JAWWA journal | February 2018 by Scott A. McPherson

February 2018 Volume 110 Number 2

American Water Works Association

Renewable Energy and Decentralized Infrastructure p. 32 ALSO IN THIS ISSUE:

Urban Water Supply System Sustainability Backflow Prevention and Cross-Connection Control Programs DBP Impacts From Increased Chlorine Residual Requirements Residential Irrigation Restrictions for Water Conservation in Florida

al crop marks

NEW AWWA CAREER CENTER The best water industry job website has relaunched with a user-friendly interface and new functionality! Visit awwa.org/careers to check out some of the exciting new features. •

EMAIL ALERTS. Set up job searches to be notified of relevant job opportunities.

•

POST YOUR RESUME ANONYMOUSLY. Employers will contact you, and if you’re interested, you will share who you are.

•

FREE CV/RESUME CRITIQUE.

•

CAREER RESOURCES. Career coaching, resume services, education/training, articles/helpful tips, and more to aid in your career search.

Find your dream job awwa.org/careers

•

Over 125 jobs

•

New jobs posted daily

•

Water and wastewater targeted

•

Titles include intern to operator to executive

Utility Management is a Key Component of the Partnership for Safe Water Optimization efforts are most effective when all staff are empowered to work together and share ideas that lead to operational excellence. Management practices can help drive performance, and it’s one of many factors addressed in the Partnership’s comprehensive self-assessment process—one that can be applied regardless of a utility’s size and configuration. Drinking water treatment plants and distribution systems, worldwide, have embraced Partnership for Safe Water principles to help improve operations and performance for more than 20 years. With a tenacious focus on management practices and technical and operational performance, utilities can establish a culture of continuous improvement.

Over two decades, the Partnership program has continuously expanded its portfolio of innovative optimization resources. Today, Partnership programs feature updated self-assessment guidance as well as new tools for groundwater filtration plants and membrane filtration facilities.

Optimize With Partnership Programs! Subscribe to the Partnership’s water treatment plant, distribution system and wastewater treatment facility optimization programs today!

www.awwa.org/partnership www.awwa.org/partnershipforcleanwater 303.347.6169 partnership@awwa.org

On Water & Works

KENNETH L. MERCER

Sustaining Aging Systems

verything is getting older. From our water systems to our bodies, entropy and time are constantly and irreversibly breaking down order. But while humans will eventually reach the end of their (useful) lives, water systems must continue to serve their communities without end. To ensure their sustainability into the future, utilities must address the constant need for system maintenance and repair while planning for cyclical renewal and replacement of specific components or sections. There are financial benefits of planning ahead and conducting regular maintenance as opposed to waiting until some sort of incident creates urgency. For example, Wolter Reinold de Sitter’s Law of Fives has been used to describe the effects of deferring maintenance on concrete by estimating the cost of repairs at roughly five times the cost of maintenance, and the cost of renewal at five times the cost of missed repairs—or 25 times the original cost of maintenance. Before things break down, however, much can be done to extend the life of water system components so that they can age gracefully, too. A little bit of TLC in the form of proactive maintenance can extend asset life, and periodic inspections and condition assessments can detect problems before they balloon into crises. Targeted levels of service are better supported by regular, informed maintenance that avoids or reduces reactive repairs. While scheduled repairs are much less expensive and less of a burden than unplanned interventions, it’s no easy task to account for the condition of every component in a system and, further, to determine which of them needs critical attention along with how best to deploy available resources. More research is needed to gather data and develop better predictive models for avoided repair costs through regular maintenance, which is helpful information when building or strengthening the business case for these programs. Utility managers and community leaders face wide-ranging technical and financial challenges in stewardship of their built and natural resources. The decision-making process must ultimately account for current and future site-specific conditions, typically extending present field knowledge and experiences in combination with models and appropriate safety factors. As operational and overall performance data are collected from comparable utilities, better standards for data collection and reporting will help future benchmarking efforts. Asset owners and system managers should integrate technological developments with their existing systems and decision-support tools to ensure their customers’ money is well spent and that levels of service meet community expectations. The public’s need for transparency regarding the health and cost of its water can contribute to asset management efforts when tied to future capital outlays (i.e., you get what you pay for). Even as water systems are renewed or replaced, it is the water industry’s responsibility to remind customers and communities that things are never simply “fixed,” that responsibility and system stewardship never end, and that the public’s health depends on these kinds of investments. Leaders and decision-makers must convey the need for continuity and dedication to meet their communities’ unending demand for safe and reliable water, because here there is a distinction between humans and water systems—where the former will one way or another retire someday, the latter are typically expected to sustainably serve future generations well beyond our own. With a focus on supplies and sustainability, this month’s Journal AWWA includes refereed articles on disinfection byproducts, water conservation, public benefit funds, and improving utility access to external data. Feature articles include in-depth discussions of water industry sustainability as well as a summary of backflow prevention programs in the United States. Please consider submitting your original research or practical perspectives to improve the water industry. https://doi.org/10.1002/awwa.1012 2

O N WAT E R & WO RK S | F E BRU A R Y 2 0 1 8 • 1 1 0 :2 | J O U R N A L AWWA

FEBRUARY 2018 • Vol. 110, No. 2 EDITORIAL AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOCIATION Editor-In-Chief

Kenneth L. Mercer, PhD

Senior Editorial Manager

Kimberly J. Retzlaff

Senior Technical Editor

Maureen Peck

Contributing Editors

Maripat Murphy

Carina Stanton

Jenifer F. Walker

Kelly Watkins

Chief Executive Officer

David B. LaFrance

Deputy Chief Executive Officer

Paula MacIlwaine

Director of Publishing

Zsolt G. Silberer

Publishing Coordinator

Cindy Uba

JOHN WILEY & SONS Editor

Donna Petrozzello

Art Director

Scott A. McPherson

Publisher

Lisa Dionne Lento

Journal - American Water Works Association (ISSN print 0003-150X electronic: 1551-8833) is published monthly on behalf of the American Water Works Association by Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., a Wiley Company, 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030-5774 USA. Periodicals postage paid at Hoboken, N.J., and additional mailing offices. Neither AWWA nor Wiley assume responsibility for opinions or statements of facts expressed by contributors or advertisers, and editorials do not necessarily represent official policies of the association or the publisher. Copyright © 2018 by American Water Works Association, 6666 W. Quincy Ave., Denver, CO 80235. Telephone (303) 794-7711, e-mail journal@awwa.org. Printed in the United States by Sheridan, Hanover, N.H. PRODUCTION Senior Production Editor

Linda Yeazel

Cover Design

Kirsten Seidel

Contributing Artists

Gillian Wink

Melanie Yamamoto AWWA SALES

Director of Sales

JoAnn Spinnato

Sales Project Manager

Karen Pacyga

Advertising Coordinator

Connor Larson

TERRITORY SALES MANAGERS Southeast US, Colorado, Asia, Latin America Pam Fithian: (303) 347-6138 pfithian@awwa.org Northeast US, Eastern Canada Ryan Fugler: (303) 347-6238 rfugler@awwa.org Midwest US, Western Canada, Europe, Israel Nancy Mortvedt: (303) 734-3442 nmortvedt@awwa.org Western US, Texas, Alaska, Hawaii, Mexico Kathy Smith: (303) 347-6237 ksmith@awwa.org

e protect what matters most.

From Guardians to Vintages, every hydrant in the Kennedy family is built to save lives.

In towns and cities across the country, we work hand in hand with the men and women of local

water utilities to keep your communities safe. AWWA, NSF, UL, and FM certified, our hydrants are made right here in America. Because at Kennedy, your safety is our priority.

TIME-TESTED PERFORMANCE • AWWA C502 • UL/FM APPROVED • O-RING SEALS THROUGHOUT • DUCTILE IRON BARREL AND SHOE • BREAK FLANGE DESIGN • EXCELLENT FLOW CHARACTERISTICS • TGIC POWDER COATED FROM GROUND LINE UP ON THE EXTERIOR • 304 STAINLESS STEEL BOLTING BELOW GROUND • 10-YEAR LIMITED WARRANTY ON MATERIAL AND WORKMANSHIP • 100% MADE IN THE USA • EASE OF MAINTENANCE • GREASE LUBRICATED OPERATING MECHANISM • OPENS EASILY AND QUICKLY AGAINST THE PRESSURE • STAINLESS STEEL SAFETY COUPLING

www.KennedyValve.com

MADE IN AMERICA SINCE 1877.

Kennedy Valve is a division of McWane, Inc. | McWane. For Generations.

Two column figure max width = 37p9 (actual 2 column width = 39p9)

FEBRUARY 2018 VOLUME 110 NUMBER 2

3-day

5-day

7-day

160

FIGURE 1 160

140

120

120 Total THM—μg/L

Total THM—μg/L

Example DPB results from one participating system (utility P)

100 80 60

80 60 40

Mean: 1 day/week irrigation required Mean: 1 day/week high irrigating demand Mean: 1 day/week medium irrigating demand Mean: 1 day/week low irrigating demand Mean: 1 day/week occasional irrigating demand

7.00

100

Mean monthly irrigation demand and required under two days/week and one day/week allowable irrigation for high, medium, low, and occasional irrigating groups

Mean: 2 days/week irrigation required Mean: 2 days/week high irrigating demand Mean: 2 days/week medium irrigating demand Mean: 2 days/week low irrigating demand Mean: 2 days/week occasional irrigating demand Depth—in./month

FIGURE 4

6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00

13 C

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

Chlorine Residual—mg/L

120

0.00

1.0Jan.

1.5Feb.

2.0 Mar.

2.5 Apr.

3.0 May

120

June

July

Aug.

Total HAA—μg/L

80 60 40 20

Water Conservation Benefits of Long-Term Residential Irrigation Restrictions in Southwest Florida

60 40 20

With residential watering restrictions 0.5 1.5 2.0 2.5 conservation 3.0 being a1.0common water Seven-Day Chlorine Residual—mg/L Seven-Day Chlorine Residual—mg/L practice in the United States, the authors DPB—disinfection byproduct, HAA—haloacetic acids, THM—trihalomethane of this study sought to add to the Utilities are required to maintain a published research on the long-term chlorine residual throughout their suchthat measures. distribution butrange. theAfter minimum the curveseffectiveness are essentially flat,of meaning DBPs will The residual in the system, 0.2–0.5 mg/L reaching as the chlorine residual 0.2–0.5 residual, further chlorine didThenot change study focused onchanges. Florida’s Tampa Bay level is mg/L defined only asincreasing “detectable.” While Figure 5 and Table 2 provide an indication of not have as large an impact. Water withmight the generally primary goal this importance study was to determine howhow systems in the area, United States per- objective Of of national are often the utilities with form at the tested each (22 C, customer’s higher impacts. Utilities falling at the 75th and 90thresidual perpH = 7.2), the irrigation of conditions comparing changing the current disinfectant centiles had significant impacts in DBP formation as the expected DBP production for any given system can be demand under two days/week requirement a numeric residual increased.to Table 2 shows the minimum difference in the determined only through system-specific testing and and one slopes of the DBP formation curves at different points modeling,day/week but these data irrigation begin to providerestrictions. a perspective value would affect public water systems. on the percentile curve. For example, for utilities at the on possible residual increase impacts on DBPs. 90th percentile increasing chlorineA. residual by DBP modeling. Theoretically, DBP formation shouldD. Dukes, Mackenzie J. Boyer, Michael Damon K. Roth andtheDavid Cornwell 0.2 mg/L from trace results in a 37.4 μg/L increase in correlate with the chlorine demand data because the Isaac Duerr, and Nikolay TTHM formation. Alternatively, that same 0.2 mg/L majority of reactants in the bulk water testedBliznyuk are

DBP Impacts From Increased Chlorine Residual Requirements 0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

increase for the 90th percentile utility might only increase TTHM formation by 3.2 μg/L if increasing from a chlorine residual of 0.8 mg/L to 1.0 mg/L. Conversely, at the 10th percentile utility, the slopes of all of February 2018 Volume 110 Number 2

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Month

100

Peer Reviewed Total HAA—μg/L

0.5

Seven-Day Chlorine Residual—mg/L

100

1.00

RO T H & C OR N W EL L |

expected to be DBP precursors. However, there is considerable scatter in the DBP production data between the different participating utilities. As shown in Figure 6, there is a modest correlation between TTHM

American Water F EB R UA R Y 2 01 8 • 11-0: 2 | J O UR N AL A WW A Works Association

Renewable Energy and Decentralized Infrastructure p. 32 ALSO IN THIS ISSUE:

On the cover: Water infrastructure requires a lot of energy, but renewable energy and decentralized infrastructure are methods water utilities can use to contribute to sustainable management of water. Imagery by Shutterstock.com artists: VioNet, JuliRose, hideto999, Julia-art

Advancing Water Innovation Through Public Benefit Funds: Examining California’s Approach for Electricity Public benefit funds (PBFs), widely used to fund clean energy initiatives, are a potential policy instrument for future water investment. This study reviews the existing literature on these tools and then takes a case study approach to investigate one PBF program, California’s electricity public goods charge. Kimberly J. Quesnel and Newsha K. Ajami

Improving Water Utilities’ Access to Source Water Protection and Emergency Response Data Sufficient data on the locations, chemical storage, toxicity, treatment options, and activity of potential threats to utilities’ water systems could help utilities establish better protection strategies; however, there are numerous barriers to having access to such data. Thus, WaterSuite was created, a cloud-based geographic information system intended to meet the demands of source water risk management, emergency planning, and event response. Jennifer Benjamin, Emily Smith, Margaret Kearns, Jeffrey Rosen, and Kristyn Stevens

Foundry Dubuque, Iowa

Bringing innovation to another level. The ideal solution for the job at hand is usually the quickest and most efficient one. And when it comes to maintaining our most precious resource – water – this is seen as the only solution. A.Y. McDonald’s patent pending Fast Connect Fitting, available in PEP and large and small CTS, brings innovation to another level. With its leak free joint and quick installation, the Fast Connect Fitting is the ideal solution that will make water work for you.

More than a brand. We’re a family.

Whether you’re in the field or at the office, experience knowledge at your fingertips with A.Y. McDonald University (AYU). Sign up for this free e-learning platform at aymcdonaldu.com and experience our knowledge in the water works and gas industry!

Visit AYMcDonald.com or call 1.800.292.2737 to learn how our Meter Frames & Covers can work for you. Look to us to make water work for the plumbing, pumps, and water works industry.

FEBRUARY 2018 VOLUME 110 NUMBER 2

32 Feature Articles 32

Sustainability Strategies at the Water–Energy Nexus: Renewable Energy and Decentralized Infrastructure The energy required for water infrastructure could increase by about 30% over the coming decades. Solar and wind energy technologies, other renewable energy sources, and a decentralized green water-infrastructure system are ways that the water industry can contribute to sustainable management of water. Juneseok Lee and Tamim Younos

40 40

Assessing the Sustainability of Urban Water Supply Systems A research group at the University of Virginia developed a list of seven indicators that could help cities set standards for, and improve, the sustainability of their water supplies. Several medium- to large-sized US cities were randomly selected for pilot applications of the sustainability indicators. This article provides overviews of community evaluations to illustrate how each indicator can be used. Brian D. Richter, Mary Elizabeth Blount, Cara Bottorff, Holly E. Brooks, Amanda Demmerle, Brittany L. Gardner, Haley Herrmann, Marnie Kremer, Thomas J. Kuehn, Emma Kulow, Lena Lewis, Haley K. Lloyd, Chantal Madray, Christina I. Mauney, Benjamin Mobley, Sydney Stenseth, and Alan Walker Strick

48 Write for the Journal

Journal AWWA is seeking peer-reviewed and feature articles. Find submission guidelines at www.awwa.org/submit.

Status of Backflow Prevention and Cross-Connection Control Programs in the United States AWWA’s Cross-Connection Control (CCC) Committee conducted a survey of water systems to explore any correlation between the relative size of a water system and its level of compliance with national, state, and local backflow and crossconnection regulations. The survey also provides a better understanding of the needs and challenges facing CCC programs. Mitchell J. LeBas, Carolyn Stewart, Steven Garner, and Byron Hardin

48 55

A Permanent Seat at the Table: The Role of Sustainability in the Boardroom In the recent past, corporate sustainability, including water conservation, was viewed as a value-add for a small niche of consumers. Now it is an integral risk management tool for successful businesses. Facilities managers and members of the board have a vested interest in sustainability practices and measurement. Gillan Taddune

Pages From the Past: Recent Progress and Tendencies in Municipal Water Supply in the United States This excerpt focuses on the development of water supply sources in the context of the water industry’s progress in the United States for the 100 years prior to 1917. The original article appeared in Journal AWWA in September 1917 (Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 278–299). John W. Alvord

Hello, future Today your vision meets its full potential, as CH2M joins Jacobs, creating greater solutions to deliver more: The promise of a more connected, sustainable world. Everything is possible.

Find out more at www.jacobs.com or follow us @joinjacobs

CH2M is now Jacobs.

JOURNAL EDITORIAL BOARD

Columns and Departments

Andrew D. Eaton (chair) Dulcy M. Abraham Joseph J. Bernosky Dominic Boccelli David E. Bracciano David Cornwell Joseph A. Cotruvo Christopher S. Crockett Steven Duranceau Richard W. Gullick Charles D. Hertz Karl G. Linden Darren A. Lytle Joan A. Oppenheimer Christine A. Owen Theresa R. Slifko John E. Tobiason

2 On Water & Works Sustaining Aging Systems 10 Open Channel Do Good Work...

65 Public Affairs Framing the Conversation About Rates Before, During, and After a Change 71 Workforce Diversity Giving Women the LIFT to Succeed: One Company’s Approach

SUBSCRIPTIONS: A subscription to Journal AWWA is a benefit for most AWWA memberships. For questions regarding membership, e-mail membership@awwa.org or call 303-794-7711. The annual subscription rates are for print only: $296 (US), £249 (UK), €297 (Europe), $320 (international); for electronic only: $296 (US), £249 (UK), €297, $320 (international); and for print and electronic: $370 (US), £312 (UK), €372 (Europe), $400 (international). For questions regarding subscriptions, contact Wiley subscription agents via e-mail cs-agency@wiley.com or by telephone: Americas +1 781-388-8597; Europe, Middle East, and Africa +44 (0)1865 778054; Asia Pacific +65 6511 8200. CUSTOMER SERVICE INQUIRIES: Contact Wiley customer service via e-mail at cs-journals@wiley.com or by telephone: Americas (toll free) +1 800-835-6770; Europe, Middle East, and Africa +44 (0)1865778315; Asia Pacific +65 6511 8000. MISSING ISSUES: Contact Wiley customer service concerning any problems with receipt of issues. Claims for missing issues must be submitted upon receipt of the following issue. Allow 90 days for change-of-address notification.

74 People in the News

INDEXING: Indexed regularly by Chemical Abstracts, Compendex, Pollution Abstracts, Water Resources Abstracts, Environmental Science & Pollution Management, and Thomson Reuters Web of Knowledge.

77 Industry News

CODEN: JAWWA5

82 Media Pulse

POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Journal AWWA, American Water Works Association, 6666 W. Quincy Ave., Denver, CO 802353098. Telephone (303) 794-7711; fax (303) 794-7310; e-mail journal@ awwa.org.

84 AWWA Section Meetings 85 Buyers’ Resource Guide 108 List of Advertisers 108 Errata

BACK ISSUES: For any Journal AWWA article from Jan. 1, 2017, to the present, or to order back issues up to 12 months old, contact Wiley customer service. REPRINTS AND PERMISSIONS: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored, or transmitted in any form or by any means and without the prior permission in writing from the copyright holder. Permissions to reproduce copyrighted material from Wiley are handled through the RightsLink® automated permissions service. To view a Rightslink® demo please visit www. wiley.com and select Rights & Permissions. For any technical queries please contact customercare@copyright.com. For questions about the permitted uses of a specific article, please contact us at permissions@wiley.com. For general information on reprints and reprint orders, e-mail commercialreprints@wiley.com. EXECUTIVE, EDITORIAL, PRODUCTION, & ADVERTISING OFFICES 6666 W. Quincy Ave., Denver, CO 80235 (303) 794-7711 e-mail: journal@awwa.org www.awwa.org A PUBLICATION OF THE AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOCIATION

Mission: Journal AWWA communicates the scholarship of the water industry through peer-reviewed original research and practical perspectives to professionals that manage and treat water. Vision: Journal AWWA strives to be an internationally acknowledged authority on the science, engineering, and management of water supply, treatment, and distribution.

Dedicated to the world’s most important resource, AWWA sets the standard for water knowledge, management, and informed public policy.

Aqua ElectrOzone™ SAFE AND EFFECTIVE OZONE TREATMENT

Wylie, TX Treating 770 MGD

One of the World’s Largest Drinking Water Plants Using Ozone.

A RELIABLE SOLUTION WITH A PROVEN TRACK RECORD The Aqua ElectrOzone™ ozone generation system is an ideal solution for water, wastewater and industrial applications requiring taste and odor control, bleaching/color removal, oxidation or disinfection. The system features advanced Metawater MicroGap™ glass lined dielectric core technology. Stainless steel elements are precision engineered for high dimensional accuracy resulting in consistent ozone generation, efﬁcient cooling and extremely low failure rates. • Robust Design for Long Life Dependability • Power Savings with Reduced Discharge Gap • Low Harmonics with Solid State Pulse Width Modulation Power • Low O&M Costs and Simple to Operate • More than 800 Installed Units, Worldwide

www.aquaelectrozone.com

815-654-2501

Open Channel DAVID B. L a FRANCE, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Do Good Work...

don’t usually write about industry mergers, but this one is different—it has a personal impact. At the end of last year, on Dec. 15, 2017, CH2M merged with Jacobs. Both are outstanding firms that now have the goal of being stronger together. But one of them, CH2M, is where my water utility career began. And for reasons I cannot fully explain, I have a sense of personal remorse about this merger. Perhaps it is because I believe what I do today began when I started working at CH2M Hill (as it was called in those days). I was 25 when I started in CH2M Hill’s Portland, Ore., office. On my first day there was no office for me—only a desk in the hallway across from my boss’s office. In those days a computer on your desk was uncommon and my desk was no exception; most work got done by phone, fax, and FedEx. I remember that first day like it was yesterday. I had no idea what I was doing. My boss—Dr. Kees Corssmit—came out to my desk and handed me a blue-covered paperback book, a manual actually, with simple instructions: “Read this.” As he tried to return to his office, I asked him why I should read it. He said, “You should read it because it will explain how we do the work we do,” and then he left me— problem solved—if I read this manual, I would know what I was doing. I looked down at the manual and read the title: Water Rates, by the American Water Works Association. That was the first time I encountered

Three Favorite Thoughts From Jim Howland’s Little Yellow Book • Work is enjoyable when one is doing a good job. • Integrity is the all-important prerequisite to employment. The person must be honest with himself and others or we have no foundation on which to build. • No matter what the organizational structure, if the people in it want it to work, it will.

AWWA, and all I knew at that moment was that the American Water Works Association held the key and provided the guidance for my new employer’s work. So, I read it, then I read it again, and then a third time. At the end of my first day, I leaned back in my chair and realized that I did not understand a single word—it reminded me of when I was in college and I had to read The Iliad by Homer. I read all the words but had no idea about the meaning of the ancient Greek poem, just like this AWWA manual. Eventually, thank goodness, Kees and others helped me understand the manual’s guidance and importance. Working at CH2M Hill was special. In those days the firm was teetering between its origins as a small practice started by an Oregon State University professor (Merryfield) and three of his students (C, H, and H) and the mega-international firm that many of us know today. The logo was a simple design of four horizontal blue bars, stacked on top of each other with the words Engineers, Planners, Economists, and Scientists lined up next to each bar. I was working with the economists. One day Jim Howland, the past president of the firm and the first “H” in the firm’s name, came to the office. Jim was known to all for his kind demeanor and leadership wisdom. His catch phrase, “Do good work. Make a profit. Enjoy life.” was central to the culture at that time. On that day, Jim was taking the time to provide us with his pearls of wisdom. He read from his Little Yellow Book, so named because, well, it was little and yellow. The book captured Howland’s thoughts on myriad timeless business issues, including ethics, organizational culture, bonuses, and how to treat people. We all received a copy of the book and, if asked, he personally signed each one. I still have my autographed copy and it continues to provide me with wisdom in times of need. It also has remained a cornerstone of CH2M’s corporate culture. Later in my career, I became very involved in AWWA and, ironically, I eventually became the chair of the Rates and Charges Committee—the committee that writes Water Rates—the manual I read three times on my first day at CH2M Hill. Thanks, CH2M Hill, for taking a chance on a 25-year-old; for if you had not, it is fair to assume that I would not be writing this column today. And now, as the new Jacobs, make Jim Howland proud, continue the legacy, and do good work. I know you will. https://doi.org/10.1002/awwa.1013

OPEN CHANNEL | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

METER & AUTOMATION Your advanced metering technology partner. With advanced metering technology, your business can be more efficient, more profitable and more service-oriented than ever before. Automated Meter Reading (AMR) and Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) are more than industry buzzwords â&#x20AC;&#x201C; they provide a steady flow of valuable data to achieve your business goals, and provide consumers critical understanding of their own usage habits. The result is better business and improved stewardship of our water resources and Ferguson Waterworks is your dedicated partner every step of the way.

ÂŠ2017 Ferguson Enterprises, Inc.

Find the closest waterworks location near you by visiting FERGUSON.COM/WATERWORKS

1217 682210

Journal -

American Water Works Association

PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLES The following section contains this issue’s peer-reviewed, original research content. Each month we print the full version of at least one article, along with the expanded summaries of additional peerreviewed articles that appear in their entirety on the Journal AWWA website (www.awwa.org/journal). There are several advantages to publishing your research in Journal AWWA:

In Press Articles

Longer Review Articles

To hasten the dissemination of peer-reviewed information, Journal AWWA posts unedited manuscripts online soon after they have been accepted for publication. In Press articles can be found at www.awwa.org/journal on the In Press Articles page.

Journal AWWA will consider articles that exceed its standard limits for text length and number of graphical elements to sufficiently present comprehensive reviews of subject areas.

Cooperation With AWWA Conferences and Events

Water Express Articles of immediate interest to Journal readers are put through the Water Express process. Reviewers are preselected and review times are shortened to expedite the time to acceptance, thereby reducing the time to publication.

If you’ve made a presentation at an AWWA conference and would like to publish your findings in Journal AWWA, there are no copyright barriers to doing so. Material that has been presented at an AWWA conference may be reused as part of AWWA publications.

Journal AWWA submission guidelines can be accessed online at www.awwa.org/submit. Questions regarding manuscript submissions can be directed to the editor-in-chief at journaleditor@awwa.org.

Join A.P. Black Award Recipients in the Pages of Journal AWWA

Amy

DiGiano

Cornwell

12 J AN UARY 2 0 1 8 • 1 1 0 :1 | J O U R N A L AWWA

Singer

O’Melia

Snoeyink

Black

Peer Reviewed

DBP Impacts From Increased Chlorine Residual Requirements DAMON K. ROTH1 AND DAVID A. CORNWELL2

1 2

Cornwell Engineering Group, Ritzville, Wash. Cornwell Engineering Group, Newport News, Va.

Since the Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR) was implemented in 1989, the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has required utilities to maintain a chlorine residual (free or total) throughout the distribution system. Although many states have established numerical minimum values for the chlorine concentration to be maintained, the SWTR only requires a “detectable” residual. In 2015, AWWA’s Disinfectant Residual Strategy Panel recommended that USEPA consider establishing numeric minimums for analytical methods used for disinfectant analysis to help utilities assess whether they are successfully maintaining disinfectant residuals in their systems. Implementing numeric minimums will require some utilities to increase chlorine dosages to maintain higher residuals than their current practice. In this study, water samples from 21 utilities across the United States were collected for testing to

determine the impact that increasing residual chlorine levels would have on disinfection byproduct (DBP) formation. The results indicated that many systems are able to maintain detectable chlorine residuals without feeding sufficient chlorine to exhaust the inherent chlorine demand of the bulk water. Therefore, significantly more additional chlorine is required to raise the free chlorine residual from a trace level to a concentration of about 0.2–0.5 mg/L; after that concentration is reached, significantly less chlorine is required to increase residual. Accordingly, systems that currently maintain trace chlorine residuals in their distribution system will see increased DBP formation if they begin feeding sufficient chlorine to increase residuals. Systems that already maintain free chlorine residuals in excess of 0.2 mg/L would expect to see minimal incremental DPB formation if required to increase chlorine residuals.

Keywords: chlorine residual, DBP formation modeling, disinfection, disinfection byproducts

The practice of drinking water disinfection, one of the greatest public health achievements of the 20th century, has constantly evolved as our understanding of disinfection and disinfection byproducts (DPBs) has grown (McGuire 2006). One of the milestones during this evolution was the realization of the beneﬁts of maintaining a disinfectant residual in the distribution system to control microbial growth. Although many utilities have focused on maintaining a chlorine or chloramine residual in their distribution system since the early to mid20th century, maintenance of a disinfectant residual was not a regulatory requirement in the United States until promulgation of the Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR) (USEPA 1989). The SWTR required utilities treating surface water to maintain “detectable” chlorine or chloramine residuals, which could be demonstrated

either through analytical measurement or by demonstrating control of heterotrophic bacteria in the distribution system through a maintained heterotrophic plate count of 500/mL or less. Since its inception, the handling of disinfectant residuals in the SWTR has been a matter of debate. Wahman and Pressman (2015) provide a history of the drafting of this requirement in the original SWTR, and explain that the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) originally proposed that systems should maintain a minimum residual of 0.2 mg/L (measured as total chlorine, free chlorine, combined chlorine, or chlorine dioxide) throughout the distribution system. However, comments received during the public review process pointed out that evidence did not exist demonstrating the beneﬁt of maintaining a disinfectant residual above that

RO T H & C OR N W EL L | F E BR UA R Y 2 0 18 • 11 0 :2 | JO UR N A L A WW A

0.2 mg/L threshold. Further, it was recognized that requiring utilities to meet a minimum residual disinfectant value would result in increased exposure to DBPs in some systems. Ultimately, USEPA decided to remove the language establishing a numerical minimum value for the disinfectant residual in favor of language requiring a “detectable” residual. In the absence of a federally mandated minimum disinfectant residual level, many states have enacted their own minimum requirements. At least 22 state primacy agencies have established specific numeric requirements for minimum free chlorine and total chlorine residuals (Wahman & Pressman 2015). Even in states that have established numeric minimums, there have been discussions regarding how effective existing regulations are in protecting public health. For example, after detection of the parasite Naegleria fowleri in two distribution systems, in 2013 Louisiana increased its minimum disinfectant residual requirement to 0.5 mg/L (free or total chlorine) to provide an adequate barrier against this chlorine-resistant parasite (LDHH 2013). Actions such as these have increased interest in reviewing the need for updating the federal regulations to protect public health (Roberson 2014). This sentiment was shared by the Disinfectant Residual Strategy Panel convened by AWWA, which recommended that USEPA consider establishing numeric minimums associated with each test method for disinfectant analysis, based on likely field performance (AWWA Water Utility Council 2015). This recommendation was made because different USEPAapproved analytical methods will have different sources of analytical and methodological errors, particularly under field conditions, that could cloud the absence of a disinfectant residual at specific locations in the distribution system. Establishing minimum thresholds based on method-specific detection limits would help drinking water systems assess whether they are maintaining an actual disinfection residual throughout their system. This recommendation highlights an important nuance to the current regulation of disinfectant residuals. By requiring a detectable residual, the de facto minimum disinfectant concentration that utilities must maintain in the distribution system is the method detection limit (MDL). By definition, the MDL is the minimum level at which a substance can be detected with 99% confidence that it is greater than zero (40 CFR 136). What the MDL does not represent is the level at which a substance can be quantified. MDLs are calculated on the basis of the precision of replicate measurements and do not account for interferences or matrix effects (Hertz 2016). Therefore, simply detecting residual chlorine or chloramine above the MDL does not necessarily provide evidence that the disinfectant is present at levels relevant to public health protection, particularly at concentrations near the MDL.

R OT H & C O RN W E LL | FE BR U AR Y 20 18 • 1 10 :2 | J OU RN A L A W W A

If USEPA implements the recommendation of the Disinfectant Residual Strategy Panel, some public water systems will need to increase their disinfectant dose to maintain disinfectant residual concentrations above the minimum value throughout their distribution system. This in turn will likely increase total trihalomethane (TTHM) and/or haloacetic acid (HAA) concentrations in those systems. The goal for this project was to establish how changing the current disinfectant residual requirement to a numeric minimum value would impact public water systems (PWSs), particularly those that currently maintain very low detectable disinfectant residuals in their distribution system. This required determining two parameters for each water sample tested: (1) the disinfectant demand that would need to be overcome to hit the target numeric chlorine residual and (2) the corresponding change in DBP production associated with the disinfectant that was consumed.

BACKGROUND It has long been recognized that disinfectants such as chlorine and chloramine must be applied at dosages above the desired residual concentration as a result of the natural chlorine demand associated with natural organic matter and other reactive compounds remaining in the treated water (McGuire 2006). Similarly, for more than 40 years it has been apparent that a portion of this chlorine demand results in the formation of chlorinated and/or brominated organic compounds, which are now known as DBPs (Bellar et al. 1974). Many researchers have subsequently sought to establish the link between the source water–specific parameters that influence chlorine demand and those parameters that influence DBP formation. Chowdhury et al. (2009) listed and critiqued 48 published models for DBP formation in drinking water. More recently, Ged et al. (2015) evaluated the performance of 87 DBP formation models. While there are many parameters these models consider in determining DBP formation, the majority of the models focus on the disinfectant dose; DBP precursor concentration, which may be measured as one or more of total organic carbon (TOC), ultraviolet absorbance at 254 nm (UV254), or specific ultraviolet absorbance (SUVA); and other water quality parameters such as pH and temperature. Occasionally researchers have attempted to use chlorine demand directly to model DBP formation (Boccelli et al. 2003, Gang et al. 2002). Because chlorine demand is influenced by the amount of DBP precursor material present in the treated water matrix, this approach essentially combines the applied disinfectant dose and DBP precursor surrogate values (TOC, UV254, SUVA) into one variable. However, there are limitations to this approach. Although chlorine demand is most strongly correlated

with TOC concentrations, chlorine demand can be affected by inorganics such as manganese, iron, and ammonia (Katz 1986). Chlorine demand is also dependent on factors beyond the water matrix properties, such as distribution pipe material (Haas et al. 2002). Finally, many PWSs do not regularly calculate chlorine demand. The standard approach to determining chlorine demand is relatively labor intensive and produces results that are specific to the matrix, temperature, pH, and applied dosage of the water tested (Standard Methods 2005a). Since chlorine demand testing is not required by regulation and is labor intensive, many utilities choose to forgo chlorine demand testing and simply base chlorine dosages on observed chlorine residuals in the distribution system using an iterative trial-and-error approach, or feedback loops. In lieu of chlorine demand testing, several studies have been undertaken to systematically optimize disinfectant dosages to meet target water quality goals, including target disinfectant residual concentrations (Bellamy et al. 2000, Tryby et al. 1999, Clark & Sivaganesan 1998, Vasconcelos et al. 1997, Kuo & Jurs 1973). However, given the multiple factors contributing to chlorine demand, there is not currently a straightforward method of projecting chlorine demands in the absence of systemspecific testing to determine the dimensionless chlorine decay constants for a given system’s water. Further complicating matters is that simply defining the chlorine demand for a given water matrix is not necessarily straightforward. Three factors are frequently attributed to chlorine decay in water systems: (1) reactions with organic and inorganic compounds present in the bulk phase of the water; (2) reactions with material at the pipe wall surface, including biofilms; and (3) consumption by corrosion reactions (Clark 1998). The first factor, the chlorine demand of the bulk water, is often the controlling factor that influences both the required chlorine dosage at the treatment plant and the chlorine residual at the point of entry to the distribution system. This factor is also common to all water treatment systems. The other two factors may be important in certain systems but are strongly dependent on distribution system configuration, operations, and water age, and as such are not applicable to all systems. In this study, all testing was conducted in prepared glassware, which eliminated the wall demand and corrosion components, and directly related chlorine demand to the decay in the bulk phase of the water. Although the other chlorine demand components may be important in some systems, the purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between the increased chlorine demand required to produce higher chlorine residuals and DBP formation. Independent of the demand source, the research focused on achieving a certain residual. In this case, only the bulk demand was included in reaching

the residual. The bulk demand would generally be associated with the DBP precursors. Chlorine decay in water has frequently been characterized in the literature by a ﬁrst-order kinetic model, such as the following: Cðt Þ = Co e – kt

where C(t) = chlorine concentration at time t, C0 = initial chlorine concentration, k = first-order decay constant, and t = reaction time. However, although the first-order kinetic model is the most commonly applied model for chlorine decay, it is implicit in the assumption of first-order kinetics that there is always excess reactant material available to react with the applied chlorine (Boccelli et al. 2003). In essence, if first-order kinetics are applicable, the consumption of chlorine in the bulk water, and the associated formation of DPBs, are chlorine-limited. Therefore, the assumption of first-order kinetics for chlorine decay is often not borne out in practice, particularly for systems feeding higher doses of chlorine to overcome the initial chlorine demand of the water in order to produce higher residual chlorine levels. Under these conditions, when the applied chlorine exceeds the amount of reactant material in the system, chlorine decay will be limited by the reactant rather than by chlorine. Various researchers have attempted to account for such circumstances; for example, Clark (1998) proposed using a second-order kinetic model that accounts for the reactant, while Warton et al. (2006) proposed using a regression model to account for the dependence of chlorine demand on initial dose. All of these methods to characterize chlorine demand account for the fact that chlorine demand is dependent on initial conditions, including water quality parameters such as pH and temperature, as well as the initial chlorine dose. Therefore, it can be difficult to characterize the chlorine demand of a given water matrix; even if all other conditions are the same, as the initial chlorine dose increases, the chlorine demand will increase accordingly. Given the considerations presented previously, systems that currently maintain low disinfection residuals in their distribution system may face multiple challenges if regulations establish a higher target for disinfection residuals. First, it will be necessary to determine how much additional disinfectant is required, either at the plant or at booster stations in the distribution system, to meet the target residual. Second, it will be necessary to determine how that increase in disinfectant dose will impact DBP formation without exceeding the maximum residual disinfectant level leaving the plant. The research objective of this work was to assess both of these challenges for multiple systems using free chlorine and combined chlorine (i.e., chloramine) for secondary disinfection.

RO T H & C OR N W EL L | F E BR UA R Y 2 0 18 • 11 0 :2 | JO UR N A L A WW A

METHODOLOGY Clarified, unchlorinated water was collected from 21 water treatment plants (WTPs) operating in 13 states geographically distributed across the United States. If possible, samples were collected post-filter without chlorine addition. It was anticipated that the systems that would be most affected by a regulatory change would be those that use free chlorine, so participation of PWSs using free chlorine as a secondary disinfectant was emphasized. Seventeen of the PWSs maintain a free chlorine residual in their distribution system, while the remaining four utilize chloramine for secondary disinfection. TOC and UV254 were measured for each water matrix. Prior to further testing, the samples that were collected at plants that practiced pre-filter chlorination (i.e., those plants at which post-filter samples could not be collected) were filtered through No. 4 filter paper1 to simulate filtration; all other samples were collected postfiltration from the WTP to replicate the plant’s treatment train as closely as possible. All samples were buffered at pH 7.2 to normalize pH effects. Although chlorine demand is affected by pH, and not all of the participating systems operated at a pH of 7.2, the decision was made to buffer the pH to allow for better comparison between systems and to reduce one of the variates when modeling DBP formation. All testing was conducted at room temperature (~22 C). Therefore, pH and temperature were both eliminated as variables such that DBP formation as a function of residual could be compared on the different waters. While normalizing pH and temperature allowed for direct comparison between DBP formations from the different source waters, both pH and temperature will affect DBP formation in the field. In particular, DBP formation in systems that operate at consistently lower temperatures may be suppressed below the results described in this article as a result of temperature effects. The data collection plan for this phase was to prepare a series of samples from each water matrix dosed with sufficient disinfectant (free chlorine or free chlorine followed by chloramine formation) to meet the target disinfection residual profile after seven days of holding. For the systems using free chlorine, the target disinfection residuals were “trace” (defined as <0.1 mg/L), 0.2, 0.5, and 1.5 mg/L free chlorine (after seven days). The targets for the chloramine systems were 0.5, 1.5, and 3.0 mg/L total chlorine. In some instances, additional tests were conducted beyond the four target residuals to better cover the range of chlorine residuals targets. Subsamples were taken from each of the samples tested and quenched at three, five, and seven days after dosing. These subsamples were analyzed for residual chlorine (free or total), TTHM, and the sum of five regulated haloacetic acids (HAA5). 16

R OT H & C O RN W E LL | FE BR U AR Y 20 18 • 1 10 :2 | J OU RN A L A W W A

The participating PWSs providing water for this study did not maintain disinfectant decay information for their treated water, and review of operating records was not sufﬁcient to establish chlorine demand. Therefore, before further testing, a series of chlorine or chloramine decay tests were conducted on each water matrix to establish the disinfectant doses required to meet the target disinfection residuals. Decay testing consisted of dosing an aliquot from each WTP sample, holding for seven days, and analyzing for residual disinfectant (free chlorine or chloramine). Testing was repeated as needed to determine the required doses for each water matrix using an iterative trial-and-error approach. All samples were chlorinated using a sodium hypochlorite stock prepared by diluting a commercial bleach solution2 with deionized water. The concentration of the chlorine stock solution was measured before each test to account for degradation. For the chloraminated tests, chloramine was formed by ﬁrst dosing the sample with chlorine, then adding ammonia after the PWS reported contact time at a 4.75:1 Cl2:N-N ratio. All free and total chlorine measurements were analyzed using the DPD spectrophotometry method (Standard Methods 2005b). DBPs were analyzed using Method 551.1 for TTHM (USEPA 1995a) and Method 552.2 for HAA5 (USEPA 1995b). All tests were conducted at the Environmental Engineering & Technology Laboratory.

RESULTS Chlorine demand. On the basis of results from preliminary chlorine demand testing, water from each participating system was dosed with several free chlorine or chloramine dosages to establish the chlorine demand curve for that particular water matrix. Samples at each dosage were quenched at three, ﬁve, and seven days of dosing and analyzed for residual chlorine. Figure 1 shows chlorine residual results for two of the participating systems, utilities D and P. These results are representative of those obtained in many systems. By the third day, the majority of the applied chlorine that was dosed to the jar had been consumed, although additional chlorine consumption occurs as the jar ages over the course of the week. Interestingly, comparison of the seven-day chlorine demand (deﬁned as the chlorine consumed in each jar over the seven-day test period) between utilities D and P illustrates some of the complexities in assessing chlorine demand for a given system. In both instances, chlorine demand increased as the applied chlorine dose increased; however, for utility D the chlorine demand leveled off as the applied chlorine dose increased, while the chlorine demand for utility P continued to increase with the applied chlorine dose. This effectively illustrates the difference between reactant-limited and chlorine-limited systems. It appears that the reactants in the bulk water phase for utility D had been exhausted

FIGURE 1

Example of chlorine demand test results from two participating systems (utilities D and P) Utility D

Utility P 7

7 7-day chlorine demand Applied

3-day residual

5-day residual

7-day residual

2 1 0

7-day chlorine demand

6 Chlorine—mg/L

Chlorine—mg/L

Applied

3-day residual

5-day residual

7-day residual

2 1

Jar

after application of 5.7 mg/L of chlorine, which is why the seven-day chlorine demand did not increase when the applied dose was increased to 6.5 mg/L of chlorine. Conversely, utility P had sufficient reactants so that the seven-day chlorine demand continued to increase as the applied chlorine dose increased. Despite the differences between the two systems, in both systems the seven-day chlorine demand for the tests with the highest applied chlorine dose exceeded the applied chlorine dose required to produce a trace residual in the tests with the lowest applied chlorine doses. There are two potential explanations for this observation. In theory, as the majority of the applied chlorine was consumed, subsequent reactions between the applied chlorine and the bulk water phase reactants may not have been kinetically favorable, leaving a trace chlorine residual. Alternatively, it is possible that the measured chlorine residual at the low levels may not be a “real” chlorine number, and instead an artifact of analytical interferences, since there should be no residual when the demand is greater than the dose. Seven-day chlorine consumption results from all of the free chlorine systems are presented in Figure 2. Several trends are apparent from these data. The chlorine demand between systems varies considerably, with the minimum dose required to produce a detectable residual (i.e., the furthest left point on each curve) ranging from 1.4 to 4.9 mg/L chlorine. As demonstrated, many of the system curves do decrease in slope as the applied chlorine dose increases. This indicates the point at which the available reactants in the bulk water phase have been consumed, and the system transitions from being chlorine-limited to reactant-limited with regard to chlorine demand (i.e., the point at which first-order demand kinetics are no longer valid). There are some curves that maintain steep slopes at higher chlorine doses. This indicates that the applied chlorine dose may not have been sufficient to fully oxidize the available reactants of that

Jar

system’s water. Some systems, such as utility E, also exhibited high variability in chlorine demands during the chlorine demand testing, which led to higher-thananticipated residuals during the simulated distribution system testing. Similar testing was performed for the systems using chloramine for secondary disinfection. The results from these tests are shown in Figure 3. In general, three of the four systems tested tended to have consistent chloramine consumption as the dose increased. However, utility U indicated a very high chloramine demand for its water matrix, with nearly all of the chloramine dosed to the system consumed by available reactants in the bulk phase of the water. All of the systems tested were dosed with sufficient free chlorine or chloramine to produce detectable residuals at the end of the seven-day test. However, the results in Figures 1–3 suggest that, for at least some of the systems tested, the minimum applied disinfectant dose was below what the chlorine demand would be if additional chlorine were available. For comparison, Table 1 shows the minimum applied disinfectant dose for each system, the resulting seven-day chlorine residual, and the maximum measured chlorine consumption (disinfectant demand) for that system. For all but three of the 21 systems tested, the maximum observed disinfectant consumption exceeded the minimum applied disinfectant dose required to produce a “detectable” disinfectant residual. Again, the chlorine doses that achieved a detectable chlorine residual after seven days (for all but one free chorine system) were not sufficient to satisfy the chlorine demand of the water. This could be interpreted as the “detectable” chlorine residuals observed after seven days are not true values since the demand exceeded the dose. DBP production. After each sample was quenched after three, five, or seven days, TTHM and HAA5 concentrations were measured to assess the DBP formation RO T H & C OR N W EL L | F E BR UA R Y 2 0 18 • 11 0 :2 | JO UR N A L A WW A

FIGURE 2

Relationship between seven-day chlorine consumption and applied chlorine dose for the free chlorine systems 10 9 A B

C D

Consumed Chlorine—mg/L

E F

G H

I J

O N

P Q

1 0

Dosed Chlorine—mg/L

associated with the observed free chlorine or chloramine residual and corresponding consumption. TTHM and HAA5 production were measured for all systems,

FIGURE 3

Relationship between seven-day chlorine consumption and applied chlorine dose for the chloramine systems

10 S U T V

Consumed Chlorine—mg/L

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

Dosed Chlorine—mg/L

R OT H & C O RN W E LL | FE BR U AR Y 20 18 • 1 10 :2 | J OU RN A L A W W A

including those using free chlorine and those using chloramine. Because there were fewer chloraminated systems that participated, DBP production trends relative to chloramine residuals were more difficult to detect as a result of sparseness of data. For this reason, the DBP results and analysis presented in this article will focus primarily on those participating systems that use free chlorine for secondary disinfection. Example TTHM and HAA5 results from one participating utility (utility P) are presented two ways in Figure 4. Part A presents the TTHM measurements versus the measured chlorine residual at the time of quenching. Naturally, the chlorine residual is often higher after three days than it is after five, which in turn is higher than the residual after seven days. Part B presents the same results normalized to the measured seven-day chlorine residuals to facilitate comparison between TTHM readings at the same final residual. Parts C and D present the HAA5 readings from the same sample jars. It is observed that for this utility the DBP formation levels off at a certain residual or that there is a sharp slope change in formation after a certain residual. This observation is further assessed later. When DBP formation was plotted relative to chlorine residual, most of the systems exhibited a two-slope DBP formation curve as the chlorine residual increased. First, DBP production increased significantly as sufficient chlorine was dosed to increase the residual from trace to

TABLE 1

Applied disinfectant dose and disinfectant consumption data for systems in this study

Reading on Instrument After Seven Days mg/L

Maximum Measured Disinfectant Demand mg/L

Maximum Measured Disinfectant Demand Exceeds Minimum Applied Dose to Get Detectable Residual?

System

Disinfectant

Minimum Applied Disinfectant Dose to Get Detectable Residual mg/L

Free chlorine

1.0

0.1

1.7

Yes

Free chlorine

1.0

0.2

1.6

Yes

Free chlorine

2.3

0.1

3.7

Yes

Free chlorine

4.2

0.1

4.9

Yes

Free chlorine

6.5

2.2

4.6

Free chlorine

2.5

0.4

2.9

Yes

Free chlorine

2.5

0.1

4.2

Yes

Free chlorine

2.5

0.03

4.9

Yes

Free chlorine

2.5

0.1

3.8

Yes

Free chlorine

2.0

0.05

2.3

Yes

Free chlorine

2.2

0.02

3.4

Yes

Free chlorine

1.5

0.02

1.8

Yes

Free chlorine

2.7

0.2

3.2

Yes

Free chlorine

1.8

0.02

2.1

Yes

Free chlorine

1.2

0.03

1.4

Yes

Free chlorine

2.8

0.04

4.8

Yes

Free chlorine

2.0

0.02

2.3

Yes

Chloramines

1.1

0.9

1.0

Chloramines

1.5

0.3

1.6

Yes

Chloramines

3.0

0.1

8.4

Yes

Chloramines

2.0

0.9

1.6

~0.2 mg/L. The actual seven-day chlorine residual at which the inflection occurred varied and was commonly observed in the 0.2–0.5 mg/L range, with many systems around 0.2 mg/L. After this inflection point, DBP formation continued to increase as additional chlorine was added, but the increase in DBP production was generally less than that observed when the residual was initially increased above trace. The two-phase nature of the DBP production curves was investigated further by calculating the slope of the DBP production curve before and after the inflection point for each system. The location of the inflection point was determined on the basis of visual inspection of the curves. Figure 5 presents the results of this slope analysis for the systems using free chlorine. Compared with HAA5 production, there was greater variation in the slopes before and after the inflection point for the TTHM production curves. Before the inflection point, the median utility TTHM formation was an increase of 32.4 μg/L TTHM/mg/L increase in free chlorine. The location of the inflection point varied between systems generally on the basis of the residual chlorine measured for the second lowest jar. After the initial increase in TTHM production,

the median utility TTHM formation rate dropped to an increase of 5.1 μg/L TTHM/mg/L increase in free chlorine above the inflection point residual. There was a similar trend, albeit with less of a discrepancy in slopes, when comparing the HAA5 formation curves. The median utility HAA5 formation was an increase of 22.6 μg/L HAA5/ mg/L free chlorine before the inflection point, and an increase of 8.1 μg/L HAA5/mg/L free chlorine increase after the inflection point. These data indicate that the increase in DBP formation associated with increasing applied chlorine doses to produce higher chlorine residuals will vary depending on the target chlorine residual. The median utility increasing its residual from 0.7 to 0.9 mg/L would be expected to see only a 1.0 μg/L increase in TTHM and a 1.6 μg/L increase in HAA5. However, if the median utility was increasing from a trace residual to a residual of 0.2 mg/L, that same 0.2 mg/L increase in chlorine residual would increase TTHM and HAA5 by 6.5 and 4.5 μg/L, respectively. In general, the largest increase in DBP production for a utility increasing its residual will occur as a utility moves from a trace residual to a residual in the 0.2–0.5 mg/L range. After reaching RO T H & C OR N W EL L | F E BR UA R Y 2 0 18 • 11 0 :2 | JO UR N A L A WW A

FIGURE 4

3-day

5-day

7-day

160

140

120

120 Total THM—μg/L

Total THM—μg/L

Example DPB results from one participating system (utility P)

100 80 60

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

Chlorine Residual—mg/L

120

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

120

100

60 40 20 0

1.0

Seven-Day Chlorine Residual—mg/L

Total HAA—μg/L

0.5

60 40 20

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

Seven-Day Chlorine Residual—mg/L

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

Seven-Day Chlorine Residual—mg/L

DPB—disinfection byproduct, HAA—haloacetic acids, THM—trihalomethane

0.2–0.5 mg/L residual, further increasing chlorine did not have as large an impact. Of national importance are often the utilities with higher impacts. Utilities falling at the 75th and 90th percentiles had signiﬁcant impacts in DBP formation as the residual increased. Table 2 shows the difference in the slopes of the DBP formation curves at different points on the percentile curve. For example, for utilities at the 90th percentile increasing the chlorine residual by 0.2 mg/L from trace results in a 37.4 μg/L increase in TTHM formation. Alternatively, that same 0.2 mg/L increase for the 90th percentile utility might only increase TTHM formation by 3.2 μg/L if increasing from a chlorine residual of 0.8 mg/L to 1.0 mg/L. Conversely, at the 10th percentile utility, the slopes of all of 20

R OT H & C O RN W E LL | FE BR U AR Y 20 18 • 1 10 :2 | J OU RN A L A W W A

the curves are essentially ﬂat, meaning that DBPs will not change as the chlorine residual changes. While Figure 5 and Table 2 provide an indication of how systems in the United States might generally perform at the conditions tested (22 C, pH = 7.2), the expected DBP production for any given system can be determined only through system-speciﬁc testing and modeling, but these data begin to provide a perspective on possible residual increase impacts on DBPs. DBP modeling. Theoretically, DBP formation should correlate with the chlorine demand data because the majority of reactants in the bulk water tested are expected to be DBP precursors. However, there is considerable scatter in the DBP production data between the different participating utilities. As shown in

FIGURE 5

Slope analysis of the DPB production curves for participating systems using free chlorine THM increase after inflection point 3 days after 5 days after 7 days after

HAA increase before inflection point 3 days before 5 days before 7 days before

100

Observations Less Than Value—%

THM increase before inflection point 3 days before 5 days before 7 days before

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0.01

0.1

100

HAA increase after inflection point 3 days after 5 days after 7 days after

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0.01

1000

Slope THM Versus Chlorine Residual—μg THM/mg Cl2

0.1

100

Slope HAA5 Versus Chlorine Residual—μg HAA5/mg Cl2

Cl2—free chlorine, DPB—disinfection byproduct, HAA5—sum of ﬁve regulated haloacetic acids, TTHM—total trihalomethane

Figure 6, there is a modest correlation between TTHM production and the measured chlorine consumption (part A), but the same correlation does not hold for HAA5 production (part B). No direct correlation was observed between DBP production and applied chlorine dose or chlorine residual. Existing DBP formation models were compared against the DBP data generated during this study to assess their usefulness in helping utilities understand how increasing chlorine residual levels may affect DBP production. In general, these models did not describe the data well, with linear coefﬁcient of determination (R2) values ranging from 0.08 to 0.29. As an example, a

TABLE 2

model ﬁt was obtained using USEPA’s WTP model (USEPA 2005), shown in Figure 7. Compared with the measured data, the USEPA WTP model consistently under-predicted formation of both TTHM and HAA5. Given the lack of correlation between the existing models and the data generated in this study, the researchers generated new multilinear models. Models were developed using different combinations of initial independent variables, including chlorine dose (mg/L), chlorine residual (mg/L), consumed chlorine (mg/L), TOC (mg/L), UV254 (cm−1), time (h), and SUVA (L/mg-m). Recall that in this research, pH and temperature were not variables. Multilinear models were developed from the

Summary of slope analysis of the DBP production curves for the participating systems using free chlorine at select percentiles TTHM

Percentile %

Before inﬂection point

HAA5 After inﬂection point

Before inﬂection point

After inﬂection point 1.6

2.4

0.0

32.4

5.1

22.6

8.1

91.0

9.3

50.4

17.5

187.2

15.9

72.1

22.4

DBP—disinfection byproduct, HAA5—sum of ﬁve regulated haloacetic acids, TTHM—total trihalomethane Values shown are μg/L increase in DBP formation per mg/L increase in free chlorine residual. Results are shown for 22 C, pH 7.2.

RO T H & C OR N W EL L | F E BR UA R Y 2 0 18 • 11 0 :2 | JO UR N A L A WW A

FIGURE 6

DPB production from participating systems using free chlorine 140

160

B y = 15.534x + 32.244 R2 = 0.555

120

140

120

100

H I J

HAA5—μg/L

TTHM—μg/L

E y = 8.7177x + 50.587 R2 = 0.1635

F G H

I J K

L M

N O

Chlorine Consumed—mg/L

DPB—disinfection byproduct, HAA5—sum of ﬁve regulated haloacetic acids, TTHM—total trihalomethane

signiﬁcant independent variables in each initial variable set using a stepwise regression method. The signiﬁcance of each independent variable for a given regression was

FIGURE 7

Comparison of measured DPB concentrations versus the DPB concentrations predicted using the USEPA WTP model TTHM

160

HAA5

Predicted TTHM/HAA5—μg/L

140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0

100

150

Measured TTHM/HAA5—μg/L DPB—disinfection byproduct, HAA5—sum of ﬁve regulated haloacetic acids, TTHM—total trihalomethane, USEPA—US Environmental Protection Agency, WTP—water treatment plant

R OT H & C O RN W E LL | FE BR U AR Y 20 18 • 1 10 :2 | J OU RN A L A W W A

determined on the basis of a 0.05 p-value. Nonsignificant initial variables were not included in the regression. Table 3 presents the regression models developed for participating utilities using free chlorine for disinfection. In general, these models represented a better fit for the data than those described in the literature. However, R2 values are still relatively low, ranging from 0.27 to 0.59. It should be cautioned that using R2 to assess a plot of observed data versus model data is often misleading. A model can have a strong R2 even if the data are not well described by the model. This is because R2 is calculated on the basis of its own best-fit line, which may not be a 1:1 line. The following example illustrates this. Figure 8 presents the measured TTHM concentrations from the systems using free chlorine compared with the predicted TTHM concentrations using model 2 from Table 2. Although the correlation between results is moderately strong (R2 = 0.59), plotting the data from all systems versus a 1:1 best-fit line indicates that the data are skewed. To better illustrate this, a linear trend line has been fit to the data and overlaid on Figure 8. The R2 represents the correlation of the data to the best-fit line, not to the 1:1 slope that represents an ideal fit between the model results equaling the measured data. A correlation coefficient is not a proper statistic to determine whether data fit a predictive model since the data set may have a high correlation to itself but not to the model. To supplement a correlation analysis, a residuals analysis should be performed.

Multilinear regression models (developed for this work) describing DBP formation resulting from increasing chlorine residual

TABLE 3

Equation

Initial Variables

Model

DOSE, t, RES, UV254, TOC

TTHM = 101.2146(DOSE)0.3897(t)0.3142(UV254)0.1381

0.5781

DOSE, t, CONSUM, UV254, TOC

TTHM = 101.0504(DOSE)0.2385(t)0.286(CONSUM)0.2045

0.5858

DOSE, t, RES, UV254, TOC

HAA5 = 101.8573(t)0.2292(RES)0.0927(UV254)0.3372(TOC)0.2070

0.3249

DOSE, t, RES, TOC

HAA5 = 101.1854(t)0.2474(RES)0.086(TOC)0.438

0.2553

DOSE, t, CONSUM, UV254, TOC

HAA5 = 10

2.0747

0.1901

(DOSE)

0.1581

(t)

(UV254)

0.4056

0.2796

CONSUM—consumed chlorine, DBP—disinfection byproduct, DOSE—chlorine dose, HAA5—sum of ﬁve regulated haloacetic acids, RES—chlorine residual, t—time, TOC—total organic carbon, TTHM—total trihalomethane, UV254—ultraviolet absorbance at 254 nm

Graphical analysis of a residuals plot, such as that shown in Figure 9, will better illustrate potential bias in a model. As an example, Figure 9, part A, shows a residuals analysis for model 2 that was calculated by subtracting the predicted TTHM value from the measured TTHM value for each sample. The relatively even distribution of the residuals suggests the bias in the model is minimal. This is further supported by the histogram of residuals shown in Figure 9, part B, which indicates that the residuals follow a normal distribution. This residuals analysis indicates that model 2 ﬁts the observed data well with a minimal bias, even if the correlation between results is only moderately strong.

FIGURE 8

As seen in Table 3, when modeling the entire data set, time is always a signiﬁcant independent variable. In order to reduce the number of independent variables, models were constructed using only the seven-day DBP data. These models represent the DBP formation at the highest water age simulated during this work and represent the greatest DBP formation expressed for each water and chlorine dose. Table 4 presents these models. Comparison of models 6 and 7 indicates that between dose, residual chlorine, and consumed chlorine, the applied chlorine dose was the only signiﬁcant independent variable. In fact, the applied chlorine dose by itself can reasonably be used to predict the seven-day TTHM

Measured TTHM production for participating systems using free chlorine versus predicted TTHM concentrations as calculated by model 2

140 y = 0.5711x + 28.548 R2 = 0.5858

120

100

F G

H I

J K

Predicted TTHM—μg/L

100

80 3-day 5-day

7-day

M N

100

120

140

Measured TTHM—μg/L

100

120

140

Measured TTHM—μg/L

TOC—total organic carbon, TTHM—total trihalomethane, UV—ultraviolet Utility B had insufﬁcient UV/TOC information available for predictive modeling of TTHM

RO T H & C OR N W EL L | F E BR UA R Y 2 0 18 • 11 0 :2 | JO UR N A L A WW A

FIGURE 9

Residuals analysis of model 2 bias

50 50

Frequency

Residual—μg/L

10 0

–10 –20

–30 –40

0 –50

100

–40

–30

–20

Predicted THM—μg/L

–10

Residual TTHM—μg/L

THM—trihalomethane, TTHM—total trihalomethane

formation. The fit of models 6 and 7 to the data in a predictive format is shown in Figure 10, part A. However, dose does not directly relate to the final residual because the relationship between applied chlorine dose and chlorine consumption was not consistent between systems. Therefore, the model was forced to consider consumed chlorine instead of applied chlorine dose (model 8). Consumed chlorine takes into account both the dose and the residual. In this case, the correlation was slightly better (R2 = 0.61), as shown in Figure 10, part B. The distribution of residuals for models 6 and 7 and for model 8 are relatively random, indicating a good fit to the modeled data. A utility could use either the applied dose or consumed dose as long as those are measured relative to a specific residual goal. As the

TABLE 4

Equation

residual goal increases, the dose to obtain that goal will also increase; however, the DBPs may level off once dose does not relate to demand. The consumption may or may not increase, as seen previously. Parts A and B of Figure 10 are logarithmic curves, and as such demonstrate the “double slope effect” discussed previously wherein the DBPs increase more during the initial residual increase phase. Compared with the TTHM models, which correlate moderately well to the data, the HAA5 models performed poorly. When comparing all data, the best R2 value obtained was 0.32 using four signiﬁcant independent variables (time, chlorine residual, UV254, and TOC). Correlation was slightly better when only the seven-day HAA5 data were modeled (R2 = 0.42), as seen in Figure 11.

Multilinear regression models (developed for this work) describing seven-day DBP formation resulting from increasing chlorine residual Initial Variables

Model

DOSE, RES, UV254, TOC

7-day TTHM = 101.678(DOSE)0.4262

0.5934

DOSE, CONSUM, UV254, TOC

7-day TTHM = 101.678(DOSE)0.4262

0.5934

CONSUM, UV254, TOC

7-day TTHM = 101.709(CONSUM)0.4655

0.6049

DOSE, RES, UV254, TOC

7-day HAA5 = 102.7526(RES)0.0923(UV254)0.5361 2.711

(DOSE)

0.5309

DOSE, CONSUM, UV254, TOC

7-day HAA5 = 10

CONSUM, UV254, TOC

7-day HAA5 = 102.665(UV254)0.501

(CONSUM)

0.418

−0.4886

(UV254)

0.5771

0.3695 0.2359

CONSUM—consumed chlorine, DPB—disinfection byproduct, DOSE—chlorine dose, HAA5—ﬁve regulated haloacetic acids, RES—chlorine residual, TOC—total organic carbon, TTHM—total trihalomethane, UV254—ultraviolet absorbance at 254 nm

R OT H & C O RN W E LL | FE BR U AR Y 20 18 • 1 10 :2 | J OU RN A L A W W A

FIGURE 10

Predicted seven-day TTHM formation versus applied chlorine dose (model 6/7) or consumed chlorine (model 8) Model prediction

Measured data

120

100

80 60

60 40

Applied Chlorine Dose—mg/L

Measured data

Model prediction

140

120

TTHM—μg/L

7-Day TTHM—μg/L

140

Consumed Chlorine—mg/L

TTHM—total trihalomethane

DISCUSSION Chlorine demand. The chlorine consumption results observed during this study indicate that systems that maintain trace disinfectant residual may not actually be maintaining a functional disinfectant residual. All but one of the systems using free chlorine, and half of the systems using chloramine, found that the amount of free

FIGURE 11

Predicted seven-day HAA5 formation versus chlorine residual as calculated using model 9 UV254 < 0.019 UV254 > 0.034 UV254 = 0.025

140

0.019 ≤ UV254 ≤ 0.034 UV254 = 0.016 UV254 = 0.037

HAA5—μg/L

120 100 80 60 40 20 0

0.5

1.5

2.5

Chlorine Residual—mg/L HAA5—sum of ﬁve regulated haloacetic acids, UV254—ultraviolet absorbance at 254 nm The curves represent the predicted results using the model and the UV254 value indicated. The data points represent measured HAA5 formation.

chlorine or chloramine required to produce a trace chlorine residual was less than the chlorine demand at higher doses. This potentially implies that at the lower chlorine doses, even though a disinfectant residual was detected above the MDL, the chlorine residual may not be real and the test is producing a false positive. For example, the state of Colorado, through extensive analysis, had indicated that the chlorine minimum reporting limit (MRL) should be around 0.2 mg/L (CDPHE 2016). Additional work is needed in assessing the MRL suitable for residual chlorine measurement. In this work, chlorine demand was not generally met until the residual was 0.2 mg/L and in some cases higher. The variability of chlorine demand can impact the stability of the chlorine residual in the system. As seen in Figure 2, some of the systems in this study did not show a ﬂattening of the chlorine consumption curve as the applied chlorine dose increased. This indicates that the system continued to be chlorine-limited, with excess reactive material in the bulk water matrix. In such systems, the chlorine residual is not stable and the presence of a trace residual simply indicates that the chlorine level has become low enough that the reaction between chlorine and the reactants in the bulk water matrix is not kinetically favorable. However, Figure 2 also shows that some systems tested did show a decrease in chlorine consumption relative to the applied dose as the applied dose increased. In such systems, the reaction between chlorine and reactants in the bulk water matrix becomes reactant-limited. This should result in greater chlorine residual stability over time as well as leaving the chlorine residual available RO T H & C OR N W EL L | F E BR UA R Y 2 0 18 • 11 0 :2 | JO UR N A L A WW A

for reaction with pathogens that may be introduced to the distribution system. DBP production. For any given system, DBP production was relatively consistent; DBPs generally increase with water age and as the chlorine consumption (applied chlorine dose minus the chlorine residual) increases. However, when comparing systems, DBP production was highly variable. This is apparent in Figure 6. Despite the moderately strong correlation between chlorine consumption and TTHM formation (R2 = 0.555), it is apparent that DBP production is more closely grouped by system, with some systems consistently above the trend line and some consistently below the trend line. Even the HAA5 data, which are relatively scattered (R2 = 0.163), indicate that DBP production is clustered by system. Most waters exhibited a two-phase DBP formation curve with a sharp initial increase in DBP production as the chlorine residual was increased above trace, and a more gradual increase in DBP formation at higher chlorine residual values. This observed trend correlates well with the chlorine demand observations. From a national perspective, the increase in DBP formation will depend on the numerical value established for the minimum chlorine residual, and how high that value is above the minimum chlorine residuals currently maintained by systems. The systems most greatly affected will be those that maintain trace chlorine residuals, while those systems maintaining higher residuals will be affected less, if at all. This study found that DBP formation tended to flatten relative to the increase in chlorine residual as the chlorine residual increased above 0.2 mg/L to 0.5 mg/L, whereas DBP formation relative to the increase in chlorine residual could be significant as the residual increased from trace to 0.2 mg/L. Wahman and Pressman (2015) noted that 18 states require a minimum chlorine residual of 0.2 mg/L or higher, with a couple of additional states proposing minimum chlorine residuals at or above those levels. Systems in those states will be much less affected by a potential change to the minimum chlorine residual requirement compared with systems in states where trace residuals are acceptable. An example analysis can be performed using Table 2. Consider a hypothetical system increasing the residual from trace to 0.3 mg/L compared with a hypothetical system increasing from 0.2 to 0.3 mg/L. Assuming both systems are representative of median conditions, the first system will see an increase of approximately 7.0 μg/L TTHM; as the chlorine residual increases from trace to 0.2 mg/L, the rate of TTHM formation will be 32.4 μg/L TTHM/mg/L Cl2 residual, then the rate of TTHM formation will decrease to 5.1 μg/L TTHM/mg/L Cl2 residual as the chlorine residual is raised from 0.2 to 0.3 mg/L. Conversely, TTHM formation in the second system would be projected to increase by only 0.5 μg/L 26

R OT H & C O RN W E LL | FE BR U AR Y 20 18 • 1 10 :2 | J OU RN A L A W W A

as the residual increases from 0.2 to 0.3 mg/L on the basis of the median formation rate of 5.1 μg/L TTHM/mg/L Cl2 residual. A similar analysis shows a greater disparity of impact if the systems are representative of the 90th percentiles in Table 2. Increasing chlorine residual from trace to 0.2 mg/L would form 37.4 μg/L TTHM at the rate of 187.2 μg/L TTHM/mg/L Cl2 residual, while the additional increase in residual from 0.2 to 0.3 mg/L would only form 1.6 μg/L TTHM at the rate of 15.9 μg/L TTHM/mg/L Cl2 residual. HAA5 formation follows a similar, if less dramatic, trend. At the median, an increase from trace to 0.2 mg/L chlorine would form 4.5 μg/L HAA5, while increasing from 0.2 to 0.3 mg/L would only form an additional 0.8 μg/L HAA5. For the 90th percentile systems, the formation increases to 14.4 and 2.2 μg/L HAA5, respectively. DBP modeling. Existing DBP production models did not correlate well with the results observed in this study, including the USEPA water model. Given the fact that these models generally are developed to account for the applied chlorine doses instead of the chlorine residual or chlorine consumption, it is not difficult to understand the lack of correlation. Better results were obtained by developing multilinear regression models specifically for these data. The models presented in Table 2 range from weak to moderately strong correlations. Time was a significant independent variable in all models, as would be expected on the basis of DBP formation kinetics. All models developed for the full data sets included three or more significant independent variables, reducing the practicality of developing graphical curves to describe model results. Restricting the data to the seven-day tests eliminated time as a variable and reduced the complexity of the models. Figure 10 presented a graphical solution for estimating seven-day TTHM formation based on the applied or consumed chlorine. HAA5 formation, including seven-day HAA5 formation, was less well correlated, with a predictive curve as shown in Figure 11.

CONCLUSIONS Although existing federal regulations in the United States only require water systems to maintain a detectable chlorine residual in their distribution system, there has been ongoing discussion regarding the need for increasing the chlorine residual requirement to a quantifiable minimum value. Many states have been moving to a required numerical minimum chlorine residual above trace. Results from this work support that direction. The chlorine demand testing and DBP testing conducted for this study indicate that at trace residual chlorine levels, there is not sufficient chlorine to fully react with all reactive matter in the bulk water. This suggests that there may not be sufficient chlorine to fully

react with introduced pathogens or other contaminants in the distribution system. Systems that need to increase chlorine residuals will need to add additional chlorine to the system, which will in turn increase DBPs. The major increase in DBPs is seen when increasing the chlorine residual from “trace” to the 0.2–0.5 mg/L range. After that, DBP increases are modest. The range of TTHM increase going from trace to ~0.2 mg/L was 7 μg/L for the median utility, and up to 37 μg/L for the 90th percentile utility, while the projected increase in HAA5 ranged from 4.5 to 14 μg/L, respectively. Once the residual goes beyond the point at which demand is satisﬁed, the DBP increase is generally minor. For example, the TTHM increase going from 0.2 to 1.2 mg/L residual was 5 μg/L. Utilities need to individually determine the DBP impact for increasing chlorine residual. For many utilities, this impact may not be signiﬁcant, but for others the impact is one that could alter DBP compliance. However, it is also these utilities that are furthest from satisfying the water’s chlorine demand, and they may well be the utilities that most need to increase the residual.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT This research was funded through the AWWA Water Industry Technical Action Fund program under the management of Steve Via.

ENDNOTES 1

Grade 4 qualitative ﬁlter paper (P/N1004–090), GE Healthcare Life Sciences, Pittsburgh, Pa. 2 The Chlorox Company, Oakland, Calif.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS Damon K. Roth (to whom correspondence may be addressed) is a senior project manager for Cornwell Engineering Group, 109 N. Washington St., Ritzville, WA 99169 USA; droth@eetinc.com. He has more than 16 years of experience in the water, wastewater, and stormwater industries, 10 of which have been with his current company, where he has specialized in helping water utilities with regulatory compliance, treatment process analysis, and treatment plan residuals management issues. He earned his bachelor’s and master’s degrees in civil engineering from the University of Washington, Seattle. David A. Cornwell is the president of Cornwell Engineering Group in the company’s headquarters in Newport News, Va.

https://doi.org/10.5942/jawwa.2018.110.0004

PEER REVIEW Date of submission: 04/19/2017 Date of acceptance: 09/21/2017

REFERENCES

AWWA Water Utility Council, 2015. Disinfection Residual Strategy Panel Findings. AWWA Fall Council Summit, Denver. www.awwa. org/portals/0/files/legreg/documents/wucmeetingnotebookoct2015. pdf (accessed May 4, 2016). Bellamy, W.; Carlson, K.; Pier, D.; Ducoste, J.; & Carlson, M., 2000. Determining Disinfection Needs. Journal AWWA, 92:5:44. Bellar, T.A.; Lichtenberg, J.J.; & Kroner, R.C., 1974. The Occurrence of Organohalieds in Chlorinated Drinking Waters. Journal AWWA, 66:12:703. Boccelli, D.L.; Tryby, M.E.; Uber, J.G.; & Summers, R.S., 2003. A Reactive Species Model for Chlorine Decay and THM Formation Under Rechlorination Conditions. Water Research, 37:2654. https:// doi.org/10.1016/S0043-1354(03)00067-8. CDPHE (Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment), 2016. Quick Guide: Disinfectant Residuals. https://drive.google.com/file/d/ 0BwDv77AW5PLkRlNsaFR3R1JwRWM/view (accessed Nov. 23, 2016). CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) 136.2, 2017. Protection of Environment—Guidelines Establishing Test Procedures for the Analysis of Pollutants. Office of the Federal Register, Washington. Chowdhury, S.; Champagne, P.; & McLellan, P.J., 2009. Models for Predicting Disinfection Byproduct (DBP) Formation in Drinking Waters: A Chronological Review. Science of the Total Environment, 407:14:4189. Clark, R.M., 1998. Chlorine Demand and TTHM Formation Kinetics: A Second-Order Model. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 124: 16. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372(1998)124:1(16). Clark, R.M. & Sivaganesan, M., 1998. Predicting Chlorine Residuals and Formation of TTHMs in Drinking Water. Journal of Environmental Engineering, 124:12:1203. Gang, D.D.; Segar Jr., R.L.; Clevemger, T.E.; & Banerji, S.K., 2002. Using Chlorine Demand to Predict TTHM and HAA9 Formation. Journal AWWA, 94:10:76. Ged, E.C.; Chadik, P.A.; & Boyer, T.H., 2015. Predictive Capability of Chlorination Disinfection Byproducts Models. Journal of Environmental Management, 149:253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jenvman.2014.10.014. Haas, C.N.; Gupta, M.; Chitluru, R.; & Burlingame, G., 2002. Chlorine Demand in Disinfecting Water Mains. Journal AWWA, 94:1:97. Hertz, C.D., 2016. Application of Detection and Quantification Concepts to Chlorine Residual Measurements. PADEP Proposed Disinfection Requirements Rule Stakeholder Meeting, Harrisburg, Pa. http://files.dep.state.pa.us/Water/BSDW/ DrinkingWaterManagement/Regulations/Aqua%20PA% 20disinfectant%20residual%20measurement%20MDL%20MRL% 20presentation%20PADEP%20Stakeholder%20Meeting% 20030916%20CDH.pdf (accessed July 18, 2016). Katz, E.L., 1986. The Stability of Turbidity in Raw Water and its Relationship to Chlorine Demand. Journal AWWA, 78:2:72. Kuo, K.-S. & Jurs, P.C., 1973. Semiquantitative Determination of Chlorine Dosages for Water Treatment Using Pattern-Recognition Techniques. Journal AWWA, 65:10:623. LDHH (Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals), 2013. Declaration of Emergency—Minimum Disinfectant Residual Levels in Public

RO T H & C OR N W EL L | F E BR UA R Y 2 0 18 • 11 0 :2 | JO UR N A L A WW A

Water Systems. Released Nov. 6, 2013. www.dhh.la.gov/assets/oph/ EmergencyRule/EmergencyRule-MinimumDisinfectantResidual Levels.pdf (accessed July 22, 2016). McGuire, M.J., 2006. Eight Revolutions in the History of US Drinking Water Disinfection. Journal AWWA, 98:3:123. Roberson, J.A., 2014. The Middle-Aged Safe Drinking Water Act. Journal AWWA, 106:8:96. https://doi.org/10.5942/jawwa.2014.106.0118.

Drinking Water by Liquid-Liquid Extraction and Gas Chromatography With Electron-Capture Detection. Method 551.1. USEPA, Cincinnati. USEPA, 1995b. Determination of Haloacetic Acids and Dalapon in Drinking Water by Liquid-Liquid Extraction, Derivatization and Gas Chromatography With Electron Capture Detection. USEPA, Cincinnati.

Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 2005a (21st ed.). Method 2350B, Chlorine Demand/Requirement. APHA, AWWA, and WEF, Washington.

USEPA, 1989. Drinking Water; National Primary Drinking Water Regulations; Filtration, Disinfection; Turbidity, Giardia lamblia, Viruses, Legionella, and Heterotrophic Bacteria; Final Rule. Federal Register, 54:124:27486.

Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 2005b (21st ed.). Method 4500-Cl, section G, DPD Colorimetric Method. APHA, AWWA, and WEF, Washington.

Vasconcelos, J.J.; Rossman, L.A.; Grayman, W.M.; Boulos, P.F.; & Clark, R.M., 1997. Kinetics of Chlorine Decay. Journal AWWA, 89:7:54.

Tryby, M.E.; Boccelli, D.L.; Koechling, M.T.; Uber, J.G.; Summers, R.S.; & Rossman, L.A., 1999. Booster Chlorination for Managing Disinfectant Residuals. Journal AWWA, 91:1:95. USEPA (US Environmental Protection Agency), 2005. Water Treatment Plant Model User’s Manual, v. 2.2. Ofﬁce of Ground Water and Drinking Water. USEPA, Cincinnati, Ohio. USEPA, 1995a. Determination of Chlorination Disinfection Byproducts, Chlorinated Solvents, and Halogenated Pesticides/Herbicides in

R OT H & C O RN W E LL | FE BR U AR Y 20 18 • 1 10 :2 | J OU RN A L A W W A

Wahman, D.G. & Pressman, J.G., 2015. Distribution System Residuals—Is “Detectable” Still Acceptable for Chloramines? Journal AWWA, 107:8:53. https://doi.org/10.5942/jawwa.2015.107. 0118. Warton, B.; Heitz, A.; Joll, C.; & Kagi, R., 2006. A New Method for Calculation of the Chlorine Demand of Natural and Treated Waters. Water Research, 2877. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres. 2006.05.020.

Peer Reviewed

Expanded Summary

Water Conservation Benefits of Long-Term Residential Irrigation Restrictions in Southwest Florida MACKENZIE J . BO YE R, M IC H A E L D. D U KE S, IS AAC D U ER R , AN D N I K O L AY BL I Z N Y U K

Long-term water restrictions that periodically reduced who irrigated least lacked the capability to conserve Two column figure max width = 37p9 (actual 2 column width = 39p9) allowable irrigation frequencies from two days/week to more, whereas those who irrigated most had the highone day/week coincided with lower irrigation demand of est conservation potential. Additional conservation single-family residential customers in southwest Florida. potential existed for high irrigators, in which irrigation This analysis was based on monthly water billing records demand was 56% greater than irrigation required of approximately 127,250 customers in five memberunder one-day-per-week restrictions. governments of Tampa Bay Water from 1998 to 2010. Sixty-five percent of high irrigators had lower irrigation Annual irrigation demand (landscape water applied) was demand under the more stringent restrictions as compared 13% lower (9.8 versus 11.3 in./year), while annual irrigawith 16% of high irrigators that had higher irrigation tion required (on the basis of weather conditions and demand. All but one zip code in the study area had lower landscape water needs) was 3% higher (25.7 versus annual irrigation demand under the more stringent restric25.0 in./year) under the more stringent restrictions. tions, although substantial variation existed within each Customers were grouped on the basis of their mean zip code. The primary focus of this study was long-term annual ratio of irrigation demand to irrigation required water restrictions, but the brief ban on in-ground irrigation (Figure 1): occasional irrigators (ratio <0.25), low systems in Tampa in April and May 2009 resulted in a irrigators (ratio of 0.25–0.50), medium irrigators (ratio substantially lower irrigation demand as well. 0.50–1.0), and high irrigators (ratio >1). Irrigation demand under the more stringent one-day-per-week Corresponding author: Michael D. Dukes is a professor restrictions was 20% higher (difference of 0.3 in./year) in the Department of Agricultural and Biological for occasional irrigators and 20% lower (difference of Engineering at the University of Florida, POB 110570, 10.2 in./year) for high irrigators, indicating that those Gainesville, FL 32611-0570 USA; mddukes@ufl.edu.

FIGURE 1

Mean monthly irrigation demand and required under two days/week and one day/week allowable irrigation for high, medium, low, and occasional irrigating groups

Depth—in./month

7.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00 Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

July

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Month

B O YER ET A L. | FEB R U A R Y 2018 • 110: 2 | JO U R NA L AWWA

Peer Reviewed

Expanded Summary

Advancing Water Innovation Through Public Benefit Funds: Examining California’s Approach for Electricity K I MBERLY J. QUE SNE L A ND NE WSH A K. A JAMI

America’s sophisticated centralized water use systems face many challenges including aging infrastructure, hydrologic uncertainty, population growth, and urbanization. Yet dwindling public funding opportunities, inadequate water rates, and declining per capita demand make it impossible for many utilities to fully recover their costs of service. Maintaining and operating existing systems can be a fiscal challenge, leaving little capacity for service providers to invest in programs and projects outside of normal operating procedures. The water sector needs revamped and restructured financial models. Various financing strategies have been proposed, but these schemes must be supplemented with—or some of these resources must be funneled into—dedicated funds for innovation. This article examines one such financing instrument for the water sector: public benefit funds (PBFs). PBFs are widely used in the electricity sector to fund energy efficiency and renewable energy initiatives. The electricity and water sectors share many similarities that warrant looking to one sector for financing and policy models that could be adapted for the other. Using a case study approach, this article investigates the first state-level electricity PBF program in the United States: California’s electricity public goods charge (PGC), which was in place 1998–2011. The goal of the current research was to examine the PGC for lessons learned and then determine how the mechanism could be modified for the water sector. The findings of this study show that customers, utilities, and the state benefitted environmentally and economically from the PGC program, and the fund partially supported California’s clean energy movement. PGC funds contributed to increased energy efficiency throughout the state; in 2011, 15% of statewide energy savings could be attributed to program efforts largely supported by the PGC. Renewable generation also accelerated as PGC programs helped California reach and surpass its 20% renewable portfolio standard goal. Additionally, the state gained economic benefits as PGC programs saved customers money on utility bills while also leveraging the $0.9 billion of PGC funds allocated to research and development to attract an additional $1.13 billion of private capital for energy innovation. Following the electricity sector’s lead, the water sector could use PBFs to strengthen public investment in 30

QUE SN E L & AJ AMI | F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 8 • 1 1 0 :2 | J O U R N A L AWWA

water by creating a dedicated fund for programs and projects that enhance system resiliency, revamp infrastructure, and increase innovation. In forming new water PBFs, the water sector can benefit from lessons learned from the administration and management of California’s PGC program. Electricity PBF governance structures must be specifically adapted for the water sector. To optimize success, water PBFs should be set up to ensure they have flexible program priorities adjustable to local and regional realities and needs; continually reevaluate and revisit program goals; include built-in financial tracking mechanisms and transparent record keeping; support public-purpose programs and projects; promote the advancement and dissemination of new and innovative solutions through investment in research, development, and demonstration; and leverage funds to attract other public and private capital. Given the fragmented nature of the water sector, water PBFs could be implemented at local, regional, state, or multiple levels. Funds should support public interest projects at the same scale from which the surcharge is collected so that those paying receive the benefits. Potential program areas that water PBFs could be used to fund include conservation and efficiency, supply diversification, data gathering and management, information technology such as smart meters, and/or upstream watersheds that directly affect water quality and quantity for downstream communities. PBF mechanisms would not replace financial tools currently in place to support water infrastructure but could be a supplemental way to address some of the sector’s financial shortfalls. Some regional water agencies have already successfully implemented PBF-like mechanisms, and these examples can serve as models for the future. Adequate financing is a key component in reinventing US urban water systems, and PBFs could help launch the water sector into a more modern and sustainable future. Corresponding author: Kimberly J. Quesnel is a PhD candidate in the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Y2E2 Bldg., 473 Via Ortega, Rm. 314, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305 USA; kquesnel@stanford.edu.

Peer Reviewed

Expanded Summary

Improving Water Utilities’ Access to Source Water Protection and Emergency Response Data JE NN IF ER BEN JAM IN, E M ILY SM ITH , M A RGA R ET K EAR N S , J EF F R EY R O S EN , AN D K R I S T Y N S T EV EN S

There are significant amounts of existing data that are critical to source water protection and emergency response. Given their role as the primary stewards of drinking water for their respective communities, water utilities and those acting on their behalf should have access to these data; however, barriers preventing access to these data by water utilities still exist. This article discusses and makes recommendations for removing these barriers with the goal of improving water utilities’ access to the data they need to protect source waters and respond to emergencies. In January 2014, 11,000 gal of a 4-methylcyclohexanemethanol mixture spilled into the Elk River, W.Va. Consequently, an effort to better understand the challenges water utilities face in managing and protecting source waters led to the development of WaterSuite, a cloud-based geographic information system partly intended to meet the demands of source water risk management, emergency planning, and event response. Spatial data that identified the locations and quantities of contaminants—or were indicative of entities likely to manufacture, transport, or store contaminants—were mined from various state, federal, and local departments, then integrated into WaterSuite. Data that characterize the chemical, physical, toxicological, medical, safety, and treatability of contaminants in a watershed were also collected and used to create a searchable contaminant database in WaterSuite that can be used to identify contaminants by property or common descriptors and to locate contaminant sources on a map. The data collection effort described in this article revealed significant barriers to effective source water protection planning, which can be classified into four interrelated categories: availability, accessibility, quality, and format. Issues of availability encountered during data collection included a lack of data relevant to source water protection, which seemed to be more pervasive among agencies and organizations in which source water protection was not a priority. Regulatory barriers were directly related to provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, each of which made the process of submitting and fulfilling data requests more labor-intensive and time-consuming and lowered the rate of return for data requests. Data quality issues

included missing or incomplete data fields, spatial data points in the wrong locations, insufficient location information for verifying the locations of spatial data points, lack of descriptive metadata, lack of unique identifiers, and irregular or nonexistent updates of data at the source. Quality issues encountered in chemical information included vague chemical names; failure to provide Chemical Abstract Service numbers; omitted volumes and masses in reports related to chemical storage; and lack of information on color, odor, taste, health effects, treatment options, toxicity, and other contaminant properties. Format-related issues that complicated data collection, integration, and use may be summarized by a lack of standards for recording and storing data at the source. Naming conventions and encoding of data fields varied from source to source, as did the file formats for storing data. Many of the barriers that impede access to source water protection data by water utilities can be removed by establishing standards and regulatory reform at the federal and state levels. Recommendations discussed in this article call for setting standards that require a minimum of data relevant to source water protection and emergency response be collected. These standards also should dictate every aspect of how these data are stored, managed, undergo quality control, and are made available to water utilities. Some of the recommendations discussed require regulatory changes. If these standards and regulatory changes are implemented, it can be expected that water utilities will have greater access to data that will allow them to mitigate risk, plan for emergencies, and respond to events with more ease, efficiency, and probability of success. Corresponding author: Jennifer Benjamin is a data analyst at Corona Environmental Consulting, 1001 Hingham St., Ste. 102, Rockland, MA 02370 USA; JBenjamin@coronaenv.com.

Write for the Journal Journal AWWA is currently seeking peer-reviewed and feature articles. Find submission guidelines at www.awwa.org/submit.

B ENJA M IN ET A L. | FEB R U A R Y 2018 • 110: 2 | JO U R NA L AWWA

Feature Article

J U N ES EO K L EE AN D TAMI M Y O U N O S

Sustainability Strategies at the Water–Energy Nexus: Renewable Energy and Decentralized Infrastructure WITH A GLOBAL FOCUS ON INCORPORATING RENEWABLE ENERGIES INTO EXISTING WATER INFRASTRUCTURE, THE WATER INDUSTRY HAS STRATEGIES TO CONSERVE WATER AND ENERGY FOR FUTURE SUSTAINABILITY.

LEE & YOUNOS | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

Layout imagery by D-Krab/Shutterstock.com

ESTABLISHED IMPORTANT

ncreased urbanization, population growth, aging built infrastructure, emerging contaminants, competitive water uses, and measures to mitigate the effects of climate change in urban areas are some of the major concerns that influence the planning and design of water infrastructure, including potable water, wastewater, stormwater, and water reuse systems (Larsen et al. 2016, NRC 2008). Furthermore, centralized water infrastructure is highly energy dependent and may account for 4–10% of the United States’ total energy use, most of which is generated from fossil fuel–based sources with significant economic, social, and environmental impacts (CRS 2013, Sanders & Webber 2012). According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA 2016), fossil fuels generate 81% of the energy used in the United States each year (petroleum, natural gas, and coal, as shown in Figure 1). To effectively address the immediate and long-term energy requirements of water infrastructure in urban environments, a paradigm shift toward more sustainable management of water and energy use is critical (Lee et al. 2017). To meet these goals, the water industry should consider integrating renewable energy into urban water infrastructure to reduce the sector’s dependency on fossil fuel–based electricity use. Practical applications and novel research in the domain of renewable energy applications for water infrastructure are rapidly evolving (Lee et al. 2017; Dallman et al. 2016; Tavakol-Davani et al. 2016; Walsh et al. 2014; Agudelo-Vera 2012a, 2012b; Agudelo-Vera et al.

2011; Pidou et al. 2007; Dixon et al. 1999); however, at present only limited examples exist in the literature of powering water infrastructure with renewable energy sources. Besides sun and wind energy sources, which are the focus of this article, potential alternative energy sources that have a relatively low carbon footprint include nuclear, bioenergy, geothermal, and hydropower. Although nuclear energy is widely used to generate electricity, nuclear energy production is water intensive and also presents environmental and safety issues (Younos 2012). Wastewater treatment plants commonly use bioenergy generated onsite from recovered off-gas, specifically methane (USEPA 2016). Geothermal energy technologies are also currently used at various scales, ranging from utility-scale generation (300–50 MW) to direct-use applications (TEEIC 2016). At present, environmental and ecological constraints imposed on small- and large-scale hydropower generation (1–30 MW) make its development less favorable. However, a recent US Department of Energy report, Hydropower Vision: A New Chapter for America’s 1st Renewable Electricity Source, proposes approaches that could optimize and increase the efficiency of existing hydropower systems (Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy 2016). Micro- and minihydropower (5–100 kW) generation has a long history of use in rural areas and developing countries (Harvey & Brown 1993). Use of small-scale hydropower at water utilities is limited, but there is a growing list of projects, including a recent project in Portland, Ore., designed to generate electricity from pressurized water pipes and return the power generated to the electric grid (Valentine 2015).

WATER–ENERGY NEXUS The water-energy nexus refers to the interdependency of water and energy production systems (Lawson et al. 2014, CRS 2013, Ruberto et al.

2013, Sanders & Webber 2012). Water availability is a critical factor for fossil fuel extraction and

significant amounts of energy, especially in areas with poor source water quality that require extensive

To effectively address the immediate and long-term energy requirements of water infrastructure in urban environments, a paradigm shift toward more sustainable management of water and energy use is critical. Three column figure max width = 37p9 (actual 2 column width = 39p9) thermoelectric power generation treatment or with service areas that (Younos et al. 2016, Younos 2012). require significant amounts of pumpOn the other hand, centralized ing. Some of the potential challenges water infrastructure can consume faced by urban water systems include

FIGURE 1

Total US energy generation

Petroleum Natural Gas Coal Nuclear Bioenergy (Biomass) Hydroelectric Wind Solar Geothermal Bioenergy (biomass) 5% Nuclear 9%

Hydroelectric 2%

Wind 2%

Solar 1%

Geothermal 0%

Petroleum 36%

Coal 16%

Natural gas 29% Source: EIA 2016

LEE & YOUNOS | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

CO2 emissions attributed to fossil fuel–based electric power generation

TABLE 1

CO2 Output Rate g/kW·h (lb/kW·h)

Fuel Type Coal

960.3 (2.117)

Natural gas

596.0 (1.915)

Petroleum

868.6 (1.314)

Source: Kloss & Lukes 2008 CO2—carbon dioxide

TABLE 2

Estimated energy savings and CO2 reduction attributed to solar energy upgrades at drinking water treatment facilities in Massachusetts Renewable Energy Generation kW

Total Annual Energy Savings kW

Estimated Annual CO2 Reduction kW

Ashland Howe Street Water Treatment Plant

Solar (up to 45 kW)

194,464

233 × 103

Easton Water Division

Solar (up to 50 kW)

60,000

47 × 103

Falmouth Long Pond Water Treatment Plant

Solar (up to 15 kW)

278,200

216 × 103

Solar and hydroelectric (up to 105 kW)

200,940

155 × 103

New Bedford—Quittacus Water Treatment Plant

Solar (up to 138 kW)

165,000

168 × 103

Townsend Water Treatment Plant

Solar (up to 40 kW)

73,844

57 × 103

Worcester Water Treatment Plant

Solar and hydroelectric (up to 160 kW)

553,152

430 × 103

Water Treatment Facility

Lee Water Treatment Plant

Source: USEPA 2009 CO2—carbon dioxide

the following (Ganesan et al. 2017; Güngör-Demirci et al. 2017; Dallman et al. 2016; Tanverakul & Lee 2016; Lee et al. 2013, 2012): • Complex pipe networks with wide distributions of ages and materials • Dependency on imported water supplies • Increasing demand for wastewater reuse • High levels of impervious cover leading to greater stormwater runoff More than 52,000 conventional or centralized potable water treatment and distribution systems and 15,000 wastewater treatment systems operate in the United States, with most being powered by fossil fuel–based energy distribution systems (USEPA 2009). In 2009, the electricity consumed by the nation’s public drinking water and 34

wastewater utilities for pumping, conveyance, treatment, distribution, and discharge was estimated to be 56.6 billion kW·h, or approximately 4% of the total national energy consumption (CRS 2013). The energy used for water treatment and delivery in the United States is reported to be in the range of 0.07–0.92 kW·h/m3 with an estimated average of 0.38 kW·h/m 3 (Kloss & Lukes 2008, AwwaRF 2007), where the energy requirements for a specific water system depend on source water quality and regional topography. The energy demand for water infrastructure is projected to increase by approximately 30% over the coming decades as a result of increased urban water demand and reliance on energyintensive treatment processes for nonfresh water sources such as

LEE & YOUNOS | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

saltwater and reclaimed wastewater (Stokes & Horvath 2005). Table 1 shows carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from fossil fuel electric power generation. Since existing centralized water infrastructure depends mostly on fossil fuel–based electricity, more water being treated and delivered should be accompanied by increasing levels of CO 2 emissions. Based on Table 1, Kloss & Lukes (2008) estimated that, on average, approximately 300 kg of CO2 is emitted for every cubic meter of water delivered. Water and energy conservation. Each type of customer group or class has opportunities for water conservation that could result in reduced energy use and a commensurate smaller carbon footprint (Younos & Parece 2012). Consumerrelated energy-use efficiency practices include water conservation

Examples of estimated savings from solar energy upgrades at wastewater treatment facilities in Massachusetts

TABLE 3

Wastewater Treatment Facility

Renewable Energy Generation kW

Total Annual Energy Savings kW

Estimated Annual CO2 Reduction kW

Charles River Pollution Control District

Solar (20 kW)

705,300

567 × 103

Great Lawrence Sanitary District

Solar (410 kW)

4,909,062

5,420 × 103

Solar and biomass (1,770 kW)

4,255,737

3,252

Solar (400 kW)

831,615

636

Type of Solar Energy

Desalination Technology

Plant Capacity—m3/d

Pittsfield Wastewater Treatment Plant Upper Blackstone Water Pollution District Source: USEPA 2009 CO2—carbon dioxide

TABLE 4

Desalination plants using direct and indirect solar energy

Location El Paso, Tex., USA

Solar pond

MSF

16.19

Dish collectors

199.96

La Desired Island, French Caribbean

Solar-evacuated tube

MED

40.01

Abu Dhabi, UAE

Solar-evacuated tube

MED

119.98

Yanbu, Saudi Arabia

Takami Island, Japan

Solar-parabolic trough

MED

15.99

Almeria, Spain

Solar-parabolic trough

ME-heat pump

71.99

Margarita de Savoya, Italy

Solar pond

MSF

49.99–59.99

Near Dead Sea

Solar pond

MED

2,999.61

Sources: Abou-Rayan & Djebedjian 2014, García-Rodriguez 2002 CO2—carbon dioxide, FS—freeze separation, MED—multiple effect distillation, MSF—multiple effect evaporation

achieved by modifying consumer behaviors (Tanverakul & Lee 2016, 2015; Parece et al. 2013) and the increased use of in-building water and energy-saving fixtures (e.g., USEPA 2014). Another potential option is to integrate decentralized water infrastructure that uses locally available sources such as rainwater, thus reducing the energy attributed to long-distance pumping. For example, Dallman et al. (2016), Younos et al. (2016), and Ward et al. (2012) discussed the potential energy savings that could be achieved by lowering potable water consumption and corresponding reduction in CO2 levels attributed to greater use of rainwater harvesting systems. Green building designs can ameliorate much of this adverse impact by incorporating practices that

improve the efficient use of water and energy through better design, operation, and maintenance across a building’s entire life cycle (Corbett & Muthulingam 2007, USGBC 2006, Cassidy 2003). However, from an energy conservation perspective, the advantages of water and energy conservation strategies may ultimately be offset by increasing demand, so reducing the overall energy use in combination with implementing renewable energy sources in place of fossil fuel–based energy sources should be a critical objective of water infrastructure planning and design. Solar energy. Solar energy is a proven way to integrate renewable energy into large-scale applications such as water and wastewater treatment, and currently the most promising solar energy technology consists

of photovoltaic (PV) arrays made of silicon chips. In the United States, several water utilities are at least partially powered by solar energy. For example, the New Jersey American Water Canal Road Water Treatment Plant, constructed in 2005, includes two 225 kW alternating current (AC) inverters, revenuegrade metering, and an Internetbased data acquisition system. The treatment plant’s original solar array consisted of 2,871 solar PV modules, each rated at 175 W for a total direct current (DC) output of 502 kW. In 2007, the system was expanded by 87 kW (17% increase) to achieve an overall output of 590 kW. A further expansion of 109 kW DC was added atop the filter basins in 2008 to increase the overall capacity of the site to 698 kW DC. The solar array satisfies approximately

LEE & YOUNOS | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

TABLE 5

Examples of desalination plants utilizing photovoltaic energy Power Generated 103 Btu/h (kW)

Location

Desalination Technology

Plant Capacity m3/day

Perth, Western Australia

4.1 (1.2)

RO—seawater

2.40–12.10

Cituis West, Java, Indonesia

85 (25)

RO—brackish water

35.99

Lipari Island, Italy

215 (63)

RO—seawater

47.99

University of Almeria, Spain

80 (23.5)

RO—brackish water

59.99

Fukue City, Nagasaki, Japan

222 (65)

ED—brackish water

199.89

Sources: Abou-Rayan & Djebedjian 2014, García-Rodriguez 2002 ED—electrodialysis, RO—reverse osmosis

TABLE 6

Examples of estimated savings from wind energy upgrades at wastewater treatment facilities in Massachusetts Renewable Energy Generation kW

Total Annual Energy Savings kW

Estimated Annual CO2 Reduction kW

Barnstable Wastewater Treatment Plant

Wind and solar (1,000 kW)

850,000

825 × 103

Falmouth Wastewater Treatment Plant

Wind (3,150 kW)

4,235,000

3,181 × 103

Power Generated 103 Btu/h (kW)

Desalination Technology

Plant Capacity m3/day

Shark Bay, Western Australia

109 (32)

RO—brackish water

129.98–167.98

Ruegen Island, Germany

683 (200)

MVC

119.98–299.96

Wastewater Treatment Facility

Source: USEPA 2009 CO2—carbon dioxide

TABLE 7

Examples of desalination plants incorporating wind energy

Location

Sources: Abou-Rayan & Djebedjian 2014, García-Rodriguez 2002 MVC—mechanical vapor compression, RO—reverse osmosis

20% of the Canal Road treatment plant’s peak usage (Leiby & Burke 2011). Tables 2 and 3 show the estimated annual energy savings and CO2 emission reductions attributed to solar energy, respectively, for selected water and wastewater treatment plants (USEPA 2009). Water scarcity in many parts of the world has increased demand for desalination of seawater and brackish waters, particularly in highpopulation coastal cities and island countries. Desalination technologies are highly energy intensive (Younos & Tulou 2005), so for areas of the world that receive plenty of sunny days, solar energy can be a significant energy source to boost the production 36

of freshwater (Abou-Rayan & Djebedjian 2014). Tables 4 and 5 show examples of desalination facilities powered by solar energy in various countries. Wind energy. Wind rotates wind turbines, creating mechanical energy that is converted to electrical energy. Wind turbines that convert mechanical energy into electricity come in vertical axis arrangements and multiple axis horizontal arrangements. Turbines generating low power (10–100 kW), medium power (100 kW–0.5 MW), and high power (>0.5 MW) are mature technologies (García-Rodriguez 2002). In the United States, several water utilities are powered by

LEE & YOUNOS | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

wind energy. For example, the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (WSSC) in Laurel, Md., uses wind energy to power one-third of its water and wastewater operations (Leiby & Burke 2011). The wind power used by WSSC is provided by 14 wind turbines installed on a farm in southwestern Pennsylvania, generating 70,000 MW·h of power a year. Table 6 shows the estimated annual energy savings and reduction in CO2 emissions attributed to wind energy for selected wastewater treatment plants (USEPA 2009), and Table 7 provides examples of desalination facilities powered by wind energy in Australia and Germany.

DECENTRALIZED GREEN WATERINFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS Integration of solar and wind energy technologies strengthens the concept of an onsite or decentralized contribution to overall system sustainability. A decentralized green w a t e r- i n f r a s t r u c t u r e s y s t e m (DGWIS) is defined as one that integrates locally available water sources (i.e., rainwater and graywater) with renewable local energy sources (i.e., solar and wind) to support potable and nonpotable water services tailored to meet the needs of the specific customer class (i.e., domestic, commercial, industrial, or institutional). Decentralized rainwater harvesting and graywater recycling have long been identified as alternative water sources for overall sustainable management of water resources (Tavakol-Davani et al. 2016; Walsh et al. 2014; Agudelo-Vera et al. 2012a, 2012b; Agudelo-Vera et al. 2011; Pidou et al. 2007; Dixon et al. 1999). Furthermore, the general characteristics of graywater and rainwater harvesting systems have been studied by many researchers (Malinowski et al. 2015, NWRI 2015, Eriksson et al. 2009, Li et al. 2009, Pidou et al. 2007). However, as these systems gain in popularity, it remains to be seen what effects they may have on utility revenue and ultimately on customer rates. Recent technological advances in prefiltration, first-flush design, and the availability of small-scale advanced water treatment units could mean captured rainwater may be more widely used as a potable water source. Advances in small-scale and packaged water treatment technologies such as reverse osmosis, carbon filters, and ultraviolet (UV) disinfection devices allow decentralized water production systems to treat locally available water sources, including captured rainwater and reclaimed graywater. A typical small-scale packaged water treatment system with capacities up to approximately 13,000 gpd (50,000 L/day) can easily be configured as a water treatment

unit at the individual building level in urban areas (Younos 2014). A DGWIS should incorporate appropriate treatment technologies based on patterns of anticipated water use. The production and consumption of energy at the individual building level for harvesting and

and to switch the drinking water source from municipal to rainwater harvesting systems that include filtration/UV treatment. The house’s water systems are powered by solar panels installed on the rooftop. As noted earlier, the shift to decentralized systems will ultimately affect

Centralized water infrastructure can consume significant amounts of energy, especially in areas with poor source water quality that require extensive treatment or with service areas that require significant amounts of pumping.

treating water onsite may increase service reliability and technical efficiency while reducing the overall system’s environmental impacts by decreasing the energy burden associated with pumping and distribution system water losses. An added benefit would be that decentralized systems could also improve levels of service if they can diminish service interruptions, especially for systems that require extra reliability. The authors contend that DGWIS can provide a partial solution to challenges at the water/energy interface. The potential contributions of selfsufficiency/greater reliability, along with higher wastewater recovery rates toward sustainable water resource management, have been highlighted in several recent studies (AgudeloVera et al. 2012a, 2011; Rygaard et al. 2011). An example of a US Environmental Protection Agencyfunded pilot system that is currently exploring this paradigm, the ReNEWW house in West Lafayette, Ind., incorporates real-time flow and temperature monitoring devices into every fixture (sampling the flow once every second) for both hot and cold water, as well as ambient air monitoring. Within the ReNEWW house, it is possible to adjust the water heater storage capacity from 180 to 1,200 L

the centralized supply systems they are intended to supplement. For example, less energy spent on pumping water, as well as that associated with system water losses, could represent a major step toward overall energy conservation while reducing the water industry’s share of CO2 pollution (Leiby & Burke 2011; USEPA 2016, 2014, 2010). It is clear that further research on decentralized systems and the broader incorporation of renewable energy technologies into water and wastewater operations is needed.

CONCLUSION Incorporating decentralized systems and renewable energy sources, in particular solar and wind energy, should reduce the water industry’s share of CO2 emissions by lowering the need for fossil fuel electric power generation. As discussed, DGWIS could offer a way to improve both the efficiency and reliability of future water infrastructure. However, there is much to be learned before DGWIS is more broadly accepted, including assessments of safety, cost–benefit ratios, and operator training and certification. Further, practical applications of the latest research on integrating renewable energy into existing water infrastructure are evolving rapidly, but these deserve

LEE & YOUNOS | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

far greater attention from the research community and the water industry as a whole.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS Juneseok Lee (to whom correspondence may be addressed) is California Water Service Company chair professor and associate professor of civil and environmental engineering at San José State University, 1 Washington Square, San José, CA 95192 USA; Juneseok.Lee@sjsu.edu. He has been conducting research on diverse aspects of drinking water infrastructure analytics and modeling for over 15 years. He has MS and PhD degrees in civil and environmental engineering from Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Va. Tamim Younos is founder and president of Green WaterInfrastructure Academy in Washington, D.C. https://doi.org/10.1002/awwa.1001

REFERENCES Abou-Rayan, M.M. & Djebedjian B., 2014. Advances in Desalination Technologies: Solar Desalination. In Potable Water: Emerging Global Problems and Solutions, the Handbook of Environmental Chemistry, Vol. 30 (T. Younos & C.A. Grady, editors). Springer Publishing, New York. Agudelo-Vera, C.M.; Leduc, W.R.W.; Mels, A.R.; & Rijnaarts, H.H.M., 2012a. Harvesting Urban Resources Towards More Resilient Cities. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 64:3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. resconrec.2012.01.014. Agudelo-Vera, C.M.; Mels, A.R.; Keesman, K.; & Rijnaarts, H.H.M., 2012b. The Urban Harvest Approach as an Aid for Sustainable Urban Resource Planning. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 16:6:839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. resconrec.2012.01.014. Agudelo-Vera, C.M.; Mels, A.R.; Keesman, K.J.; & Rijnaarts, H.H.M., 2011. Resource Management as a Key Factor for Sustainable Urban Planning. Journal of 38

Environmental Management, 92:10:2295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jenvman.2011.05.016. AwwaRF (AWWA Research Foundation), 2007. Energy Index Development for Benchmarking Water and Wastewater Utilities. AWWA Research Foundation, Denver. Cassidy, R. (editor), 2003. White Paper on Sustainability: A Report on the Green Building Movement. Supplement to Building Design & Construction. http:// archive.epa.gov/greenbuilding/web/ pdf/bdcwhitepaperr2.pdf (accessed Nov. 8, 2017). Corbett, C.J. & Muthulingam, S., 2007. Adoption of Voluntary Environmental Standards: The Role of Signaling and Intrinsic Benefits in the Diffusion of the LEED Green Building Standards. UCLA Institute of the Environment and Sustainability. www.ioes.ucla.edu/ wp-content/uploads/pdfcc34.pdf (accessed Nov. 8, 2017). CRS (Congressional Research Service), 2013. Energy-Water Nexus: The Water Sector’s Energy Use. 7-5700. CRS, Washington. Dallman, S.; Chaudhry, A.M.; Muleta, M.K.; & Lee, J., 2016. The Value of Rain: Benefit Cost Analysis of Rainwater Harvesting Systems. Water Resources Management, 30:12:4415. Dixon, A.; Butler, D.; & Fewkes, A., 1999. Water Saving Potential of Domestic Water Reuse Systems Using Greywater and Rainwater in Combination. Water Science and Technology, 39:5:25. EIA (Energy Information Administration), 2016. Percent of Total U.S. Energy Consumption. In Energy Encyclopedia, Institute for Energy Research, Washington. http://instituteforenergy research.org/topics/encyclopedia (accessed Nov. 9, 2017). Eriksson, E.; Andersen, H.R.; Madsen, T.S.; & Ledin, A., 2009. Greywater Pollution Variability and Loadings. Ecological Engineering, 35:5:661. García-Rodriguez, L., 2002. Seawater Desalination Driven by Renewable Energies: A Review. Desalination, 143:2:103. Ganesan, S.G.; García, D.G.; Lee, J.; & Keck, J., 2017. A Spatio-Temporal Water Mains Integrity Management Program for California. ASCE World Environmental and Water Resources Congress, Sacramento, Calif. https://doi. org/10.1061/9780784480625.049. Güngör-Demirci, G.; Lee, J.; & Keck, J., 2017. Performance Assessment of a California

LEE & YOUNOS | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

Water Utility by Data Envelopment Analysis. ASCE World Environmental and Water Resources Congress, Sacramento, Calif. https://doi. org/10.1061/9780784480625.051. Harvey, A. & Brown, A., 1993. Micro-Hydro Design Manual: A Guide to Small-Scale Water Power Schemes. Practical Action Publishing, Rugby, United Kingdom. https://doi.org/10.3362/9781780445472. Kloss, C. & Lukes, R., 2008. Managing Wet Weather With Green Infrastructure— Municipal Handbook: Rainwater Harvesting Policies. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington. Larsen, T.A.; Hoffmann, S.; Luthi, C.; Truffer, B.; & Maurer, M., 2016. Emerging Solutions to the Water Challenges of an Urbanizing World. Science, 352:6288:928. Lawson, S.E.; Zhang, Q.; Joshi, M.; & TzuHan, P., 2014. The Effects of WaterEnergy Nexus on Potable Water Supplies. In Potable Water—Emerging Global Problems and Solutions: The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry, Vol. 30 (T. Younos & C.A. Grady, editors). Springer Publishing, New York. Lee, J.; Bae, K.-H.; & Younos, T., 2017. Conceptual Framework for Decentralized Green WaterInfrastructure Systems. Water and Environment Journal, 00:2017:1. https:// doi.org/ 10.1111/wej.12305. Lee, J.; Kleczyk, E.; Bosch, D.; Dietrich, A.; & Lohani, V., 2013. Homeowners’ DecisionMaking in a Premise Plumbing FailureProne Area. Journal AWWA, 105:5:E236. https://doi.org/10.5942/ jawwa.2013.105.0071. Lee, J.; Lohani, V.; Dietrich, V.; & Loganathan, G.V., 2012. Hydraulic Transients in Plumbing Systems. Water Science & Technology: Water Supply, 12:5:619. https://doi.org/10.2166/ws.2012.036. Leiby, V.M. & Burke, M.E., 2011. Energy Efficiency Best Practices for North American Drinking Water Utilities. Water Research Foundation, Denver. www.waterrf.org/Pages/Projects. aspx?PID=4223 (accessed Nov. 9, 2017). Li, F.; Wichmann, K.; & Otterpohl, R., 2009. Review of the Technological Approaches for Greywater Treatment and Reuses. Science of the Total Environment, 407:11:3439. Malinowski, P.A.; Stillwell, A.S.; Wu, J.S.; & Schwarz, P.M., 2015. Energy-Water Nexus: Potential Energy Savings and Implications for Sustainable Integrated Water Management in Urban Areas From Rainwater Harvesting and GrayWater Reuse. Journal of Water

Resources Planning and Management, 141:12:A4015003. NRC (National Research Council), 2008. Urban Stormwater Management in the United States. National Academies Press, Washington. NWRI (National Water Research Institute), 2015. Framework for Direct Potable Reuse. www.watereuse.org/watereuseresearch/framework-for-direct-potablereuse/ (accessed Dec. 1, 2017). Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, 2016. Hydropower Vision: A New Chapter for America’s 1st Renewable Electricity Source. http:// energy.gov/eere/water/articles/ hydropower-vision-new-chapteramerica-s-1st-renewable-electricitysource (accessed Nov. 9, 2017). Parece, T.E.; Grossman, L.; & Geller, E.S., 2013. Reducing Carbon Footprint of Water Consumption: A Case Study of Water Conservation at a University Campus. In Climate Change and Water Resources, The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry, Vol. 25 (T. Younos T. & C.A. Grady, editors). Springer Publishing, New York. https://doi. org/10.1007/698_2013_227. Pidou, M.; Mamon, F.A.; Stephenson, T.; Jefferson, B.; & Jeffrey, P., 2007. Greywater Recycling: Treatment Options and Applications. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers Engineering Sustainability, 160:3:119. https://doi. org/10.1680/ensu.2007.160.3.119. Ruberto, A.R.; Lee, J.; & Bayer, A., 2013. The Water Energy Nexus: A Water-Energy Nexus Analysis of a Public University in California. Water Efficiency, 8:3:36. Rygaard, M.; Binning, P.J.; & Albrechtsen, H.J., 2011. Increasing Urban Water SelfSufficiency: A New Era, New Challenges. Journal of Environmental Management, 92:1:185. 10.1016/j. jenvman.2010.09.009. Sanders, K.T. & Webber, M.E., 2012. Evaluating the Energy Consumed for Water Use in the United States. Environmental Research Letters, 7:3:1. Stokes, J.H. & Horvath, A., 2005. Life Cycle Energy Assessment of Alternative Water Supply Systems. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 11:5:335. Tanverakul, S. & Lee, J., 2016. Decadal Review of Residential Water Demand Analysis From a Practical Perspective. Water Practice and Technology, 11:2:433. https://doi.org/0.2166/wpt.2016.050. Tanverakul, S.A. & Lee, J., 2015. Impacts of Metering on Residential Water Use in

California, Journal AWWA, 107:2:E69. https://doi.org/10.5942/jawwa.2015. 107.0005. Tavakol-Davani, H.; Burian, S.J.; Devkota, J.; & Apul, D., 2016. Performance and CostBased Comparison of Green and Gray Infrastructure to Control Combined Sewer Overflows. Journal of Sustainable Water in the Built Environment, 2:2. https://doi.org/10.1061/JSWBAY.0000805. TEEIC (Tribal Energy and Environmental Information Clearing House), 2016. Utility-Scale and Direct Use Geothermal Energy Generation. http://teeic. indianaffairs.gov/er/geothermal/restech/ scale/index.htm (accessed Nov. 9, 2017). USEPA (US Environmental Protection Agency), 2016. Sustainable Water Infrastructure: Renewable Energy Options. www.epa.gov/sustainablewater-infrastructure/energy-efficiencywater-utilities (accessed Nov. 9, 2016). USEPA, 2014. WaterSense. www.epa.gov/ watersense (accessed Nov. 9, 2017). USEPA, 2010. Evaluation of Energy Conservation Measures for Wastewater Treatment Facilities. EPA-832-R-10-005. http://water.epa.gov/scitech/wastetech/ upload/Evaluation-of-EnergyConservation-Measures-forWastewater-Treatment-Facilities.pdf (accessed Nov. 9, 2017). USEPA, 2009. Massachusetts Energy Management Pilot Program for Drinking Water and Wastewater Case Study, EPA-832-F-09-014. USEPA, Washington. USGBC (US Green Building Council), 2006. Foundations of the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Environmental Rating System: A Tool for Market Transformation. LEED Certification Policy Manual. www.usgbc.org/Docs/Archive/ General/Docs626.pdf (accessed Dec. 1, 2017). Valentine, K., 2015. It’s Not A Pipe Dream: Clean Energy From Water Pipes Comes to Portland. http://thinkprogress.org/ climate/2015/08/13/3661575/portlandwater-pipes-energy/ (accessed Nov. 9, 2017). Walsh, T.C.; Pomeroy, C.A.; & Burian, S.J., 2014. Hydrologic Modeling Analysis of a Passive, Residential Rainwater Harvesting Program in an Urbanized Semiarid Watershed. Journal of Hydrology, 508:204. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2013.10.038. Ward, S.; Butler, D.; & Memon, F.A., 2012. Benchmarking Energy Consumption and CO2 Emissions From Rainwater Harvesting Systems: An Improved Method by Proxy. Water and Environment Journal, 26:2:184.

WateReuse, 2015. Framework for Direct Potable Reuse. WateReuse, Alexandria, Va. www.watereuse.org/watereuseresearch/framework-for-direct-potablereuse (accessed Nov. 9, 2017). Younos, T., 2014. Bottled Water: Global Impacts and Potential. In Potable Water, The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry, Vol. 30 (T. Younos & C.A. Grady, editors). Springer Publishing, New York. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-319. Younos, T., 2012. Water Dependency of Energy Production and Power Generation Systems. Water Resources IMPACT, 14:1:9. Younos, T.; O’Neill, K.; & McAvoy, A., 2016. Carbon Footprint of Water Consumption in Urban Environments: Mitigation Strategies. In Sustainable Water Management in Urban Environments, The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry, Vol. 47 (T. Younos & T.E. Parece, editors). Springer Publishing, New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3319-29337-0_2. Younos, T. & Parece, T.E., 2012. Water Use and Conservation. In 21st Century Geography: A Reference Handbook, (J. Stoltman, editor). Sage, Thousand Oaks, Calif. Younos, T. & Tulou, K.E., 2005. Overview of Desalination Techniques, Desalination: A Primer. Journal of Contemporary Water Research & Education, 132:3. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1936-704X.2005. mp132001002.x.

AWWA RESOURCES • Survey of Energy Requirements for Public Water Supply in the United States. Sowby, R.B. & Burian, S.J., 2017. Journal AWWA, 109:7:E320. Product No. JAW_0084892. • The Water–Energy Nexus in Motion. Grindstaff, J. & Pompa, J., 2016. Journal AWWA, 108:12:63. Product No. JAW_0084377. • Logan, Utah: A Case Study in Water and Energy Efficiency. Jones, S.C.; Lindhardt, P.W.; & Sowby, R.B., 2015. Journal AWWA, 107:8:72. Product No. JAW_0082221. These resources have been supplied by Journal AWWA staff. For information on these and other AWWA resources, visit www.awwa.org.

LEE & YOUNOS | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

Feature Article

BRIAN D. RIC H TE R, M A RY E L IZA B E TH BL O U N T, C AR A BO T T O R F F, H O L LY E. BR O O K S , AMANDA D E M M E RL E , B RITTA NY L . G AR D N ER , H AL EY H ER R MAN N , MAR N I E K R EMER , THO MAS J. KU E H N, E M M A KU L O W, LEN A L EW I S , H AL EY K . L L O Y D , C H AN TAL MAD R AY, CHRISTINA I. M A U NE Y, B E NJA M IN M O BL EY, S Y D N EY S T EN S ET H , AN D AL AN WAL K ER S T R I C K

Assessing the Sustainability of Urban Water Supply Systems THE PERPETUAL NEED FOR SAFE WATER PRESENTS COMMUNITIES AND UTILITIES WITH 21ST-CENTURY CHALLENGES; A RECENTLY DEVELOPED SERIES OF ESTABLISHING AND MONITORING WATER SUSTAINABILITY EFFORTS.

RICHTER ET AL. | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

Layout imagery by Brian S/Shutterstock.com

INDICATORS CAN HELP IN

ublic water providers face many challenges in meeting the needs and expectations of the communities they serve. Providing an adequate supply of safe water remains a preeminent goal of all urban water providers, of course, but the nature of the challenges inherent in continuously meeting that goal have changed dramatically since the first public water supply systems were developed thousands of years ago. As public concerns over water continue to evolve in the 21st century, so too do perspectives on what “sustainability” might mean for urban water supply systems. Some of the earliest water supply systems date back to the period when human societies began shifting from hunting and gathering food and water to living in sedentary, agrarian communities. With this transition came a fundamental shift in our vulnerability to the vagaries of weather and water availability: instead of traversing the landscape to find water, we became largely dependent on water coming to us. Not surprisingly, the earliest population centers and ancient water supply systems developed where abundant and reliable water supplies could be extracted from adjacent rivers, lakes, and springs. Long before the concept of sustainability was formulated, communities understood that they could only be sustained as long as their water uses remained within the limits of local water supplies.

THE DRIVE FOR SUSTAINABILITY The ability to store large volumes of water in reservoirs—thereby buffering fluctuations in river flows across dry months or years—greatly increased the volume of water available for human use and expanded the realm of water sustainability for many communities. Similarly, when rivers in many parts of the world became fully allocated and aquifers became depleted, continued growth in urban and agricultural demands were increasingly met by importing water from distant sources; today, more than 40% of the water consumed in major cities comes from water importation schemes (McDonald et al. 2014). In recent decades, new technologies and infrastructure have further increased the water supply for cities, such as through recycling wastewater, ocean water desalination, or harvesting rainwater and stormwater. Bolstering water supplies and staying ahead of growing urban water demands has been, and will continue to be, a key aspect of the sustainability of water supply systems. But now the needs and expectations of urban residents are forcing water providers to consider much more than simply providing sufficient volumes of safe water. For instance, customers are demanding that water be provided at a cost that is affordable to all; that water users be strongly encouraged to use water in the most conservative manner possible; that the waste of water due to leaking pipes be eliminated; that carbon emissions of the energy used to move and clean water be reduced; that the volume of water extracted from freshwater ecosystems that imperils aquatic species be reduced; and that water suppliers give due consideration to the likelihood of reduced water supply as the climate changes. These concerns shape customer opinions as to whether their water managers are performing in a sustainable manner as measured by 21st-century standards, and these best practices also influence the attractiveness of a city to new residents and businesses.

DESIGN OF SUSTAINABILITY INDICATORS Our research group at the University of Virginia has developed a suite of sustainability indicators that address many of these considerations, with the hope that the proposed indicators can help guide urban water providers toward the highest standards of sustainability, and help citizen activists in their

TABLE 1

advocacy for well-managed, safe, and affordable water systems. Focusing on the sustainability of water supply systems, this article provides an indicator framework that can be used as a self-evaluation tool for cities and citizens to use in developing public inquiries on watersupply issues. This suite of sustainability indicators is summarized as a simplified scorecard in Table 1.

Indicator scorecard Indicator

Fully Meets

Partially Meets

Does Not Meet

Water governance Well-functioning governance system Strategic planning Enforcement of governance Budgeting and pricing

Drought and other emergency preparedness Planning and preparedness Water reserves

Water monitoring Data collection Progress tracking

Water affordability and social justice Affordability Access Social justice

Water-use efficiency and conservation Water conservation plans Conservation incentives Per capita water use Leak detection and repair

Water quality Safe quality Transparency and reporting

Watershed protection Watershed protection plan Watershed protection and restoration actions

RICHTER ET AL. | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

Short explanations of the purpose and rationale for each indicator follow, along with illustrative examples from applying these indicators to selected cities across the United States. Water governance. The role of water governance is to establish,

Drought preparedness and other emergency response capabilities. Abrupt changes in water availability threaten a utility’s ability to provide adequate water supplies, and a lack of drought or disaster preparation could potentially lead to a severe water shortage with attendant

As public concerns over water continue to evolve in the 21st century, so do perspectives on what “sustainability” might mean for urban water supply systems.

maintain, and enforce a system for reliable water provision with public accountability, equity, and participation, and to do so in a manner that is sustainable and affordable for all water users. A properly functioning governance system will help ensure that the utility delivers water in the most affordable and environmentally sound manner, including giving preference to water supply options that minimize energy requirements; fully capitalizes on demand management options and thereby minimizes the need to extract additional water from freshwater ecosystems; and prices water in a way that fully covers all maintenance and operational functions and discourages water waste. Good water governance also helps centralize and coordinate a community’s water management decisions, thereby minimizing confusion or conflicting interests surrounding water use. By establishing clear goals and decision-making authority—informed by meaningful stakeholder input—governing unit(s) can make decisions that improve water use efficiency and sustainability over the long term. The preparation, regular updating, and tracking of progress of a strategic water supply plan is essential to sustainable water management. 42

human health and ecosystem impairment. Planning and preparedness are important in case of water contamination from pollutants, natural disasters, or other changes in water availability. The public needs to be informed about associated risks and understand what may be required should a disruption in supply occur. A primary line of defense for preventing water shortages during droughts is the ability of a community to swiftly implement a drought management plan, which depends on the existence of a plan that includes actions that can be readily and effectively implemented. Effective responses to supply disruptions caused by contamination events usually depend on an ability to switch to alternative sources; if other water supplies are not adequate, the ability to lower demands quickly will be very important. This indicator focuses on a community’s readiness and capabilities for implementing such responses. There exists a strong interconnection between drought and disaster responses and the overall strategic plan for a water utility, as discussed in the water governance indicator; a strategic plan should explicitly account for immediate disasters and longer-term shortfalls and, to the extent feasible, ensure that sufficient water resources

RICHTER ET AL. | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

are available to minimize hardship during disruptions in supply. Water monitoring. Monitoring water availability, use, and quality is essential in efforts to manage water supplies and demands and to protect human health. Data on water quality and quantity can inform plans for infrastructure renewal or replacement, alert utility managers to the need for drought or emergency responses, enable assessments of the ecological health of freshwater ecosystems, and support enforcement of rules and regulations. Monitoring water quality and use can also reveal which customer groups are using the most water or contributing the most pollution, which can aid water conservation or remediation initiatives. Water affordability and social justice. A water utility must be committed to upholding and supporting the basic human right to water, and social justice must be honored in all aspects of water management. Access to water should be nondiscriminatory and affordable for all. Carefully tailored rate structures—in some instances supported by governmental subsidies—can enable a utility to generate sufficient revenue to properly operate and maintain its water treatment and delivery system, yet at the same time provide water for essential human needs at an affordable cost. During times of overall water shortage, access to water should be fairly distributed without prejudice or preference for certain members or subsectors of a community. Another key social justice concern is the siting of water infrastructure, particularly facilities such as water treatment plants that may generate foul odors or attract undesirable pests such as mosquitoes. The placement and operation of such facilities must be conducted in a manner that does not disadvantage poorer neighborhoods. Water use efficiency and conservation. Communities can minimize their water needs by fostering water use efficiency in homes, businesses, industries, and outdoor irrigation,

and by encouraging adoption of water conservation practices in all sectors through education and incentives. Demand management can reduce the volume of water that must be extracted from freshwater ecosystems and potentially avert or delay the need for expensive new infrastructure such as water treatment plants or storage reservoirs. A community’s vulnerability to disruptions in water supply during droughts is also commensurate with the volume of its water demands, so aggressive demand management can lower a city’s risk of water shortages. Many communities depend on water sources such as river basins that are also used for non-urban purposes, such as for irrigated agriculture outside city limits. Opportunities may exist for utilities to work in partnership with non-urban water users to implement water efficiency and conservation strategies and thereby reduce the risk of water shortages or to free up water that can be traded or shared with the city. This approach can better enable communities to balance their water demands with available supplies cost-effectively. Water quality. Water provided for human consumption must be free of contaminants, and return flow to the environment after use must be clean enough to avoid environmental degradation or problems for other water users located downstream. Not only does water pollution affect the vitality of ecosystems, it can also reduce the effectiveness of ecosystem services. Watershed protection. Efforts to protect source watersheds or aquifers and implement green infrastructure can be significantly cost-effective and promote the quality and health of the surrounding ecosystem. Watershed protection is important in providing a clean and reliable water source. For instance, stormwater runoff is filtered by healthy watersheds, reducing the introduction of pollutants such as sediment, nutrients, and heavy metals into surface waters, especially in urban areas.

Water governance in Honolulu, Hawaii. Evaluation of this complex indicator focuses on four components: a well-functioning governance system, strategic planning, enforcement of rules or codes, and budgeting and pricing. The Honolulu Board of Water Supply (BWS) supplies water to both SUSTAINABILITY INDICATORS the city and county of Honolulu and IN USE the almost one million residents on the Several medium- to large-sized US island of O’ahu. Water sustainability cities were randomly selected for is especially critical for island cities Three column figure max width = 37p9 (actual 2 column widthas=their 39p9)water suppilot applications of the sustainabilsuch as Honolulu, ity indicators. These pilot evaluaply options are limited and highly vultions revealed challenges in acquirnerable to the vagaries of climate. ing the data or other information Honolulu has risen to these chalnecessary in evaluating communities lenges by preparing a comprehensive based on these indicators. The folWater Master Plan (Honolulu BWS lowing sections provide overviews of 2016) and a strategic plan (Honolulu these evaluations that illustrate how BWS 2017), as well as eight regional each indicator is intended to be used. watershed management plans Watershed protection also provides sufficient clean water to sustain healthy natural ecosystems upstream and downstream. Healthy ecosystems provide ecosystem services to humans and habitat for other species that degraded ecosystems cannot.

FIGURE 1

Honolulu Board of Water Supply’s water governance model

Watershed management plan ategic plan Str Mission

Water master plan

BWS Vision Water conservation plan

S tr

Other current and future initiatives

M is sio n

ate gic pla n

Energy savings programs

BWS—Board of Water Supply The plans and programs that make up the Honolulu Board of Water Supply’s water governance model are tightly integrated around its strategic plan, mission, and vision (Honolulu BWS 2016).

RICHTER ET AL. | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

providing greater detail for each land use district on the island (Figure 1). The Water Master Plan provides a comprehensive understanding of O’ahu’s water supplies and needs as well as the water storage and distribution system, giving BWS a road map to meet future needs, establish priorities, and adopt sustainable financing strategies. In addition to a seven-member board appointed by the Honolulu mayor, development of the Water Master Plan included formation and active engagement of a Stakeholder Advisory Group composed of 28 residents and community leaders with expertise in many disciplines. The Water Master Plan and interrelated watershed management plans give central importance to protecting source watersheds, sustaining proper environmental flows throughout the island’s stream network, accounting for future climate change, and prioritized use of the most reliable, affordable water supply options. By maintaining healthy watersheds, the utility ensures adequate groundwater recharge and protection for the island’s aquifers, which are the sole source of supply for urban uses. Agricultural irrigation and industrial water uses are served with recycled and brackish nonpotable water supplies, thereby avoiding competition with urban needs. Demand management is also central to the utility’s mission to “provide a safe, dependable, and affordable water supply now and into the future” (Honolulu BWS 2016). Drought preparedness in Charlottesville, Va. This indicator focuses on two components: planning and preparedness as well as the availability of emergency water reserves. An initial assessment of this indicator focused on droughtinduced challenges rather than on water contamination emergencies because, as a result of security concerns, many communities are unwilling to share information on their emergency response plans. Although it annually receives 48 in. of rain on average, Charlottesville experienced a drought of record in 44

2002 that fundamentally changed the city’s perspective on potential water shortages. As water levels in the city’s reservoirs plummeted during the drought, the water utility imposed mandatory conservation requirements that angered the local business community, including requiring an immediate 25% reduction in water use. As a result, even the best restaurants in the city were forced to serve meals on paper plates to avoid running dishwashers, and some restaurants installed portable toilets outside as they closed their bathrooms. Many citizens also became alarmed when all release of water from storage reservoirs was curtailed, causing some reaches of the rivers downstream to nearly dry up, with adverse impacts on aquatic life. In response, in 2004 the community created the Rivanna Regional Drought Response Committee, tasked with formulating a drought response and contingency plan (RWSA 2015) that defined an approach for predicting and identifying drought conditions, specifying drought stages, identifying appropriate use restrictions for each drought stage, and notifying citizens of necessary water use restrictions. The committee is composed of representatives from both the city and outlying rural areas, reflecting the full community served by this regional water provider. The drought plan was completed in 2008 and subsequently revised in 2015. Typical of many urban drought response plans, Charlottesville’s plan is based on drought stages that progress from watch to warning to emergency stages, each with different water conservation requirements. Of particular note, however, is the means by which these drought stages are determined, adopted, and communicated. Rivanna Water & Sewer Authority (RWSA) uses a probability-based hydrologic model to project the rate at which water storage levels are expected to drop on the basis of a historical record of river inflows and expectations of water

RICHTER ET AL. | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

demand reductions as new drought stages are declared. These modelbased forecasts enable water managers to determine when it will become necessary to call on the public for increasingly restrictive water conservation measures. For example, a drought warning is issued when there is a “10% or greater probability that total useable reservoir storage will be less than 60% of full within 10 weeks” (RWSA 2015). These drought stages and their associated water use restrictions are then communicated through a widespread media campaign. The model-informed drought response has been designed such that reservoir storage should not drop below 50% of useable capacity, even during another drought of record. In addition, the drought plan notes that two additional recreational reservoirs could be tapped in the case of extreme emergency. Importantly, the use of probabilitybased modeling for drought forecasting has enabled regional water managers to reduce the number of false alarms calling for restrictive conservation measures. In turn, these models provide confidence for releasing water downstream for environmental purposes even when it is not raining. Water monitoring in Denver, Colo. Evaluation of this indicator focuses on two components: data collection (for a variety of water quantity and quality parameters) and reporting on progress toward goals. Metropolitan Denver’s water comes from snowmelt-fed rivers flowing both east and west from the Rocky Mountains’ Continental Divide. Denver Water—which serves 1.4 million customers (25% of Colorado’s population)—collects daily readings at stream gauges and reservoirs throughout its system to track streamflow, diversions, snowpack, and other water supply data that it makes available on the utility’s website (Denver Water 2017a). Denver Water also maintains a leak detection crew that surveys more

than 11 mi of distribution pipe each year and a dam inspection team that evaluates the conditions of all of Denver Water’s dams annually. Denver Water also prepares regular Water Watch Reports that provide its Board of Water Commissioners updates on current conditions (Denver Water 2017b). These reports, prepared monthly during the winter and weekly during the summer, provide useful tabular and graphical summaries of water storage levels in each reservoir, day-by-day water usage, precipitation, snowpack water content, and inflows into reservoirs. The utility also participates in several local and regional environmental initiatives, many of which are designed to maintain or restore healthy environmental flow conditions and endangered species popula tions throughout its source watersheds (Denver Water 2017c). In addition to keeping a close eye on the quantity of its supplies, in 2016 Denver Water collected more than 35,000 water quality samples from its raw (source) water, its water distribution system, and from lead and copper testing in more than 500 homes (Denver Water 2017b). Notably, Denver Water offers free lead testing for any homeowner requesting it. This extensive and comprehensive data collection system has enabled Denver Water to gain deeper understanding of the variability within its water sources, and how the water it distributes is used among its customer classes. This knowledge informs the utility’s regularly updated strategic plan, its nationally recognized water conservation program, and its infrastructure development plans. Water affordability and social justice across the 16 cities sampled. Evaluation of this indicator focuses on three components: affordability, access, and social justice. The sample of US cities used in this study revealed that while it is common for some water and wastewater treatment facilities to be located in impoverished communities, no

cases were found in which these facilities appeared to be exclusively or predominately located in disadvantaged neighborhoods. Detection of systematic bias in the locations of water infrastructure—particularly wastewater plants—would require a deeper investigation than this cursory review allowed. Therefore, assessment of this indicator focused mostly on affordability.

use to prioritize their water supply options, the assistance provided to citizens to help them become more water-efficient, and the rate structures used to recover the costs of service must all be scrutinized and in many cases improved. There are numerous examples of utilities attempting to address this problem. For example, San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (2017)

Long before the concept of sustainability was formulated, communities understood that they could only be sustained as long as their water uses remained within the limits of local water supplies.

In its review of the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (USEPA’s) mandates for affordability in water and wastewater provision, a consulting firm pointed out that USEPA’s guideline of maintaining the cost of these services at less than 4.5% of the median household income (MHI) may not be appropriate, given that MHI “is a poor indicator of economic distress and bears little relationship to poverty or other measures of economic need within a community” (Stratus Consulting 2013). Instead, this report recommended examining the effect of rising water bills across the entire income distribution—and especially at the lower end—rather than simply at the median. In applying this approach, all 16 cities in our sample had at least 20% of their populations paying more than 4.5% of their household income for water and wastewater services, and for some cities, this level exceeded 40% of the population. This is a serious issue, one that deserves heightened attention because many urban households may find their utility bills to be a financial burden. This finding suggests that the decision processes that communities

offers a 15% discount on water and a 35% discount on sewer charges through its Community Assistance Program, and Seattle Public Utilities (2017a) offers a 50% discount through its Utility Discount Program for qualifying residential singlefamily customers. New York City’s Department of Environmental Protection (2017) has offered an annual credit of $116 to qualifying homeowners through its Home Water Assistance Program, as well as deferment of debt payment through its Water Debt Assistance Program. Water use efficiency and water conservation in Charlotte, N.C. Evaluation of this indicator focuses on four components: water conservation planning, conservation incentives, per capita water use rate, and leak detection and repair. An example of an excellent water conservation plan is the one developed for Charlotte through its collaboration with a regional planning group called the Catawba-Wateree Wa t e r M a n a g e m e n t G r o u p (CWWMG), which represents 18 water supply utilities. In 2014 this group prepared a comprehensive Water Supply Plan that includes a water use efficiency section

RICHTER ET AL. | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

(CWWMG 2014). Measurable water conservation goals have been set for each water basin supplying water to the member utilities on the basis of an assessment of each water utility’s conservation potential; these conservation goals are explicitly accounted for in the water budget (supply and demand) projections for each water basin through 2055.

backflow assembly, and separate irrigation meter are installed and maintained on an irrigation system (Charlotte Water n.d.). The Utility Department has adopted a goal to further reduce its total water use by 13% by 2055. With adoption of a water audit and loss control program, the Utility Department would receive a high evaluation for its

Utilities can evaluate and track these indicators over time in an effort to improve service reliability, financial viability, customer satisfaction, and environmental health.

The Water Supply Plan outlines four initial strategies for reaching water-use efficiency goals, including a public information campaign, education and outreach, landscape water management and demonstration gardens, and commercial and institutional water and energy user surveys. Once these initial strategies have been deployed, the water utilities are encouraged to implement incentive programs for installing water- and energy-efficient fixtures as well as water audit and loss control programs. The CWWMG estimates that the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Utility Department has reduced its total utility per capita water use (total water use/number of residential customers) by more than 27% during 2002–2011 (from 113 to 85 gpd). The department was given a high performance rating for its existing conservation programs, which includes a tiered block-rate pricing structure and a drought management plan with five trigger levels (CWWMG 2014). The department also offers a Smart Irrigation Program that encourages water irrigation efficiency and conservation through a water rate incentive that kicks in when a smart irrigation controller, 46

water use efficiency and conservation metrics. Water quality in Seattle, Wash. Evaluation of this indicator focuses on two components: (1) appropriate quality and (2) transparency and reporting. The United States is fortunate to have strong water quality standards for public water supply utilities as well as requirements for regular reporting of water quality testing as specified in the Safe Drinking Water Act. From our sample of 16 cities, two were able to avoid any water quality violations for the past 10 years or longer and at least four additional cities implemented total-maximum-daily-load remedial plans within five years of reported violations. For instance, the City of Seattle has not had any water quality violations since 2004 (Environmental Working Group n.d.). It publishes its water quality report online each quarter (Seattle Public Utilities 2017b), and has also been implementing an aggressive aquaticinvasive-species control plan. Watershed protection in New York City, N.Y. For this study, this indicator focused on two components: the existence of a watershed protection plan and the degree to which watershed protection and

RICHTER ET AL. | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

restoration activities are being implemented. The New York City water supply system—serving more than eight million people and delivering more than 1 bil gal of potable water per day, on average—spans 2,000 mi2 to the north and west of the city, including a system of 19 reservoirs and three controlled lakes. The city’s watershed protection program has long been recognized for its ambitious scope, the amount of funding allocated to it, and the geographic scale of the actions being taken. The city’s primary motivation for watershed protection relates to the city’s desire to continue earning its Filtration Avoidance Determination from USEPA under the Safe Drinking Water Act, based on the simple premise that “it is better to keep the water clean at its source than it is to treat it after it has been polluted” (New York City DEP 2016). The central pillars of the city’s watershed protection plan include a watershed agricultural program, land acquisition, and wastewater programs. Before strengthening its watershed protection program in the 1990s, the city was potentially facing $8 billion to $10 billion for new filtration facilities with operational costs of $1 million/day (New York State DEC 2017). Since 1992, more than 350 farms have developed plans for controlling agricultural pollution in the city’s source watersheds; to date, more than 7,000 best management practices have been implemented on these farms at a cost to the city of more than $58 million. Additionally, more than 140,000 acres have been protected through conservation easements or fee acquisition, amounting to 38% of the entire watershed area. Through its wastewater programs, the city has also helped remediate more than 5,000 failing septic systems, another 2,400 have been decommissioned, and all wastewater treatment plants in the watershed have been upgraded to tertiary treatment standards.

SUMMARY The seven sustainability indicators described in this article can aid cities in their efforts to improve the overall sustainability of their water supply systems. Our research team found that many of the subcomponents of the indicators can be quantified and evaluated rather easily, but some will require considerable subjective judgment in their assessment and ultimate weighting. However, utilities can evaluate and track these indicators over time in an effort to improve service reliability, financial viability, customer satisfaction, and environmental health.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Brian D. Richter (to whom correspondence may be addressed) is president of Sustainable Waters, 5834 St. George Ave., Crozet, Va., 22932 USA; brian@sustainablewaters.org. Involved in water science and conservation for more than 30 years, he previously served as chief scientist for the Global Water Program of The Nature Conservancy. His latest book, Chasing Water: A Guide for Moving From Scarcity to Sustainability, has been published in six languages. Richter received a BA degree from San Diego State University, San Diego, Calif., and an MA degree from Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colo. Mary Elizabeth Blount is a student at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va. Cara Bottorff is an electric sector analyst at the Sierra Club, Washington, D.C. Holly E. Brooks is a student at the University of Virginia. Amanda Demmerle is a student at the West Virginia University College of Law. Brittany L. Gardner is a student at the University of Virginia. Haley Herrmann is an intern at the Institute for Environmental Negotiation, Charlottesville. Marnie Kremer is a research assistant at the

University of Virginia. Thomas J. Kuehn is an underwriting analyst at Hiscox Ltd., New York, N.Y. Emma Kulow, Lena Lewis, Haley K. Lloyd, Chantal Madray, Christina I. Mauney, Benjamin Mobley, Sydney Stenseth, and Alan Walker Strick are students at the University of Virginia. https://doi.org/10.1002/awwa.1002

REFERENCES Charlotte Water, n.d. Smart Irrigation Program. http://charlottenc.gov/Water/ Pages/SmartIrrigation.aspx (accessed July 10, 2017). CWWMG (Catawba-Wateree Water Management Group), 2014. CatawbaWateree River Basin Water Supply Master Plan. Prepared by HDR and McKim & Creed, Charlotte, Va. Denver Water, 2017a. Your Water: Supply Data and Reports. www.denverwater. org/your-water/water-supply-andplanning/supply-data-and-reports (accessed July 10, 2017). Denver Water, 2017b. 2017 Residential Water Rates: Your Water Rates at Work. www.denverwater.org/residential/ billing-and-rates/2017-rates (accessed July 10, 2017). Denver Water, 2017c. Your Water: Environmental Planning & Stewardship. www.denverwater. org/your-water/water-supply-andplanning/environmental-planningand-stewardship (accessed July 10, 2017). Environmental Working Group, n.d.. National Drinking Water Database: Seattle Public Utilities. www.ewg.org/tap-water/ whatsinyourwater/WA/Seattle-PublicUtilities/5377050/ (accessed July 10, 2017). Honolulu BWS (Board of Water Supply), 2017. Board of Water Supply Strategic Plan 2018–2022. Honolulu BWS, Hawaii. Honolulu BWS, 2016. Water Master Plan. Prepared by CDM Smith. Honolulu BWS, Honolulu, Hawaii. McDonald, R.I.; Weber, K.; Padowski, J.; Flörke, M.; Schneider, C.; Green, P.; & Gleeson, T., 2014. Water on an Urban Planet: Urbanization and the Reach of Urban Water Infrastructure. Global Environmental Change, 27:96. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.04.022. New York State DEC (Department of Environmental Conservation), 2017. New York City Watershed Program. www.dec. ny.gov/lands/25599.html (accessed July 10, 2017).

New York City DEP (Department of Environmental Protection), 2017. Home Water Assistance Program. www.nyc. gov/html/dep/html/customer_ assistance/home_water_assistance_ program.shtml (accessed July 10, 2017). New York City DEP, 2016. Long-Term Watershed Protection Plan. New York City DEP, N.Y. RSWA (Rivanna Water & Sewer Authority), 2015. Drought Response and Contingency Plan. Revised Mar. 13, 2015. RWSA, Charlottesville, Va. San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, 2017. Community Assistance Program. www.sfwater.org/index.aspx?page=131 (accessed July 10, 2017). Seattle Public Utilities, 2017a. Get Help with Utility Bills—Utility Discount Program. www.seattle.gov/util/MyServices/ MyAccount/GetHelpwithUtilityBill/index. htm (accessed July 10, 2017). Seattle Public Utilities, 2017b. Water Quality Analyses. www.seattle.gov/util/ MyServices/Water/Water_Quality/ WaterQualityAnalyses/index.htm (accessed July 10, 2017) Stratus Consulting, 2013. Affordability Assessment Tool for Federal Water Mandates. Prepared for US Conference of Mayors, AWWA, and Water Environment Federation. Stratus Consulting, Boulder, Colo.

AWWA RESOURCES • Jordan Valley Water Redefines Sustainable Water Supply Through Energy Management. Sowby, R.B.; Jones, S.C.; Packard, A.E.; & Schultz, T.R., 2017. Journal AWWA, 109:10:38. Product No. JAW_0085669. • Sustainable Water Supply Infrastructure for Hong Kong. Man, A.; Ng, B.; Shou, S.; & Vickridge, I., 2011. Journal AWWA, 103:7:57. Product No. JAW_0073971. • Preserving Sustainable Water Supplies for Future Generations. Kenel, P.P. & Schlaman, J.C., 2005. Journal AWWA, 97:7:78. Product No. JAW_0061917. These resources have been supplied by Journal AWWA staff. For information on these and other AWWA resources, visit www.awwa.org.

RICHTER ET AL. | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

Feature Article

MITC HELL J . L e B A S, C A RO LYN STE WA RT, S T EV EN G AR N ER , AN D BY R O N H AR D I N

Status of Backflow Prevention and Cross-Connection Control Programs in the United States

UTILITIES INDICATES A NEED TO DEVELOP AND IMPROVE CROSSCONNECTION CONTROL PROGRAMS TO HELP ENSURE PUBLIC HEALTH.

L e BAS ET AL. | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

Layout imagery by Scott A. McPherson and Shutterstock.com artist: Wisanu_nuu

A SURVEY OF US WATER

ross connections, defined as actual or potential connections between any part of a potable water system and an environment that would allow substances to enter the potable water supply (AWWA 2015), are prevalent throughout potable water supply systems and individual plumbing systems. According to the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, cross connections and backflow incidents to the potable water distribution systems continue to represent a significant public health risk. There are chemical and biological contaminants finding their way into the potable water supply, causing widespread illness and undermining the public’s confidence in potable water supplies. To address these risks in the United States, the USEPA implemented the Revised Total Coliform Rule, which in part requires states to document that each of their public water systems has an approved cross-connection control (CCC) program. But while US federal and state regulations require public water supply systems to implement a containment or premise isolation program for the purpose of protecting the public water supply from accidental contamination (USEPA 2013), little guidance is provided as to what constitutes a compliant program or what elements should be included. And while

regulations are in place to address public water supply protection, they typically do not address plumbing systems on private property. State regulations often reference plumbing codes for the appropriate method of backflow prevention. Several plumbing codes address the method of backflow prevention required for internal isolation (i.e., point of use [POU]) protection, installation requirements, and testing requirements, most notably CSA B64.10 (CSA 2017) in Canada and the International Plumbing Code (ICC 2015) in the United States. While these plumbing codes are similar in content, the Canadian standard provides specific information about the method of protection required at certain types of facilities for containment protection and, depending on the hazard encountered, any isolation protection methods that may be required.

water systems to estimate the level of compliance with national, state, and local backflow and cross-connection regulations and to explore any correlation between the relative size of a water system and its level of compliance. In addition, the survey was intended to develop a better understanding of the needs and challenges facing CCC programs, such as lack of funding, enforcement, or education. To avoid bias, AWWA membership was not a factor in survey distribution. Through the study design and distribution, efforts were made to anticipate and minimize errors attributable to coverage, sampling, nonresponse, and measurement. However, despite these efforts, the response rate from states and provinces was not uniform (i.e., more responses were received from certain areas). While the data collected from the respondents does not represent all water systems in North America, it does provide an indication of the levels of compliance for participating systems. The cross-connection survey was distributed via e-mail to water systems of all sizes throughout the United States, Canada, and Mexico using lists generated by AWWA and the CCC Committee; the results in

SURVEY OF BACKFLOW AND CCC PROGRAMS IN THE UNITED STATES In 2016, AWWA’s CCC Committee, a group of water professionals representing municipal, regulatory, research, sales, and consulting interests throughout North America, created and conducted a survey of

FIGURE 1

this article focus exclusively on the 724 US systems that voluntarily responded to the online survey in October 2016. Lack of participation may have resulted from several potential factors, including unawareness, time constraints, and apathy. Duplicate and incomplete responses were not included in the final data set, and the data have not been weighted to reflect any demographic composition. No estimates of error have been calculated because the full population of utilities is not well defined, the amount of self-selection bias from respondents is unknown, and a nonprobability sampling method was used.

SURVEY RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The following sections summarize the results and analyses of the reporting utilities’ practices and implementation progress as collected in 2016. To begin with, Figure 1 shows the distribution of the 724 respondents across the 50 states and territories in which they operate as well as their average potable water system demand. The number of responses per state ranged from one utility (several states) to 133 utilities (California). The potable water plants varied in average system

Distribution of US survey respondents by state and average water demand

Demand—mgd <1 >1 but <5 5–15 16–30 31–50 >50

Water Demand—mgd

16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 AK AL AR AZ CA CO CT DC DE FL GA GU HI

IN KS KY LA MA MD ME MI MN MO MP MT NC NE NH NJ NM NV NY OH OK OR PA

RI SC SD TN

TX UT VA WA WI WV WY

State or Territory

L e BAS ET AL. | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

FIGURE 2

Responses from utility personnel regarding the number of testable backflow prevention assemblies in their service area for those with and without CCC programs in place

Population <10,000 10,000–49,999 50,000–249,999 250,000–499,999 >500,000 250 199

Number of Responses

200

182 146

150

100 56

50 15

Yes Response

CCC—cross-connection control

demand from less than 1 mgd to over 50 mgd. The population served

TABLE 1

ranged from less than 10,000 to more than 500,000. The population range

Responses from utility personnel regarding whether their utility has its own CCC program

Yes, with at least one dedicated staff person

342

Yes, the program responsibilities are shared among staff

288

Not currently; however, we are developing a program

Not at this time; currently relying on plumbing codes

CCC—cross-connection control

TABLE 2

Responses from utility personnel regarding what authority their utility uses to implement and enforce its CCC program if their utility has onea

Plumbing code, ordinance, and/or regulations (three choices combined)

742

Locally adopted code of ordinance

502

State/federal regulations

129

Other

CCC—cross-connection control aRespondents

could select all of the options their utility uses

L e BAS ET AL. | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

with the most respondents was midsize utilities serving 50,000–249,999 people (222 of 724 respondents). Figure 2 shows the distribution of utilities separated into ranges by service population, which are also further distinguished by whether the utility has a CCC program. Focusing on the utilities without CCC programs, it is somewhat startling that so many utilities don’t have a CCC program in place. However, this seems to occur even for those serving larger populations, indicating that a lack of CCC attention is not just an issue for small systems. Table 1 reveals that most of the respondents’ utilities have a CCC program, where half have at least one dedicated staff person and 42% share program responsibilities among staff. More than 8% of responding utilities have no program. Just under 5% of respondents reported that they are developing a program, and just over 3% rely on plumbing codes only.

FIGURE 3

Responses from utility personnel regarding the number of testable backflow prevention assemblies in their service area for those with and without CCC programs in place

Number of Backflow Assemblies <100 100–500 500–1,000 1,000–5,000 5,000–10,000 >10,000 200

182

180

Number of Responses

160 140

119

120

100 70

79 60

60 40 20

17 6

Not mandated

Mandated CCC Program Status

CCC—cross-connection control

Responses from utility personnel regarding what authority their utility uses to implement and enforce its CCC program are shown in Table 2. Either alone or in some combination, the majority of responses indicate that the utility’s authority is based on plumbing codes, ordinances, or regulations (53% of total responses). The next most popular basis for authority was a reliance on a locally adopted code of ordinance (36% of total responses). Just 9% of responses indicated using state/federal regulations as a basis. Of the “other” responses, some respondents reported using a utility-specific guidance or other industry documentation (e.g., USC Foundation’s manual). Similar to Figure 2, Figure 3 shows the distribution of utilities separated into ranges by the number of backflow prevention assemblies in their service area; these are further distinguished by whether the utility has a mandated CCC program in place. Again focusing on the utilities

without CCC programs, the survey responses show that there are utilities with thousands of backflow prevention assemblies in their service areas that do not have a CCC program in place. Although they are beyond the scope of this survey, these results lead to several questions about how best to protect public health and how much a CCC program could help in these efforts. Preventing backflow incidents from entering the public water supply is a necessary step to protect the public health of a community. However, preventing backflow incidents within a facility is equally important to all workers and customers within that facility. Backflow prevention assembly testing may be performed within a facility (also known as POU), at the service connection point (sometimes referred to as “at the meter”), or both, as necessary. POU containment supports public health protection, but for industrial purposes it may be

targeted at preventing contamination of goods and services. On the basis of the number of backflow prevention assemblies in respondents’ service areas, Figure 4 shows the breakdown of whether utilities require backflow prevention assembly testing inside the facility only, at the service connection only, or both. Testing that requires both is generally considered more protective of public health than either approach separately, and this was the most popular option across all categories. Figure 4 also shows that POU testing was the least used option and was much less used compared with testing at the meter or both POU and testing at the meter across all categories. Field testing of backflow prevention assemblies is performed by certified or licensed testers who are typically private contractors or utility staff. Although the data are not shown, of the 642 responses to this question, the survey found that 47%

L e BAS ET AL. | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

Responses from utility personnel regarding whether their utilities require backflow prevention assembly testing inside the facility only (POU), at the service connection only, or both of these

FIGURE 4

Values POU isolation protection inside the facility only Containment, backflow protection at the facility’s service connection only Both, if needed

123

120

Responses

100

65 55

50 39

<100

100–500

500–1,000

1,000–5,000

5,000–10,000

7 >10,000

Number of Connections POU—point of use

of utilities used private contractors, 10% used utility staff, and 44% used a combination. Private testers are certified or licensed by either a state, county, water system, or a third party. The fact that private testers are used to such a great extent might point to the value of establishing minimum regional or national standards for tester certification or licensing programs. A containment CCC program includes the installation of the appropriate backflow prevention method at the water meter, while an isolation program addresses

TABLE 3

hazards at the POU internal to the meter. Containment responsibility is that of the water purveyor, and isolation protection is generally the responsibility of the local building or plumbing official. Results indicate that approximately half of the systems are testing both containment and isolation backflow preventers. This is an indication of program conflict between local regulatory agencies; consequently, CCC isolation and containment program deficiencies exist. Tracking cross-connection inspections (CCI) and backflow prevention

Distribution of utilities by number of residential and commercial service connections that do not track CCI and BPAT

Estimated Number of Utility Service Connections

Respondents in Each Category

Total not Tracking CCI and BPAT

<3,000

145

3,000–9,999

162

10,000–24,999

149

25,000–49,999

50,000–149,999

100

≥150,000

BPAT—backflow prevention assembly testing, CCI—cross connection inspections

L e BAS ET AL. | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

assembly testing (BPAT) is an important part of a CCC program. Table 3 reveals the distribution of utilities that are not tracking CCI and BPAT as a function of the utility’s estimated number of residential and commercial service connections. These results show that communities with fewer service connections are more prone to inadequately tracking CCI and BPAT. For example, 19% of systems with fewer than 3,000 connections and 12% of systems with 3,000–9,999 connections were not tracking CCI and BPAT. In comparison, the percentage of larger systems that were not tracking CCI and BPAT averaged between 2 and 5%, or much less than the smaller systems. Of the systems not tracking CCI and BPAT, 45% served populations of fewer than 10,000 (26 total), while 7% served populations greater than 500,000, demonstrating a need for more and better CCC programs across communities of all sizes.

RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION Minimizing public health risks caused by cross-connections and backflow incidents remains an ongoing challenge that all public

and private water systems face. Many of the issues facing utility CCC programs have been confirmed from the results of the 2016 CCC survey. On the basis of these findings, it seems that more efforts could be made to identify and correct cross-connection incidents that could contaminate potable water distribution systems of all sizes. Other recommendations from this research include the following: • Develop a central repository to track cross-connection incidents at the local, state, and federal levels. A requirement to report backflow incidents is important for detection and correction of cross-connections. • Establish funding approaches for developing and supporting CCC programs to address staffing, public education, enforcement, data tracking, and related administrative requirements. • Continue to improve public education programs by developing innovative communication strategies, including educational materials and programs that explain CCC programs and the vital role they play in protecting a community’s drinking water. In addition, proper placement and ownership of CCC programs remains an ongoing issue at the state and local levels. The results from this survey show that respondents’ CCC programs most commonly reside with the following operational areas: health agencies, plumbing boards and departments, and water utilities. However, there remains no clear process for establishing responsibility for developing a CCC program, and there are still issues with interagency or departmental communication and cooperation for CCC programs. Lack of enforcement strategies also continues to be an issue. Within the United States, USEPA is aware that many state officials have adopted a regulation prohibiting

cross-connections and requiring that local water suppliers establish a program with the responsibility to administer and enforce the program at the local level. However, there is often little or no follow-up or enforcement at the state level. Furthermore, there are states that do not require systems to develop programs to implement or enforce the requirements through additional drinking water regulations, plumbing codes, or health codes. Federal regulatory changes requiring public and private water operations to implement crossconnection backflow prevention programs are necessary. It is recommended that authority for CCC programs include clearly defined enforcement procedures such as provisions to shut off water service if devices are not installed or tested, entry to property is not allowed, devices and assemblies are not installed properly, devices are not tested, or testing payments are not received. Finally, a critical component that is still absent is effective communication with public and elected officials about the importance of protecting potable water distribution and internal potable plumbing conveyance systems. Improving communications can only help with ongoing efforts to establish effective CCC programs. Even with the best-laid plans, it is certain that cross-connections will continue to occur, so it is vital that federal, state, and local government authorities work with public water suppliers to support their efforts to develop and improve their CCC programs. Controlling cross-connections protects public health and benefits all water system customers, and from the utility perspective, effective CCC can avoid the disaster of a contaminated water system.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS Mitchell J. LeBas is president, Backflow Prevention Services,

Baton Rouge, La. Carolyn Stewart is engineering technologist II in the Engineering Division, Township of Langley, British Columbia. Steven Garner is a certification manager for the California-Nevada Section of AWWA, Sacramento, Calif. Byron Hardin (to whom correspondence may be addressed) is president of Hardin & Associates Consulting LLC, Irving, Tex. He may be reached at Bhardin@ hactexas.com. https://doi.org/10.1002/awwa.1003

REFERENCES AWWA, 2015 (4th ed.). Manual of Water Supply Practices, M14. Backflow Prevention and Cross-Connection Control Recommended Practices. AWWA, Denver. CSA (Canadian Standards Association), 2017. CSA B64.10: Selection and Installation of Backflow Preventers. ICC (International Code Council), 2015. International Plumbing Code. ICC, Washington. USEPA (US Environmental Protection Agency), 2013. Revised Total Coliform Rule. Federal Register, Feb. 13, 2013 (78 FR 10269).

AWWA RESOURCES • Backflow Prevention Resource Community. AWWA webpage. www.awwa.org/resources-tools/ water-knowledge/backflowprevention-cross-connectioncontrol.aspx. • Getting Optimized—Ensure Cross-Connection Control and Backflow Prevention With a Multipoint Approach. Martin, B. & Ries, T., 2015. Opflow, 41:7:8. Product No. OPF_0082156. • Backflow Prevention and Cross-Connection Control [Video]. AWWA, 2015. AWWA Catalog No. 64398. These resources have been supplied by Journal AWWA staff. For information on these and other AWWA resources, visit www.awwa.org.

L e BAS ET AL. | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

A complete M32 road map for new and intermediate distribution system modelers Copy TK

M58 has every thing

you need about intern

al corrosion:

M32 Compue r Modeling of

• Bullet

Copy TK

Manual of Wa ter Supply Pra ctices

M32

Water Distrib

Computer Mo deling of Water Distribu tion Systems

ution System s, Fourth Edit ion

Fourth Edition

Ideal crop marks Ideal crop marks

Ideal crop marks

www.awwa.org

Dedicated to the world ’s most impor tant resour management, and inform ce, AWWA sets the standa ed rd for water knowledge, health, protec t the enviro public policy. AWWA members provid e solutions to impro nment, streng then the ve public economy, and enhan ce our quality of life. 30032 (12/17) IW

New chapters on model maintenance and advanced modeling applications

Predict system performance and solve problems with the new edition

Computer modeling is a water utility’s most powerful tool for managing and operating a water distribution system. The manual has in-depth discussion on • Model construction and development • Field data collection and testing • Model calibration • Steady-state analysis

• • • •

Extended-period simulation Water quality analysis Transient analysis Water age and tank-mixing analysis

This new edition contains updated information on asset management and real-time modeling.

For more information or to take a look inside: Dedicated to the World’s Most Important Resource®

LOOK INSIDE

awwa.org/M32

Feature Article

G I L L AN TAD D U NE

A Permanent Seat at the Table: The Role of Sustainability in the Boardroom

T COMPANIES ARE TAKING NOTE OF THE NEED FOR SUSTAINABILITY PRACTICES, ADDRESSING ENERGY AND WATER CONSERVATION USING A TOP-DOWN

Layout imagery by ASDF_MEDIA/Shutterstock.com

APPROACH FROM THE BOARDROOM.

he world of sustainability is in the midst of a paradigm shift. In the not-so-distant past, corporate sustainability was viewed as a valueadd for a small niche of consumers, but now it is being understood as an integral risk management tool for the success of any business. And the Fortune 500 companies are taking note. According to Environmental Leader, “81 percent of the companies included in the [S&P 500] published a corporate responsibility or sustainability report in 2015. This is up from just 20 percent of companies reporting in 2011” (Hardcastle 2016). Related to corporate sustainability, it is worthwhile to delve deeper into the increasing role of water conservation. In the early days of corporate sustainability reporting, board members and facilities managers (who are often responsible for resource consumption at a business) were quick to tackle energy reduction projects, and with good reason. Energy historically has been a more expensive resource than water, and it seemingly has a more direct impact on climate change through the emissions of greenhouse gases (if one ignores the high energy demands of pumping and heating water). However, the differences between water and energy are beginning to fade. This is most clearly demonstrated by the fact that water rates in the United States are rising faster than any other utility nationwide, roughly 41% since 2010 (Walton 2015). Moving forward, technology will play an increasingly valuable role in promoting sustainability as the capabilities for measurement, efficiency, and reuse rapidly evolve.

SUSTAINABILITY AND TECHNOLOGY While discussing water conservation, facilities managers and governing boards may have different priorities, yet many of their goals overlap. Broadly, a board’s role is to map out responsibilities for a company and identify key issues that may pose challenges to achieving the company’s goals. Generally ensuring long-term sustainability falls directly into a board’s scope and comes to bear in a wide range TADDUNE | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

of areas such as consumer and employee engagement, satisfying investor demand, and risk mitigation. On the other hand, facilities professionals are more concerned with improved planning and transparency of their buildings’ consumption. Real-time leak detection can be hugely valuable in preventing unnecessary damage and cost, and the time-saving potential of smart hardware and aggregated tracking software continues to improve. One byproduct of water conservation is the avoided costs from reduced energy demands (Tellinghuisen 2009).

associated damage and cost before it becomes an issue. Facilities professionals currently have the tools to understand where water is moving within their buildings and where opportunities exist to make water-saving improvements. Using these tools to make decisions is becoming increasingly common and is driving a shift toward establishing baselines and targeting improvements, an important first step for businesses. Whereas price used to pose a barrier to entry, the cost of technological solutions like these is dropping

Permanent solutions to global water risk require meaningful collaboration across stakeholder groups, governments, and individual corporations.

Water in facilities needs energy for heating, cooling, and pumping, so using less water in the first place generally leads to reduced energy bills. Realistic budget forecasting helps facilities teams understand where and when they can expect to have funds and allows board members to more accurately forecast future revenue streams. Both groups can easily support cost reductions through improved sustainability. One age-old adage proves ever true: If you can’t measure it, you can’t improve it. It is in this context that technology is rapidly advancing the sustainability space. Internet-enabled hardware such as smart water meters helps track consumption and demand in real time. By pairing this hardware with software solutions that provide analysis and reporting tools, organizations can make verified year-over-year reductions in water demand. Real-time alert engines can notify key stakeholders and managers when spikes and anomalies in use occur. Several models of smart meters can now be remotely triggered to shut off when a leak is suspected, preventing the 56

fast, and in this case, smart metering tools are becoming the new standard for water use sustainability.

THE NEW “BUSINESS AS USUAL” The overall rise in utility costs paired with the decrease in the price of solutions has lifted the sustainability movement to new heights in the past several years. In today’s complex political environment, global climate change is a frequently discussed and disputed topic. Still, business leaders around the United States and the world recognize that mitigating climate-associated risk and minimizing resource demand is simply good business practice (Tabuchi & Fountain 2017). Business leaders have also acknowledged the need for sustainably sourced materials and responsible supply chains. This has improved rates of habitat restoration and cut the rate of deforestation for production of products like palm oil (Tercek & Adams 2013). Unique and unprecedented partnerships between organizations like Coca-Cola and The Nature Conservancy are proof that the advancement we are seeing

TADDUNE | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

in this sector is no trend, but rather an entirely new model of business as usual (Tercek & Adams 2013). This has never been illustrated more clearly than when 28 of the United States’ largest businesses took out a full-page ad in The Wall Street Journal urging President Trump to remain a part of the Paris Climate Agreement. Since the president’s decision to withdraw the United States from the treaty, many of these same businesses—along with several US cities and states—have pledged to maintain course to meet the emissions goals cited in the Paris Agreement (Tabuchi & Fountain 2017). As millennials continue to make up a greater portion of the workforce, we can expect this trend to continue, as this generation is recognized more than others for its desire to align spending decisions with personal values (Patel 2017). For businesses and board members venturing into the world of corporate sustainability reporting, one of the first and most important steps is disclosure. Historically, sustainability reporting has happened on a voluntary basis, with organizations and businesses building baseline values and then monitoring progress on these factors independently. More recently, organizations like the Global Reporting Initiative and the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) have been offering surveys for businesses to analyze the effectiveness of their sustainability practices. They are then graded on the basis of the impact of their actions and of their peers’ actions. This creates several outcomes. First, it motivates business owners and executives to continually strive for what they can achieve with regard to sustainability. Second, it creates a uniform benchmark that investors and interested parties can use to guide their investment and purchasing decisions.

THE DISCLOSURE PROCESS For businesses involved in owning and managing commercial real estate, disclosure is especially relevant. The disclosure process provides

a framework through which to navigate the complexities of practicing sustainability and to learn from others who have navigated the road before. It also makes it significantly easier for investors to recognize shortcomings in their portfolios and how to address them. Initiatives like the Global Real Estate Sustainability Benchmark promote information exchange by bringing the entire industry to the same table and reporting on the same statistics (GRESB 2017). Major investors like CalPERS (California Public Employees’ Retirement System) and other pension plans and their fiduciaries look to these benchmarks to help guide their investment dollars toward businesses that are operating in alignment with their goals and values. Benchmarking uses factors such as performance indicators, risks and opportunities, building certifications, and monitoring systems; these measures are then integrated and used to objectively rank participating companies. Understanding baseline consumption levels and areas for improvement allows commercial real estate companies to take a proactive approach to sustainable development rather than a reactionary one. These efforts aren’t going unnoticed. CDP alone works with more than 800 institutional investors with a combined $100 trillion in assets under management (CDP & IWaSP 2017). In 2016, more than 5,600 companies disclosed environmental information to the CDP. Many investors today want tangible data supporting actionable and meaningful change, and companies that can provide this are the ones winning business. These disclosure efforts, although absolutely integral, are only the smallest step forward in addressing the increasing pressure on the natural environment and more specifically our already stressed water resources. A 2017 report coauthored by the CDP and the International Water Stewardship Programme (CDP & IWaSP 2017) states:

Increasing population, economic activity and consumption, coupled with declining water availability and quality, and weak water governance in many geographic regions are all leading to increased competition for this critical resource. Since these drivers of water challenges lie outside of any one company’s sphere of control, finding sustainable solutions is not straightforward.

Permanent solutions to global water risk require meaningful collaboration across stakeholder groups,

sustainability challenges both present and future. When this kind of topdown approach occurs, it creates a holistic shift in water management in which facilities managers and other relevant stakeholders face fewer barriers to implementing new technologies and tools that promote water conservation in commercial real estate. Until the global business community operates in a net-zero environment, one in which all resources that are consumed are effectively replaced, incremental improvements will drive sustainability. With regard

As public concerns over water continue to evolve in the 21st century, so do perspectives on what “sustainability” might mean for urban water supply systems.

governments, and individual corporations (Lemme 2017). With this need at the forefront, it is critical that businesses understand the greater relevance of their water use, not only the volume of water consumed in their operations and supply chains, but also the health and sustainability of the watersheds from which they draw. Support for large-scale water infrastructure improvements and habitat management as a means of preserving the long-term viability of these aquatic resources is not just protective, but also likely lucrative.

A HOLISTIC SHIFT IN WATER MANAGEMENT In addressing sustainability issues, businesses should start with a topdown approach. Without legitimate commitment from executives and board members, it is unlikely that time and resources will be dedicated to tackle these challenges. With sufficient investment of fiscal resources and other initiatives such as corporate sustainability committees and effective technology adoption, executives can give their employees and organization the tools to appropriately address the

to water conservation, several businesses such as Nestlé Waters have recognized that the single most important risk factor they will face is long-term access to sustainable water sources (Nestlé 2011). In response to this recognition, these companies have worked diligently with local stakeholders near their bottling facilities to maintain healthy habitats and equitable access. Technology leaders like Apple and Intel are also closely monitoring and tracking their water footprints throughout the scopes of their businesses, from product manufacturing to data center cooling (Apple 2017, Intel 2017). With monitoring data, they are able to accurately track the water conservation progress at their facilities around the globe. In addition, they have targeted assets in water-stressed regions and prioritized projects based on impact. Meanwhile, companies like Roche Pharmaceuticals and American Airlines have made significant strides to track and reduce their water footprints by partnering with water industry experts (Banyan Water 2017). For organizations like these, one of the simplest solutions to decreasing water

TADDUNE | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

demand is to start by optimizing the use of irrigation water for the landscapes at their offices and facilities. A business doesn’t need to save millions of gallons of water or create net-zero water demand overnight to have an impact. Gradual, small-scale improvements have a significant impact when integrated across the globe. Without datafocused approaches that accurately track and report water demands, communities will struggle to meet the needs of their growing populations. With current rate increases and the pressing need for renewal or replacement of our water infrastructure, it’s likely that businesses that don’t adopt formal policy implemented from top executives will be priced out and left in their competitors’ wake. Most importantly, we must recognize that challenges also represent opportunities. There will be many ways to collaborate, innovate, and disrupt existing practices in the water and sustainability venues in the coming years. Those willing to adapt will ride a wave of efficiency to successful business practices (and profit) for many years to come.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Gillan Taddune is chief executive officer at Banyan Water, 11002-B Metric Blvd., Austin, TX 78758 USA; Gillan@ banyanwater.com. She has more than 20 years of diversified experience in the green and clean technology sector, providing water conservation solutions, recycling incentive programs, renewable energy, smart grid applications, carbon reduction, energy efficiency, and demand-side management to municipalities and residential, commercial, and industrial markets. She was the chief economist and project lead for the Texas Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard from 1997 to 2000, which resulted in more than 9,000 MW of 58

new wind energy in the state. She is a board member of the Austin Technology Incubator and is the recipient of the 2017 GB&D Women in Sustainability Leadership Award. Taddune received an MA degree in international economics and energy policy from John Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md., and a BA degree in economics and German from the University of Vermont, Burlington. https://doi.org/10.1002/awwa.1004

REFERENCES Apple, 2017. Environmental Responsibility Report, 2017: Progress Report Covering Fiscal Year 2016. https://images.apple. com/ca/environment/pdf/Apple_ Environmental_Responsibility_ Report_2017.pdf (accessed August 2017). Banyan Water, 2017. Banyan Water Customers. CDP (Carbon Disclosure Project) & IWaSP (International Water Stewardship Programme), 2017. Overcoming Barriers to Effective Corporate Water Risk Management. https://b8f65cb373b1b7b 15feb-c70d8ead6ced550b4d987d7c03fcd d1d.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/cms/reports/ documents/000/002/074/original/ Overcoming-barriers-to-effectivecorporate-water-risk-management-CDPWater-GIZ-May-2017.pdf (accessed August 2017). GRESB (Global Real Estate Sustainability Benchmark), 2017. About GRESB. https:// gresb.com/about/ (accessed August 2017). Hardcastle, J.L., 2016. 81% of S&P 500 Companies Published Sustainability Reports in 2015. Environmenal Leader, June 30. www.environmentalleader. com/2016/06/81-of-sp-500-companiespublished-sustainability-reports-in-2015/ (accessed August 2017). Intel, 2017. 2016 Corporate Responsibility Report, Water Management. http:// csrreportbuilder.intel.com/PDFfiles/CSR2016_Full-Report.pdf#page=33 (accessed August 2017). Lemme, K., 2017. Toward Fierce Collaboration: No One Can Solve the Global Water and Sanitation Crisis Alone. Skoll Foundation, Aug. 27. http://skoll.org/2017/08/27/ toward-fierce-collaboration-no-onecan-solve-global-water-sanitationcrisis-alone/ (accessed August 2017). Nestlé, 2011. Creating Shared Value Report 2011. http://www.nestle.com/asset-

TADDUNE | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

library/documents/library/documents/ corporate_social_responsibility/2011csv-report.pdf (accessed August 2017). Patel, D., 2017. Big Brands and Businesses Are Aligning Their Missions With Millenial and Gen Z Consumers. Forbes, Mar. 13. www.forbes.com/sites/ deeppatel/2017/03/13/big-brandsand-businesses-are-aligning-theirmissions-with-millennial-and-gen-zconsumers/#3af703fe5a41 (accessed December 2017). Tabuchi, H. & Fountain, H., 2017. Bucking Trump, These Cities, States and Companies Commit to Paris Climate Accord. The New York Times, June 1. www.nytimes.com/2017/06/01/climate/ american-cities-climate-standards.html (accessed December 2017). Tellinghuisen, S., 2009. Water Conservation = Energy Conservation. Western Resource Advocates, Boulder, Colo. www. circleofblue.org/wp-content/ uploads/2010/08/CWCBe-wstudy.pdf (accessed December 2017). Tercek, M. & Adams, J.S., 2013. Nature’s Fortune. Basic Books, a member of the Perseus Books Group, Philadelphia. Walton, B., 2015. Price of Water 2015: Up 6 Percent in 30 Major U.S. Cities; 41 Percent Rise Since 2010. Circle of Blue, Apr. 22. www.circleofblue.org/2015/ world/price-of-water-2015-up-6-percentin-30-major-u-s-cities-41-percent-risesince-2010/ (accessed August 2017).

AWWA RESOURCES • Advancing Sustainability Approaches Guide the Water Industry. Wallis-Lage, C., 2017. Journal AWWA, 109:12:40. Product No. JAW_0085901. • Case Studies in Energy Management: Experience From Germany. Voltz, T.J.; Grischek, T.; & Musche, F., 2017. Journal AWWA, 109:12:E520. Product No. JAW_0085211. • Finished Water—Water Treatment Facility Delivers Energy Savings, Supply Reliability. 2017. Opflow, 43:11:36. Product No. OPF_0085801. These resources have been supplied by Journal AWWA staff. For information on these and other AWWA resources, visit www.awwa.org.

Journal January 2018 Volume 110 Number 1

American Water Works Association

Reverse Osmosis for DPR p. 28 ALSO IN THIS ISSUE:

Craft Brewers Further Acceptance of Potable Reuse Managing Desalination Concentrate With ZLD Technology Private Sector Financing in Water and Wastewater

Journal - American Water Works Association

now publishing with Wiley!

Measuring Household Affordability of Water and Sewer Services

We are delighted to announce that from January 2018 Journal - American Water Works Association will be published in partnership with Wiley! Author Benefits of publishing with Wiley include

Increase the impact of your research by publishing your article Open Access in Wileyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s journals

Altmetric Measure in real time the broader impact of your paper in newspaper, magazines, blogs, social media, Wikipedia, and more

Explain, enrich and share your paper for greater research impact

Make it easier for researchers to discover, access, and interact with your published work

Distinguish yourself from every other researcher

Wiley Editing Services

Anywhere Article

Workshops and Webinars

Ensure your paper is ready for submission with the help of experts in English language editing, translation, manuscript formatting, and figure preparation

Showcase your work with a better and more productive experience for your readers

Access to free expert guidance on a broad range of publishing topics provided regularly through live sessions and webinars

17 - 320314

Wiley Open Access

Pages From the Past

Introduction by Kenneth L. Mercer, Editor-in-Chief

ohn Alvord’s article, edited for length in the following excerpt, provides an overview of the water industry’s progress in the United States for the 100 years before its publication in 1916. Given that just over a century has passed since then, it’s fascinating to return to Alvord’s descriptions of municipal water supply systems then in development, especially keeping in mind that some of the system components installed back then are likely still in operation today. The focus here is on the development of water supply sources, but his full article also includes summaries of improvements in water filtration, disinfection, and distribution (specifically, the evolution of pumping machinery). Despite the progress, however, Alvord concludes by noting all that still remains to be done, especially in the areas of conservation and source water protection, which remain challenges for modern water professionals. Journal AWWA has been published continuously since March 1914. Over the years, it has evolved from a quarterly compilation of research, discussions, and conference proceedings into a monthly blend of original research articles, topical features, and industry-specific columns by water professionals. Pages From the Past is a regular feature that provides a glimpse into past perspectives, challenges, and solutions as presented by our predecessors. The excerpt to follow is republished exactly as it appeared in the original pages of the Journal, with only slight modifications to general formatting styles such as font and spacing. The article was originally published in the September 1917 issue of Journal - American Water Works Association (Vol. 4, No. 3, pp. 278–299).

RECENT PROGRESS AND TENDENCIES IN MUNICIPAL WATER SUPPLY IN THE UNITED STATES1 BY JOHN W. ALVORD 1Read

before the Richmond convention, May 8, 1917.

It is often worth while to turn from the immediate and exacting problems that absorb our attention from day to day and pause to survey our accomplishments and review briefly the progress we have made. Particularly is it a pleasure to summarize progress in the important field of municipal water supply engineering, where the advancement of the art has been most gratifying in recent years and where new prospects have been opened up for further improvement and service to the public. About one hundred years have elapsed since the pioneer water-works plants in this country were first put in operation. The intervening century has witnessed a very remarkable concentration of urban population, which has greatly stimulated and been in large measure conditioned upon the extensive growth of our now great municipal water supply systems, and with the spread of modern habits of life and enterprise a multitude of smaller water works plants have sprung up all over the country, until all but the very smallest communities now enjoy the benefits of a public water supply. These conditions have created a large field for the development and exploitation of methods and equipment for water supply, but have not as yet resulted in any considerable degree of standardization of water works practice. Evolution of our water-works systems and of water works practice is still in progress. A great deal has been accomplished, especially in the last ten or 60

PAGES FROM THE PAST | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

fifteen years, to make our public water supplies all that they should be, but much still remains to be done. The progress of the past few years has been mainly in the direction of the development of new supplies on unprecedented scale, radical new methods of water purification, new developments in pumping machinery and measures to reduce water waste. It is the purpose of this paper to briefly review this recent progress and to point out present tendencies.

DEVELOPMENT OF WATER SUPPLY SOURCES With continued growth all of our larger cities have found it necessary in recent years repeatedly to make large additions to their water supplies. The cities most favorably situated to keep pace with the endless demand for water in increasing quantity are those bordering on the Great Lakes and on our larger rivers, where it has only been necessary to increase the pumping capacity to get more water. But the quality of the water has complicated this otherwise simple problem, and even our lake cities have found increasing embarrassment in this direction. In the attempt to eliminate turbidity and secure more uniformly potable and safe water, the larger cities have extended their intakes further from the shores and to greater depth of water. In the past few years Cleveland, Chicago and Milwaukee have all sought this costly solution of their water problem, with indifferent success. Cleveland has finally adopted filtration, Chicago sterilizes its water and Milwaukee must come to filtration if it is to have a safe and satisfactory water. With the increasing pollution of the lakes, and the growing demand for pure, clear water at all times, the tendency of thought is towards the filtration of lake supplies. Many of the smaller cities, including Sandusky and Lorain, Ohio, Erie, Pa., and more recently Niagara Falls, N. Y.; Evanston, Ill.; South Milwaukee, Wis.; Bay City, Mich.; East Chicago, Ind., and others have adopted filtration. The water supply problem of our large river cities has continued to be a comparatively simple one in point of quantity but has presented increasing difficulties, mainly by reason of the very general and rapidly increasing pollution of most of our streams. In the face of these difficulties, the past twenty years and particularly the decade just past have witnessed an immense improvement in quality of the more important river city supplies, following the introduction of filtration. Since the pioneer

Table 4 Comparison of percentage of metered services at different periods in eighty-two large American cities* 1906–12†

1900 PRESENT SERVICES METERED

NUMBER OF CITIES

TOTAL POPULATION

NUMBER OF CITIES

TOTAL POPULATION

per cent 100

32,700

660,300

75–100

848,700

2,818,900

50–75

509,300

1,004,000

25–50

1,221,200

1,718,600

10–25

636,300

2,047,100

0–10

11,513,500‡

11,569,300§

Total and averages...

14,761,700

19,872,200

*These

cities were all over 25,000 population in 1900. data in this column were obtained for various years from 1906 to 1912, inclusive, most of them being for the years 1910, 1911 or 1912. ‡Includes New York and one other city reported as having no meters. §Includes New York and six other cities reported as having no meters. †The

PAGES FROM THE PAST | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

Bain News Service Collection | lc-dig-ggbain-09575.

Photo credit: Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division,

application of filtration on a large scale at Louisville, important river cities, including New Orleans, St Louis, Kansas City, Minneapolis, Evansville, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia and Washington, and many smaller cities, have introduced filtration of their water supplies within the past few years. It is among impounded and gravity supplies that we find the most notable water supply developments recently constructed or under way. These include the great new gravity supplies for New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco. The great dams and aqueducts of the Catskill supply for New York, at an estimated cost of about $200,000,000, will provide an additional 200,000,000 gallons per day of unpolluted mountain water and will be capable of future enlargement to yield twice this amount. This great undertaking, only just completed, had its inception as early as 1900. After exhaustive investigation actual construction was undertaken in 1906. While this addition to the New York water supply was under way, the city in 1911 faced a serious drouth and threatened water famine. This incident illustrates the necessity for foresight and wise planning if the water-works of our great cities are to be kept in point of development where they can safely meet the rapidly increasing demand for water, having due regard to natural causes affecting the quantity of the available supply from year to year. Of no less interest is the recently completed Owens River supply developed by the city of Los Angeles. Rather than limit the future of the city by attempting further development of scant local water supply resources, Los Angeles, with great foresight, adopted the bold expedient of diverting an unused mountain stream 250 miles distant and turning it from its course into the desert to the uses of the city. At a cost of $24,500,000, it made available indefinitely a municipal supply of 259,000,000 gallons per day in a locality where water is more scarce and more valuable than in any other thickly settled part of this country. In doing this Los Angeles acquired a natural resource of almost inestimable value and has insured its future growth and supremacy in the southwest. The city of San Francisco has undertaken a similar great municipal water supply project. It is now building works to develop by storage in the Hetch-Hetchy valley, 175 miles distant, a supply of 240,000,000 gallons per day, present maximum capacity. This supply is estimated to cost about $37,000,000 and may ultimately be developed to furnish 400,000,000 gallons per day. The works will include a great dam on the Tuolumne River and an aqueduct and equalizing reservoirs similar to those of the Catskill and Owens River supplies. The immense difficulties overcome and the great engineering works carried out in recent years to develop adequate water supplies for some of our great cities have had their counterpart on a smaller scale in the planning and execution of works required for the supply of many of our smaller cities. These cities, even though oftentime unfavorably situated for the development of the necessary quantities of water, must on account of more limited means depend on local sources of supply. Ground water supplies have been very extensively developed during recent years, mainly by the smaller inland cities. Sometimes there has been practically no alternative source, but in other cases this source has been developed to supplement other supplies, or used in preference to a polluted river supply requiring filtration. In the case of the Bay cities of California, ground water supplies have been extensively developed to supplement a scant impounded supply in a region where no rivers for water supply are available, except at a great distance and prohibitive cost.

The La Crosse, Wis., supply is a good example of the latest practice in developing ground water supplies from favorable water-bearing sands by means of driven wells. This city recently abandoned a polluted river supply for one that does not need artificial filtration. A modern example of one of the largest ground water supply developments is Des Moines, Iowa, which is able to develop an ample supply by means of infiltration galleries in the sand and gravel deposits of a nearby river. Deep well supplies in some localities have continued to offer the best available supply in the case of a number of our smaller cities and towns, but the continued and increasing draught on these sources, with attendant lowering of the static water level, has made this supply in many cases less economical of development than when first tapped, and it is now well recognized that this source of supply is not always well adapted to progressive enlargement to meet the growing needs of the town supplied. The deep well supply will continue, however, to be a valuable asset to many of our smaller cities situated in certain well-recognized zones favorable to the development of water from the underlying rock strata. With the continued growth of our cities and the increasing rate of water consumption, the problem of supplying water will continue to be a vital one for many of our cities, most of which are pressed to keep ahead of the insistent demand for more water. In certain sections of the country the very limited water resources are, without a doubt, a serious handicap to cities already existing. Where the growth of the city is sufficiently sustained, we may expect to see other great water supply projects undertaken, as at New York and Los Angeles, in order to overcome deficiencies or exhaustion of the local water supply resources…

WATER CONSUMPTION With several of our largest cities still lavish in the waste of water, it is plain much remains to be done in bringing about economy in the use of water and the elimination of waste… Even allowing for a somewhat more liberal legitimate domestic use of water in this country, it is difficult to reconcile the high rates so common in this country with the low per capita consumption abroad, and the lower rates of consumption in some of our own cities. The explanation is to be found mainly in leakage and lavish and careless use and waste on the part of the consumer. This has been demonstrated repeatedly in recent years by thorough investigations, by successful campaigns to reduce waste, by water waste surveys and by wide experience with metering. New York City, threatened by water famine before the completion of the Catskill supply, was able in 1912 by systematic surveys and a waste prevention campaign to reduce the total water consumption 90,000,000 gallons per day below the estimated needs for that year. Washington, D. C., and other cities have carried on work of this kind on a more or less extensive scale and with beneficial results. Waste surveys in Chicago not long ago revealed an astonishing amount of leakage and led to the detection of entirely unsuspected sources of waste. Ingenious devices have been developed for measuring and checking the flow of water in distribution mains.

METERING Unintelligent opposition still stands in the way of metering in such important cities as Chicago and Buffalo and in many smaller cities, where the present apparent per capita water consumption is altogether unreasonable. The presence of an abundant visible source of supply, as at Chicago, without doubt militates against considerations of economy and strengthens the popular notion that water should be “free as air.” These cities may be expected in the not distant future to fall into line by adopting an effective policy of metering [Table 4]. The possibilities of economy of water in these cities, now using in some cases as high as 400 gallons per capita per day, are best indicated by the prevailing low rates of consumption in those cities that have adopted metering, including Cleveland, Milwaukee, Hartford, Des Moines and many others. The striking results in economy where metering has been applied to a wasteful system is sufficient argument for the general adoption of this policy wherever apparent consumption of water is beyond all reasonable use. The few examples, of which York, Pa., is a striking instance, of moderate water consumption although practically unmetered, are exceptions rather than an argument for unmetered services. The great loss of continued and unnecessary increased water supply development, especially under present abnormal prices, makes it doubly important for all of our cities to keep water consumption

PAGES FROM THE PAST | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

within bounds. Threatened outgrowth of supplies already developed and the growing need for the greatest possible economy in plant operation may be expected to greatly accelerate the adoption of metering in those cities that have not yet taken advantage of the meter system, which offers at once the only fair method of selling water and the best insurance of economy in use of water…

CONCLUSION Any attempt to cover the notable matters in which municipal water supply has progressed in this country during the last decade must necessarily be treated broadly. Many interesting developments of a minor character must necessarily be omitted, but it is believed that the more important developments have been described. For the future it is apparent that more attention is to be given to the conservation of our available supplies and their protection from contamination. This movement is already well begun in the studies of the Great Lakes, the sanitary survey of the Ohio River, and the valuable and earnest work of the state water surveys now in progress in many states over the country. More and more will this close watchfulness over the purity of our water-courses and water reserve prevail, if present indications are any guide. Another tendency in the near future will undoubtedly relate to the increased curtailment of waste. This movement, already well in progress, will have yet wider attention the more its economic necessity becomes apparent and the increasing difficulty of extending present supplies compels the attention of our municipalities. New and revolutionary discoveries are always possible in any art, but without discussing these opportunities for betterment it is easy to see that we have a great deal to do to organize, systematize, and standardize the problem of public water supply in this country in the next few years. https://doi.org/10.1002/awwa.1005

JUNE 11–14 | LAS VEGAS, NEVADA AWWA.ORG/ACE18

PAGES FROM THE PAST | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

Public Affairs

COLUMN COORDINATOR: DEIRDRE MUELLER MARY L. GUGLIUZZA, CHRISTINA MONTOYA-HALTER, AND KAREN SNYDER

Gugliuzza

Montoya-Halter

Snyder

Framing the Conversation About Rates Before, During, and After a Change

Layout imagery by Scott A. McPherson

ddressing water and wastewater rate increases and changes to the formulas used to determine customer bills is part of every utility’s ongoing planning efforts to ensure it can cover the costs of operations, maintenance, and capital improvements. Yet some utilities shy away from discussing their funding needs more publicly, thereby missing the opportunity not only to build the case for needed resources but also to reinforce the importance of an individual utility’s efforts to ensure safe, reliable, and affordable services. This is the last in a series of articles exploring issues in communicating about rates. In the series, AWWA’s Public Affairs Council has highlighted the importance of maintaining regular conversations with a utility’s customers and community about the value and importance of water and wastewater services, the ways that rates and fees fund those vital services and protect public health, and the common need to adjust those rates and fees to ensure essential investments are made.

The first article in the three-part series, “Setting the Stage for Change Through Effective Ongoing Utility Communications” (Smith et al. 2017), detailed how utilities should establish an ongoing communication strategy to develop relationships with community stakeholders and build understanding of the value of water services. The second article, “Getting to Know Your Stakeholder in Advance of a Rate Change” (Davis et al. 2017), built on this theme by focusing on the importance of understanding the intricacies of a utility’s specific community and customers using various research and data collection tools to support productive rate conversations. This final article extends these ideas along a rate adjustment project’s time scale by describing how to communicate rate changes early in the process, as well as how to demonstrate and reinforce value after new rate structures are approved and implemented. Though proactive communication is not always their strength, water and wastewater utilities would do well to establish more effective communication strategies specific to rate increases. In fact, an impending rate PUBLIC AFFAIRS | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

increase can be leveraged for all kinds of awareness campaigns to foster support and overall transparency. If a utility doesn’t actively promote these conversations, its customers can have the issues framed for them by sources promoting conflicting accounts or outright inaccurate information. The following sections summarize some key steps a utility can take to prevent potentially heated rate discussions from ever occurring by instead promoting an ongoing, rational conversation about public health, community vitality, and the ways water connects us all.

DON’T WAIT—START THE CONVERSATION The key to any outreach program is forethought. If a rate increase may be on the horizon, especially if it is large and unexpected, utilities should start planning their outreach strategy and tactics well in advance of public discussions. Communication staff and any external consultants should be engaged early on so they understand the important drivers and potential pitfalls that will shape the discourse. Starting early will give communication professionals and utility leaders time to understand and address the concerns of important audiences and customer classes. It helps to create a calendar or timeline with milestones running backward from the first public hearing, if required, or public forum at which the rate increase will be introduced. The timeline should include deadlines and roll-out details for all communication tools.

lists of facts; rather, they are narratives supported by the facts and details of the rate increase. Taken together, these messages provide a narrative framework for outreach materials, public meetings, and all media interviews. Customer service representatives must be trained to respond appropriately to a wide range of questions about the rate change. Customer service staff must be well versed in the key messages and scripted responses to improve continuity across agents. The core communication team should work with customer service staff to adjust and update responses as new questions come to light and the situation on the ground progresses.

PROVIDE CONTEXT

While identifying project milestones, also identify key employees and technical experts who can explain the rate increase drivers and ramifications. This includes not just those who understand the intr icacies and nuances that went into the rate design and the overall utility’s finances, but also those who know the state of the system and its water supplies. Following predetermined acceptance criteria, the members of this core team need clearly identified roles, and their responsibilities must be established early and recognized by leaders so messages and information can be developed, checked, and approved promptly.

Water, wastewater, and stormwater rates by themselves do not tell a story, but fundamentally they are the outcome of every decision and action a utility undertakes or faces. For many utilities, stressing the need for efficient water use can leave customers puzzled when their bills are higher but they are using less water. On top of this, many operating expenses have little to no correlation to the amount of drinking water produced and delivered or wastewater collected and treated. Staffing at a treatment plant is the same whether the plant is producing its full capacity or only a third of it. Call center staffing is based on call volumes and response time goals, not water use. The cost to repair a break or leak has nothing to do with the amount of water a customer uses, and the same is true for laboratory testing, billing services, and more. Often there is also confusion about the actual bills themselves. Customers tend to look at the bottom line of the bill; however, for utilities that are part of a municipality, the bill may include other recurring city services such as trash collection. Customers call it a water bill, but in these cases it is actually a city services bill. For example, in Fort Worth, Tex., there are five separate city charges on the water bill. It is important to educate customers about what is on their bills. To this end, every utility staff member should be able to explain the important details of a utility bill to a layperson.

CREATE THE NARRATIVES

IDENTIFY SPOKESPERSONS

Every utility should be able to describe what changing rates mean for its customers, especially because having a ready answer to the question “What’s in it for me?” will help get buy-in and support from ratepayers. Once the team approves and assimilates this information, they should use it to form three key messages with three supporting facts for each message. These messages are the most important things all audiences need to understand, even if they know nothing about water supply, water distribution, capital planning, or rate development. These messages are not just

When a utility changes its rates, selecting the right messenger(s) is critical to an effective rollout. Spokespersons should be identified early in the process and should receive the necessary training or coaching on key messages and anticipated questions. Ideally, the outreach program would include proactive efforts to speak to various groups about the value of services and the need for additional revenue. Depending on the number of these meetings, a bench of spokespersons from throughout the utility should be trained and ready to provide presentations, participate in public meetings,

IDENTIFY THE CORE COMMUNICATION TEAM

PUBLIC AFFAIRS | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

brief local leaders, or host a booth at community events. Non-utility third-party spokespersons can also be very effective in reaching audiences.

IDENTIFY COMMUNITY-SPECIFIC TOOLS AND TACTICS From mailers to the local paper to electronic communications, a host of options are available to relay information. In fact, multiple channels are recommended to get the word out. But no matter which modes are ultimately used, a summary of the basic details should be established and relayed often and consistently. This can include what the utility has done or is doing with its customers’ money, why more is needed, and how and where ratepayers can learn more and participate in the decision-making process. As an example, Fort Worth’s ongoing customer surveys indicate that bill inserts are the primary way customers get information. But Fort Worth Water builds on this foundation, using additional methods to frame the proposed and approved rate changes, including social media, website updates, conventional news media like television and radio, and electronic newsletters. A simple fact sheet (ideally limited to one page) can be useful in a variety of forums, including briefings with the media and elected officials or handouts at a utility customer service desk. Fact sheets should be easily understood, incorporating graphics and color as opposed to being text heavy. Fact sheets can be easily transformed to web copy, advertisements, small “quick facts” cards for field crews to use, social media posts, and more. As an example, El Paso Water in El Paso, Tex., uses a social media campaign in the weeks before and during budget hearings to remind customers how the utility has made investments in service and quality over the previous year. The campaign includes a series of informational graphics featuring topics such as • how many miles of sewer and water lines were replaced, • how much water new stormwater infrastructure can hold, and • how many acres of open space were purchased. These simple graphics provide images and messages that are repeated throughout budget hearings and even up to the final vote. El Paso Water has tracked the effectiveness of these efforts, confirming increased engagement and positive feedback through this approach.

school districts. Depending on the population served, some audiences will require messages in different languages. Regardless of the group, however, key aspects to emphasize in the outreach plan are transparency and trustworthiness. To begin with, the city council or local representatives should be informed about the proposed rate increase early in the process to eliminate any surprises. This also helps inform community leaders so that they have accurate responses when constituents raise questions or concerns about the proposed rate increases. Once local leaders are on board, presentations to neighborhood associations, homeowners associations, and civic organizations can raise awareness and generate support. These groups often have regular meetings and are looking for speakers to address them. Business organizations, such as chambers of commerce, and churches are also valuable groups to engage. Although this process may require more time and involvement than mass communication, these kinds of targeted messaging have been proved to be successful. Finally, don’t forget to address utility staff. Employees are stakeholders, too, and they can be some of the best ambassadors. While customer service and public affairs

FIGURE 1

Social media infographics showing how rates make it possible to complete needed improvements

TAILOR INFORMATION FOR DIFFERENT AUDIENCES Understanding the make-up of the community a utility serves, as well as the various audiences and their preferences and concerns, will inform the best ways to connect with these groups during a rate change. A stakeholder audit is recommended, including agencies, local officials, customers of all types, large water users, businesses and civic groups, homeowners associations, faith-based organizations, multicultural groups, and

Courtesy of El Paso Water, Tex.

PUBLIC AFFAIRS | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

staff are the front line and primary point of contact for most customers, all employees need to be educated about rate increases. Field employees could be approached while repairing a main break or clearing a wastewater line. Off the clock, employees can reinforce the importance of a rate increase with neighbors and friends. Make sure employees have access to narratives and information supporting the need for the rate increase and explaining how it will affect customers. Regardless of which groups are ultimately targeted, a variety of communication tools should be used to invite customers and stakeholders to the public meetings or hearings where the rate increase will be introduced. These invitations should be repeated as often as possible, and the utility should lead the conversation about its proposed rate increase.

ENGAGE THE MEDIA EARLY AND OFTEN Rather than wait for media outlets to hear about the proposed rate increase, a media tour should be conducted before budget hearings begin. Referring back to El Paso Water’s rate increase, utility leaders and members of the communications team visited with key local television and print media managers and reporters to go over the purpose for the rate increase. El Paso Water used media tours to highlight improvement and rehabilitation projects that were driving the need for the rate increase. Members of the Public Service Board that governs El Paso Water authored guest editorials to reinforce key messages. The utility also prepared news stories on the proposed rate increase and shared them online and with the El Paso Herald Post, an online media outlet that publishes stories from guest contributors. Video and interview opportunities to talk about these projects is the kind of content media outlets need and crave. In the end, it is critical for the utility to frame its messages ahead of community discussions, rather than react to negative headlines.

REMEMBER THAT RATE APPROVAL IS NOT THE END OF COMMUNICATING Approval of the rate increase by the city council or other governing body does not mean the conversation should stop. Keep the messages coming, and include campaigns around the times the rate increase is approved, when it will take effect, and when customers will get their first bills at the higher rates. In the example of Fort Worth, rate changes are considered by the city council in early September, usually a week before the upcoming budget is approved. The utility’s fiscal year is October through September, but retail rate changes do not actually take effect until January 1, so it isn’t until the February bill arrives that customers see any changes. The rate effective date was moved to January 1 almost 20 years ago in response to a recommendation from the utility’s retail rate stakeholder group 68

PUBLIC AFFAIRS | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

to better allow businesses time to budget for the change. Because the increase takes place during the winter, when water use is lowest, customers may not actually feel any significant impacts until outdoor watering starts in late spring or summer, at which time expanded messaging may be added to ongoing communications. Whether rates take effect immediately upon adoption or months later, ongoing communication after the change is just good customer service. In today’s busy world, customers can forget or ignore changes until they are personally affected. Constant reminders in various forms about why the rate change was necessary, and the critical work the utility performs to protect public health and support the community, are helpful in both the present and over the long term. Preparing for and implementing rate changes is a never-ending process, but a utility’s history and recent performance will be under the microscope when rates increase. Customer perceptions are built and reinforced over years and in some cases decades, so utilities must talk to their customers regularly about day-to-day operations, not just when a rate increase is needed. Tell customers how long a major main break will take to repair, why a sewer overflow occurred, what is being done to maintain water and wastewater infrastructure— anything that demonstrates current levels of service or that shows where improvements are needed.

CASE STUDY The City of Fresno, Calif., presents a somewhat cautionary tale. In 2013, after decades of planning and the critical overuse of groundwater coupled with severe drought conditions, the City of Fresno was ready to proceed with its infrastructure program. The program would include a network of raw water pipelines, an 80 mgd treatment facility, and miles of distribution pipelines. The new system would diversify Fresno’s water portfolio and ensure a more sustainable water future. The system would also require significant investment. A funding and rate plan was developed, and the protocol for a standard California Proposition 218 rate approval process was followed. This process solicited minimal community participation. Once the Fresno City Council approved a fouryear rate plan to pay for the recommended projects, the plan was officially underway. However, in 2014, a group of vocal individuals convinced elected officials to rescind the new rate structure after raising concerns that public participation was inadequate during the development process. Once the rates were rescinded, the capital improvement program was no longer funded, as the previous rates were insufficient to meet ongoing operational and debt obligations. The city had to start over. City and utility administration committed to doing things differently on the second go-round. The city understood

FIGURE 2

Infographic showing the breakdown of how rates are applied

COST OF DELIVERING WATER 19%

30%

Pay-Go Infrastructure Improvements

12%

Pumping Power

18%

Personnel

Other Operations & Maintenance

21% Debt

Note: Reserves and non-rate revenue are allocated equally across these five categories.

that without knowledge of dire water supply conditions facing Fresno, its community members—including business and economic development interests—wouldn’t see the value in the infrastructure program. What followed was an intensive, tailored public participation process that invited community members to dive into Fresno’s water situation. Robust community forums were held in sequence with focused, facilitated discussions centered on the following important messages: 1. Fresno’s water situation: What are the challenges we’re trying to address? 2. Water solutions: What are the things we’ve considered and should consider? 3. Costs: What goes into Fresno’s water rates and what are the cost impacts of various alternatives? 4. Findings and recommendations: What have we heard, what are we considering based on that input, and what are the next steps? A panel of third-party experts was convened for each session to address questions and provide context. Informational displays hosted by subject matter experts were available before and after facilitated discussions. Meetings were live-streamed on the city’s government access channel, and experts were available for in-depth interviews before and after events. Simultaneously, an aggressive speakers’ bureau program was launched with trained presenters to speak to every interested group to further spread the news about Fresno’s water needs and solutions. All of these and other activities led to the approval of a five-year rate increase that is currently in its third year. Pipelines are in construction, the treatment facility is nearly complete, and the water future is much brighter thanks to a city’s commitment to share a complicated story with an interested community.

—Mary L. Gugliuzza worked in the communications section of the Fort Worth Water Department for almost 22 years, serving as media relations and communications coordinator for the past 20 years. She received the George Warren Fuller Award in 2011. Christina Montoya-Halter has been the communications and marketing manager for El Paso Water since 2008. She oversees media relations, public relations, and all community outreach activities. She and the El Paso Water communications team have been honored nationally and statewide for their communications efforts and programs. Karen Snyder is a vice-president with Katz & Associates Inc. and leads the firm’s water practice. She has been active in water, wastewater, and environmental public affairs for 30 years, specializing in strategic communication planning, public involvement, community relations, spokesperson and media training, and crisis communication. Deirdre Mueller (column coordinator, to whom correspondence may be addressed) is the senior communications manager at AWWA, 6666 W. Quincy Ave., Denver, CO 80235 USA; dmueller@awwa.org. https://doi.org/10.1002/awwa.1006

REFERENCES Davis, M.; Elliott, M.E.; & Snyder, K., 2017. Public Affairs—Getting to Know Your Stakeholders in Advance of a Rate Change. Journal AWWA, 109:12:72. https://doi.org/10.5942/jawwa.2017.109.0155. Smith, K.D.; Campbell, J.; & Snyder, K., 2017. Public Affairs—Setting the Stage for Change Through Effective Ongoing Utility Communications. Journal AWWA, 109:7:70. https://doi. org/10.5942/jawwa.2017.109.0091.

PUBLIC AFFAIRS | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

Journal January 2018 Volume 110 Number 1

American Water Works Association

Reverse Osmosis for DPR p. 28 ALSO IN THIS ISSUE:

Craft Brewers Further Acceptance of Potable Reuse Managing Desalination Concentrate With ZLD Technology Private Sector Financing in Water and Wastewater

Journal - American Water Works Association

now publishing with Wiley!

Measuring Household Affordability of Water and Sewer Services

We are delighted to announce that from January 2018 Journal - American Water Works Association will be published in partnership with Wiley! Author Benefits of publishing with Wiley include

Increase the impact of your research by publishing your article Open Access in Wileyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s journals

Altmetric Measure in real time the broader impact of your paper in newspaper, magazines, blogs, social media, Wikipedia, and more

Explain, enrich and share your paper for greater research impact

Make it easier for researchers to discover, access, and interact with your published work

Distinguish yourself from every other researcher

Wiley Editing Services

Anywhere Article

Workshops and Webinars

Ensure your paper is ready for submission with the help of experts in English language editing, translation, manuscript formatting, and figure preparation

Showcase your work with a better and more productive experience for your readers

Access to free expert guidance on a broad range of publishing topics provided regularly through live sessions and webinars

17 - 320314

Wiley Open Access

Workforce Diversity

TERRY WALTERS, COLUMN COORDINATOR JENIFER TATUM

Tatum

Giving Women the LIFT to Succeed: One Company’s Approach

eadquartered in Raleigh, N.C., the planning and design consulting firm KimleyHorn has grown from only three employees when it was founded in 1967 to over 3,000 employees in 75 offices today. With an employeefocused culture already in place, the company sought to strengthen its workforce diversity through creation of a specific program called LIFT: Lasting Impact for Tomorrow. This article describes the path taken to create, implement, and ultimately improve LIFT, a program that serves as a model for organizations across industries seeking to close gaps in workforce equality.

WOMEN’S LEADERSHIP GROUP Kimley-Horn’s board of directors originally approved a committee called the Women’s Leadership Group (WLG) in 2010. Still active today, this committee consists of 10–12 senior-level women with terms of three to five years. Their charge is to foster and support women at the company and act as a liaison with executive management. One of the first tasks completed by the WLG was to develop a mission statement to better define their purpose:

DEVELOPMENT OF LIFT In 2014, the company held a three-day workshop on gender diversity that centered on what the firm could do to eliminate the retention gap between men and women. The outcome of the workshop was a decision to develop tools to provide support for women to have long-term success. After six months of intense planning, the LIFT initiative was introduced in January 2015. The primary focus areas for LIFT were to recruit, develop, and retain women in all professional-level jobs. Recruitment. With the goal of increasing women’s share of professional jobs in the company’s workforce, WORKFORCE DIVERSITY | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

LIFT logo provided by Kimley-Horn

Kimley-Horn envisions a workplace where outstanding professional women choose to build their careers, where highly qualified women are represented in all areas of the firm, earning and playing active roles in decision-making bodies and contributing valuable perspectives to increase the firm’s competitive advantage in the marketplace. We believe this will be realized by enhancing a culture that actively mentors and sponsors women in their efforts to achieve recognized success while respecting the need for work–life balance.

Another important task for the WLG was to lead the firm to analyze and provide guidance on company-wide research developed to identify retention trends. After compiling numbers from 2003 to 2008, a planning team confirmed that there was a higher turnover rate for women than men, and this was true in all professional classification categories. The largest retention gap applied to individuals with two to four years of experience. While addressing the retention gap was the company’s first step in developing a more diverse workforce, two general trends in the industry were also noted: (1) an increasing number of top women engineering graduates and (2) an increasing number of women clients. Women in client organizations were also increasingly in decision-making roles, including consultant selection. Yet a disproportionate percentage of practicing professionals at Kimley-Horn were male. For the company to realize its full potential, a strategic decision was made to try to increase the number of women in practice and to increase support where it was needed for their retention and success.

Kimley-Horn’s women shareholders pose for a group photograph in April 2017. Photograph provided by Kimley-Horn

historically the company’s college recruiting efforts had already been successful, averaging 30–35% women hires each year, which is above the rate of women graduating from engineering and planning programs. Specifically, 77 women graduates were hired in 2015, and another 110 came on board in 2016. While there was success with new graduates, recruiting mid- and senior-level women has proved to be difficult. To address this, the LIFT initiative included the creation of recruiting materials to facilitate conversations with mid- and senior-level women and highlight how the initiative addresses the specific challenges they face at various common points in their careers. Professional women already on staff were included in the recruitment process of their female colleagues. Incorporation of these efforts contributed to the hiring of 15 mid-level women in 2015 and 17 mid-level women in 2016. Likewise, seven women were hired for senior positions in 2015, and six more in 2016. Development. Since they represent less of the firm’s workforce, newly hired women are more successful if they know they have the support of other women. Whether it’s hosting women’s forums to promote camaraderie and guidance, or hiring outside consultants to provide women-only training sessions, these actions provide tools for success and create bonds with other women who can help navigate potential barriers. Following are some of LIFT’s development activities: • Gender diversity sessions for all new hires (regardless of gender) 72

WORFORCE DIVERSITY | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

• Women shareholder sessions led by an outside consultant • Four-day women’s leadership development training by an outside consultant for women with six to 10 years of experience • A Regional Networking Committee through WLG to promote women’s forums in offices in each region • “Brown-bag” lunches to discuss Ted Talks, Lean In Circles, emotional intelligence, and other professional development concepts and activities • Social gatherings to promote discussion and mentoring • LIFT Talks consisting of internal webinars for women in the company to participate in professional development topics of interest Since LIFT’s first year, more than 400 employees have participated in its focused training, and the number of women generating large revenue practices has almost doubled. Retention. The most important measurement of LIFT’s success is the retention of professional women. To improve this metric, special attention was given to issues around work–life balance. Although everyone faces such challenges, women tend to face particular burdens as a result of historical gender roles and societal norms. Further, research of workforce trends at Kimley-Horn showed that many retention issues occurred during the phase of a woman’s career when family demands tended to increase. To help alleviate some of these stresses, the LIFT initiative led to the following changes:

• Flexible schedules: Guidelines were updated to promote flexible schedules when needed and reinforce their availability for both men and women. The firm also worked to dispel the negative stigma around flexible schedules. • Backup childcare: This resource was added as a benefit to all exempt employees to address their unanticipated childcare challenges. For example, if an employee needs to attend a critical presentation but their child comes down with an ear infection and childcare is not available, the company’s backup childcare options include the option for parents to request a nanny to watch their children for a small copay. • Modified master contract: Kimley-Horn has a contract that governs ownership in the company. As a result of the LIFT initiative, company shareholders voted to modify the master contract to allow more part-time employees to be owners. • Maternity transition coaches: The company implemented two types of maternity transition programs: Mom Buddies, an internal program to connect pregnant women with other women who have recently had children to offer advice and assistance throughout the process. External coaches, a more formal program available to women during pregnancy, maternity leave, and the transition back to work. The external coach acts as a personal assistant to help with finding pediatricians, childcare, and other motherhood-related items. Other efforts to improve retention include creating a prenatal billing code to account for time spent at the numerous doctor’s visits required during pregnancy, and a reduction in the number of billable hours required throughout pregnancy and the transition back to work.

Kimley-Horn representatives attended WTS International’s 2017 national conference. WTS was founded in 1977 and originally named Women’s Transportation Seminar. Photograph provided by Kimley-Horn

planning, analysis, design, and construction contract administration. With a background concentrated in water and wastewater systems, she is involved in master planning, transmission, distribution, pumping system, drainage system, and storage design. Tatum holds a BS degree in civil engineering from the Missouri University of Science and Technology (formerly University of Missouri-Rolla), Rolla, Mo. Terry Walters (column coordinator, to whom correspondence may be addressed) is the senior section relationship manager at AWWA, Denver, Colo. He can be reached at twalters@awwa.org. https://doi.org/10.1002/awwa.1007

FEEDBACK AND PERCEPTION Introducing an initiative like LIFT into the culture of a company operating in a historically male industry was no small order. However, within the first two years, the positive results have helped relieve initial doubts. So why LIFT? There was a clear business need to close the retention gap between men and women at the company and in the water industry. KimleyHorn’s LIFT initiative—and the more diverse workforce it hopes to generate—will create a lasting impact for tomorrow. —Jenifer Tatum is vice-president of Kimley-Horn, Fort Worth, Tex. As a specialist in municipal civil engineering services, she has more than 21 years of experience in project management for infrastructure

Jenifer Tatum (center) receives the AWWA Diversity Award at AWWA’s 2017 Annual Conference and Exposition. She is joined by AWWA 2016–2017 president Jeanne M. Bennett-Bailey (left) and chief executive officer David B. LaFrance (right). Photograph provided by Kimley-Horn

WORKFORCE DIVERSITY | FEBRUARY 2018 • 110:2 | JOURNAL AWWA

People in the News

In Memoriam Longtime AWWA member and past president Lyndon B. Stovall died on Oct. 4, 2017, at the age of 70. He lived in Simpsonville, S.C., and had been a member of the South Carolina Section since 1978 as well as an honorary AWWA member. His term as AWWA president was from 2002 to 2003. Stovall received the Honorary Member Award in 2010, the Life Member Award in 2008, and the George Warren Fuller Award in 1997. Stovall contributed two articles to Journal AWWA: “The Dark Ages,” appearing in the April 2001 issue, and “Are We Prepared?” a Manager to Manager column appearing in the November 2001 issue and written with Carrie Lewis and Dennis R. Leslie. “The Dark Ages” discussed the importance of long-term planning in the drinking water industry in order to stay focused on the industry’s primary mission and to avoid obsolescence. Stovall stressed that actions taken in the present will ultimately have profound effects on life at the end of the 21st century. In “Are We Prepared?” Stovall, Lewis, and Leslie—all general managers of water utilities— presented the steps to take to reduce the risk of a successful terrorist attack on the US water supply.

Born in Loup City, Neb., to the late Marvin and Beryl Parker Stovall, he graduated from the University of Nebraska with a degree in civil engineering. Stovall served in the US Navy on Guam as a lieutenant junior grade during the Vietnam War. He retired from Greenville Water System (Greenville, S.C.) after 33 years of service. As a board member of Water For People, having contributed his skills and expertise since 1978, Stovall was instrumental in bringing clean water to remote areas of the world. He was awarded for Outstanding Achievement on Homeland Security after serving as a member of Homeland Security for Utilities. In 2010, Stovall was awarded the Order of the Palmetto, created in 1971 by South Carolina governor John West to recognize lifetime achievement. It is the highest civilian honor awarded by the governor of South Carolina. In addition to his wife Susie, Stovall is survived by his children—son Jeff Stovall and his wife Kelley of Simpsonville; daughter Kara and her husband Neale of Murrels Inlet, S.C.; sisters Melanie and Jannie; brother Bradley; and three grandchildren.

TRANSITIONS

Mahoney

Knatz

Richard Mahoney has been named a supervising construction engineer in the New York City office of WSP USA, formerly WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff. In his new position, Mahoney will serve as resident engineer on a variety of construction projects. Before joining WSP, Mahoney was a resident engineer in the New Jersey office of a global infrastructure firm that provides planning, design, and construction management services. He was responsible for construction oversight of the central residuals building at the Newtown Creek wastewater treatment plant for the New York City Department of Environmental Protection. Giuseppe (Joe) Tulumello has been named leader of Gannett Fleming’s Northeast Region Facilities Business Line. In this role, Tulumello

7 4 PE OPL E IN T HE N E W S | F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 8 • 1 1 0 :2 | J O U R N A L AWWA

oversees business strategy and planning, project delivery, and operational growth of Gannett Fleming’s facilities practice across Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island, and Connecticut. He has served as the project manager for multiple facility renovation and modernization assignments at Metro-North Railroad’s Grand Central Terminal. He also served as project manager and oversaw the design–build services for the Springfield Railcar Assembly Facility in Massachusetts. Geraldine Knatz has joined Dewberry’s board of directors. Knatz is professor of the practice of policy and engineering at the University of Southern California (Los Angeles), where she teaches graduate-level courses in seaport policy and management, environmental impact analysis, and regulatory

compliance. Her expertise includes seaport policy and management, maritime transportation, international trade, and seaport sustainability. From 2006 until 2014, Knatz served as executive director of the Port of Los Angeles, which included overseeing the organization and setting the strategic and business vision for the port’s growth and environmental leadership. Engineering Enterprises Inc. has added Keith E. Powell to its Environmental Group as a project manager. Powell brings more than 16 years of engineering experience consulting for wastewater conveyance and treatment as well as drinking water supply, treatment, and distribution projects. NSF International has appointed Christopher Boyd as general manager of its building water health program in North America. Boyd comes to NSF International from the Department of Health and Mental

Hygiene in New York City, N.Y., where he led the agency’s response to the largest Legionella outbreak in the city’s history. As assistant commissioner of Environmental Sciences and Engineering in New York City, Boyd was also responsible for regulatory oversight of the municipal water system.

OBITUARIES

Powell

Hollis H. Brower Jr., Nixa, Mo. Thomas Chmura Jr., Poynette, Wis.; Gold Water Drop Award 2015, Life Member Award 1995 William J. Ellinger, life member, Bethpage, N.Y.; Life Member Award 2013, Silver Water Drop Award 2013 Robert C. Faro, The Villages, Fla.; Life Member Award 2005 https://doi.org/10.1002/awwa.1010

Breakthrough technology for PFAS removal from drinking water SYNTHETIC MEDIA MORE EFFECTIVE THAN CARBON ECT is a recognized leader in the development of engineering solutions for the removal of emerging contaminants, including PFAS, from drinking water. Our synthetic media (resin) technology has five to ten times higher capacity than carbon for PFOA and PFOS removal. In addition, ECT’s resin is regenerable onsite, making it far more sustainable than other technologies. The result is a compact, rapidly deployable, and cost-effective PFAS treatment process. FOR MORE INFORMATION Thomas Varner, Account Representative TVarner@ect2.com | (973) 658-3935 www.ECT2.com

P EO P LE IN TH E NEWS | FEB R U A R Y 2018 • 110: 2 | JO U R NA L AWWA

Industry News

Brazilian Coffee Company Strikes Harmony Between Production and Environmental Protection A coffee company has found a way to produce its specialty coffees in harmony with environmental preservation. Established in 1969 in Minas Gerais, Brazil, Ipanema Coffees is a specialty coffee producer that has 14 million trees planted on three farms in the south of the state of Minas Gerais—Rio Verde, Conquista, and Capoeirinha. Its work is guided by innovation, long-term relationships, and consistency in production and trade. An addition to that list is the preservation and care of nature.

FROM HENHOUSE TO ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER With 793 ha dedicated to coffee production and 773 ha of native forests, 66 springs, and 27.7 mi of water bodies, Ipanema Coffees’ Rio Verde Farm is a natural sanctuary located in the mountains of the Mantiqueira range. In the interest of environmental stewardship and continuous improvement of production, Ipanema Coffees created the Environmental Monitoring Center (EMC) there, conceived as a center for management, analysis, and monitoring of factors related to water, soil, vegetation, climate, and residue. The EMC projects are divided in two courses of action: (1) research on the production system, featuring the innovative Coffee Garden, and (2) the strategic Water Factory program. “We created a state-of-the-art farm, dedicated to producing the best high-score coffees, taking advantage of the unique characteristics of Rio Verde Farm and of the Mantiqueira Mountains,” said Washington Rodrigues, Ipanema Coffees’ chief executive officer.

Ipanema Coffees’ Rio Verde Farm provides ideal conditions for the company to combine profitable production with environmental protection. Photo credit: Igor Vilela

The Serra da Mantiqueira mountain ridge region is part of the Mata Atlântica biome, a rich ecosystem with several species of flora and fauna that exist only in that region. Significant variations of landscapes and altitudes cause different climate conditions, which, together with fertile soils, favor the adaptation of different plants and animals. The EMC occupies a former henhouse, previously used for raising laying hens, an activity maintained during several decades on Rio Verde Farm to produce organic fertilizer. When Ipanema completely restored and adapted the

Ipanema Coffees’ Rio Verde Farm is located in the Mantiqueira Mountains of Brazil. Photo credit: Igor Vilela Information in Industry News may describe products offered by companies in the water industry. AWWA does not endorse these products, nor is it responsible for any claims made by the companies concerned. Unless noted otherwise, information is compiled from press releases submitted to Journal AWWA.

IND U S TR Y NEWS | FEB R U A R Y 2018 • 110: 2 | JO U R NA L AWWA

old henhouse, it put into practice the “3 Rs” concept: reduce, reuse, and recycle. The renovation project was developed to make conscious use of resources. The polycarbonate roof helps keep the proper temperature and provides ideal light for developing seeds and seedlings. The rainwater collected in gutters and stored in a tank is used to water larger seedlings in the hardening-off phase—adaptation to solar radiation oscillations—in an open area next to the shed before transplanting. An irrigation system is used for small seedlings that stay on tables, and the water surplus collected from the tables is also reused; it flows to a drainage system on the floor and flows to a tank used to water the larger seedlings.

COFFEE GARDEN One of the main EMC research projects related to production, technology, and innovation is the Coffee Garden, an experimental area of 1.98 ha at an altitude of 1.093 m above sea level, where 10,000 coffee trees of 48 varieties are planted and are being specifically tested for the Rio Verde Farm environment. The main goal is to evaluate the potential cupping quality, productivity, and economic feasibility of each coffee variety in Rio Verde Farm’s conditions.

WATER FACTORY Rio Verde Farm’s mountainous terrain makes it a natural collector of rainwater. Its water bodies and

springs disperse through a 773 ha reserve to form a natural water factory. These conditions inspired Ipanema Coffees to create the Water Factory, which focuses on the protection of springs and forests, including planting and monitoring of native species of trees. The program is divided into four projects: reservoir use, native seed technology, native tree seedling production, and enrichment of forest conservation areas with native species. The goal of the Water Factory is to ensure quality and increase the volume of water produced to feed the farm’s hydrographic chain. Some of this water is stored in a reservoir for use in coffee processing after harvesting, and for the drip irrigation of coffee plantations. The Water Factory program also produces seedlings of native species for spring area revegetation. Ipanema Coffees’ technical team checks Rio Verde’s basins for changes in water quantity and quality over time, identifying and monitoring the efficiency of the forests in water production.

VISITORS WELCOME The coffee company’s agricultural and environmental protection activities can be seen by visitors when they walk on the farm’s observation trails at Rio Verde Farm. They can witness firsthand the importance of Ipanema Coffees’ ongoing investments in preserving nature.

Reservoir Added to Register of Historic Places The New York State Historic Review Board voted unanimously to add the Ridgewood Reservoir to the New York State Register of Historic Places. The application to list the site on the National Historic Register has been submitted to the National Park Service with approval anticipated for April 2018. NYC H2O, a nonprofit organization that provides education programs on New York City’s water system and ecology, wrote the National Historic Register application for the reservoir. Since 2014, NYC H2O has brought 3,000 Brooklyn and Queens students on free Water Ecology and Engineering Field Trips to the Ridgewood Reservoir to experience New York City’s water system up close and to learn to appreciate their city’s reliance on natural and engineered systems for clean water. The Ridgewood Reservoir is a 50-acre natural oasis that serves diverse communities on the border of Brooklyn and Queens. It was built in 1859 to supply the once independent City of Brooklyn with high-quality water. The ambitions of Brooklyn’s builders, in the face of their city’s growth, created an expanding reservoir system that routed water from Queens and Nassau

7 8 IN DUST RY N E W S | F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 8 • 1 1 0 :2 | J O U R N A L AWWA

Counties. Its increasingly vast scale still did not suffice to quench the needs of the fourth-largest city in the country. Water thus helped drive Brooklyn’s 1898 consolidation with New York City. The Ridgewood Reservoir became obsolete with the addition of new reservoirs in the Catskill Mountains in the 1950s. By 1989, the reservoir was mostly drained. Since then, nature has taken its own course and has provided New Yorkers with a case study in ecological succession. Now, at the Ridgewood Reservoir, a lush and dense forest has grown in the two outside basins—each with a unique variety of flora—while a freshwater pond with waterfowl sits in the middle basin. That pond is on the path of the Atlantic Flyway and is an important source of freshwater to migrating birds. Today we see a 19th-century feat of engineering whose intact, large basins are surrounded by parkland. According to NYC H2O, the Ridgewood Reservoir illustrates a cautionary and ultimately inspiring tale about how citizens can work together to protect a site whose adaptive reuse ensues from its being reclaimed by nature.

Young Water Leaders Meet in Cape Town More than 500 young water sector leaders from around the world met in December in Cape Town, South Africa, to find solutions to the world’s growing water challenges. The eighth annual International Young Water Professionals Conference, hosted by the International Water Association (IWA), brought together water science and research with the public and private sectors and policymakers to drive global water cooperation and collaboration on water solutions. “The water sector is critical to ensuring a sustainable water future for all, but the sector faces a human resources crisis, particularly in low- and middle-income countries,” said Kirsten de Vette of the IWA. “The water sector needs to attract, engage, and retain young water professionals as one of the key contributions to solving the growing water crisis. They are current and future leaders who are critical to delivering the solutions for a sustainable water future.” The Young Water Professionals Conference provides a platform to debate the challenges and solutions facing the sector and the role of young professionals within it. It offers learning and professional development

opportunities and sets the stage for networking among young professionals. “We have a significant opportunity to ensure a sustainable water future,” said Lloyd Fisher-Jeffes, conference chair. “Fresh water is critical for human wellbeing, as well as for healthy ecosystems and economic growth. Yet water scarcity, as Cape Town knows from its current prolonged drought, is increasingly the reality. This meeting is an opportunity for young professionals from around the world to debate the solutions to the emerging water crisis.” The conference featured experts from all areas of the water and development sectors: • Gustaf Olsson of Lund University, Sweden, an expert on smart water systems • Diane d’Arras, IWA president, international water expert • Faith Matshidiso Hashatse, chair of the board of Rand Water and head of a water utility in South Africa • Richard Ashley, director of EcoFutures • Adriana Marais, theoretical physicist and head of innovation at SAP Africa

BUSINESS BRIEFS The Santa Clara Valley Water District and City of Sunnyvale, Calif., completed installation of a booster pump station at Sunnyvale’s San Lucar Pump Station and 2.5 mi of recycled water pipeline underneath Wolfe Road. This project expands recycled water infrastructure in Sunnyvale and helps develop drought-proof water supplies for the future. The pipeline was designed to allow for the potential expansion of Sunnyvale’s recycled water system for parks and business customers and extension into the City of Cupertino. At full capacity, up to 10 mil gal of recycled water can be delivered through this new system, helping divert water from the San Francisco Bay and further protecting drinking water supplies. The total project cost $15 million and was funded by the Santa Clara Valley Water District ($4.1 million),

Apple Inc. ($4.8 million), the City of Sunnyvale ($2.1 million), and California Water Service Co. ($1.5 million). The water district and Sunnyvale jointly applied for and received a grant from the California Department of Water Resources ($2.5 million). Envirosight has released a white paper on managing the cost of ownership for sewer inspection crawlers. The report highlights what influences cost of ownership and provides tips for keeping the cost low. 7 Secrets to Low Cost-ofOwnership for Sewer Crawlers details steps operators and supervisors can take to minimize cost of ownership. It examines the qualities of a crawler that can affect cost of ownership, as well as the impact of operating techniques, cleaning, care, and preventative maintenance.

Xylem Inc. has entered into a definitive agreement to acquire all the issued and outstanding shares of Pure Technologies Ltd. Pure Technologies’ board of directors has unanimously approved the transaction and recommends that Pure Technologies shareholders vote in favor of the transaction. Earlier in 2017, Xylem and Pure Technologies entered into an exclusive commercial partnership in which Xylem represents Pure Technologies’ products and services in parts of the Middle East, India, and Southeast Asia. In other company news, the Xylem Water Prize 2017 was awarded to the national team of India at the 14th annual International Junior Science Olympiad (IJSO). The theme of this year’s IJSO was “Water and Sustainability,” and the competition took place on December 4–11 in the Netherlands, where more than

IND U S TR Y NEWS | FEB R U A R Y 2018 • 110: 2 | JO U R NA L AWWA

300 students aged 15 years or younger from 50 different countries tested their scientific knowledge and skills. Rainmaker Worldwide Inc. has partnered with Strengthening Participatory Organization (SPO), a national not-for-profit organization headquartered in Islamabad, Pakistan, to bring safe drinking water to marginalized communities in the neediest areas of the country. Per the terms of this agreement, SPO will facilitate the identification of national and international organizations to participate in the program. On the basis of current projections, the first implementations and freshwater delivery will take place in the third quarter of 2018. After field studies by Rainmaker and SPO, both Rainmaker Waterto-Water and Air-to-Water units were selected for implementation. Each Water-to-Water machine will provide up to 150,000 L of drinking water per day, while each Airto-Water machine will deliver up to 20,000 L/day. All will be powered by a combination of wind and solar energy to provide the most energyefficient and cost-effective solutions for delivering affordable water. The Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago (MWRD; Chicago, Ill.) and US Army Corps of Engineers have completed the first phase of the McCook Reservoir project, a key component of MWRD’s plan to reduce flood damage and sewer overflow pollution in the Chicago area. Black & Veatch has provided planning, design, engineering, and construction support on various aspects of MWRD’s Tunnel and Reservoir Plan (TARP) since 2001, including design and construction services for the McCook Main Tunnel System that connects TARP’s Mainstream Tunnel to the McCook Reservoir. McCook Reservoir Stage I provides an

additional 3.5 bil gal of storage capacity to capture flood water and combined sewer overflows (CSOs) and is estimated to provide $114 million annually in flood damage and CSO pollution reduction benefits. TARP reduces flooding by storing CSOs, which during wet weather events would otherwise flow into and pollute Lake Michigan and the region’s waterways, until they are able to be treated. As a result, regional water quality is also enhanced. RJN Group Inc. has been selected by the City of St. Peters, Mo., for its sanitary sewer flow monitoring program. RJN will implement a comprehensive flow monitoring program to measure and evaluate the city’s future sewage conveyance and pumping needs, and identify where inflow/ infiltration (I/I) may be contributing to system operations. The flow monitoring program will also provide critical information to help the city prioritize future pipeline and manhole rehabilitation needs. RJN services include installing and maintaining flow meters and rain gauges, conducting robust I/I analysis, and providing solutions to improve the system and address I/I. In Florida, North Miami Beach (NMB) Water recently broke ground on the construction of improvements to the Norwood Water Treatment Plant. The Reliability Improvements Project will enhance operations and long‐ term viability of the water supply and treatment system. Among other components of the water treatment plant, this $11 million investment will upgrade the following systems: generators, electrical components, chemical feed systems, the filtration system, instrumentation and control systems, pumping systems, and finished water storage. The project is anticipated to be completed in late 2018.

8 0 IN DUST RY N E W S | F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 8 • 1 1 0 :2 | J O U R N A L AWWA

Western Municipal Water District (WMWD; Riverside, Calif.) works with local colleges and universities to offer scholarships to students in Riverside County. Local institutions, including University of California Riverside, California State University San Bernardino, Riverside City College, and Norco College all offer endowed scholarships from WMWD for students studying a water-related subject or planning to pursue a career in a water-related field. The following students have been awarded scholarships from WMWD’s program in 2017: Kyle Peña, California State University San Bernardino; Eileen Tovar, University of California Riverside; Michael Pimentel, Riverside City College; and Joshua Dailey, Norco College. Heartland Water Technology Inc. has signed a contract with the Three Rivers Solid Waste Management Authority to install a Heartland Concentrator at the Three Rivers Regional Landfill near Pontotoc, Miss., to treat landfill leachate. Heartland will capture and use the thermal energy from Three Rivers’ existing landfill gas-to-energy plant. ARCOS LLC has implemented its software-as-a-service CallOut and Scheduling solution at the Chattanooga, Tenn.-based Tennessee American Water to automate how the utility’s distribution department responds to customer emergencies. For Tennessee American Water, a subsidiary of American Water, responding to emergencies includes making calls to the utility’s employees to locate available crews to restore water main breaks and shut off meters during after-hours, unplanned events. With ARCOS, Tennessee American Water can reduce response time to fix water main breaks.

The San Diego County Water Authority’s board of directors voted unanimously to extend an exchange agreement with the Metropolitan Water District (MWD) of Southern California by 10 years, requiring MWD to continue transporting conserved Imperial Irrigation District water to San Diego County through 2047. By extending the exchange agreement with MWD, the Water Authority gains 2 million acre-ft of conserved Colorado River water for delivery to the San Diego region between 2037 and 2047. Without that water, the San Diego region could face significant supply shortages during future dry years.

Singapore to dramatically reduce potable water demand and contribute to the island nation’s goal of water self-sufficiency. The systems, designed and installed by local UV Pure representative Netatech Pte. Ltd., will capture, store, and treat rainwater to a standard that is safe for landscape irrigation. Each of the 78 units on the property will be equipped with a fully automated, chemical-free rainwater harvesting and disinfection system that can be managed by the homeowners. The systems will help reduce total potable water demand in the complex by an estimated 233,600 m3 (61.7 mil gal) of water per year, along with other water-saving initiatives.

An innovative rainwater harvesting system, equipped with UV Pure disinfection, will enable residents at a new housing property in

In Waves For Water’s recent field update, it announced that, as part of its efforts in Puerto Rico following the hurricanes that struck

in 2017, it has teamed up with Banco Santander. Working with Santander employees, Waves For Water has been able to fully activate the communities of Utuado and Humacao. In Utuado, in addition to the new Santander implementations, Waves For Water followed up on earlier remediation conducted there that had helped 30 families. The follow-up phase is viewed as the most important part of the program, essential for training during the initial implementation of water filtration systems to take hold. The field update summarized the organization’s efforts in Puerto Rico as having implemented more than 6,000 filter systems and 22 community-size “water depot” filtration systems across 78 communities. https://doi.org/10.1002/awwa.1008

HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS IS NOW

COUNT ON CORE & MAIN’S

DEPENDABLE EXPERTISE Solutions and support you can count on.

coreandmain.com PARAAWWA12122017

IND U S TR Y NEWS | FEB R U A R Y 2018 • 110: 2 | JO U R NA L AWWA

Media Pulse

Adsorption Processes for Water Treatment and Purification Adrián Bonilla-Petriciolet, Didilia Ileana Mendoza-Castillo, and Hilda Elizabeth Reynel-Ávila, editors This book provides researchers and graduate students with an overview of the latest developments in and applications of adsorption processes for water treatment and purification. In particular, it covers current topics in connection with the modeling and design of adsorption processes, and the synthesis and application of cost-effective adsorbents for the removal of relevant aquatic pollutants. The book describes recent advances and alternatives to improve the performance and efficacy of this water purification technique. In addition, selected chapters are devoted to discussing the reliable modeling and analysis of adsorption data, which are relevant for real-life applications to industrial effluents and groundwater. Available from Springer International Publishing, www. springerprofessional.de; ISBN: 9783-319-58135 (2017, hard cover, 256 pp., $189.00).

Cost of Maintaining Green Infrastructure Jane Clary and Holly Piza, editors Cost of Maintaining Green Infrastructure reports findings from a survey and literature review to capture and quantify the expenses associated with operating and maintaining sustainable stormwater‐management technologies. Green infrastructure (GI) practices use processes found in the natural environment to manage stormwater with the end goal of reducing stormwater runoff volumes and corresponding pollutant loading from urban surfaces. Because GI installations require ongoing maintenance to remain effective, the authors set out to compile data to support whole‐life cost estimates for a suite of small‐scale, distributed GI technologies, with a particular emphasis on maintenance costs. To develop this report, the authors contacted 30 state and local agencies to gather information on GI program structure, types and frequency of maintenance activities, maintenance program

Information in Media Pulse may describe products offered by companies in the water industry. AWWA does not endorse these products, nor is it responsible for any claims made by the companies concerned.

ME DIA PUL SE | F EB R U A R Y 2 0 1 8 • 1 1 0 :2 | J O U R N A L AW WA

costs, data tracking approaches, and budgeting. These topics are included in the book: • Survey results from 10 communities that provided data on GI maintenance costs • Descriptions of GI programs in 11 communities not yet able to provide cost data • Resources on GI practices available from the US Environmental Protection Agency • Descriptions of nine readily available cost‐estimating tools and resources • Recommendations to standardize GI cost reporting This book is a resource for environmental engineers and managers, urban planners, and government officials working with states and communities interested in planning and developing green stormwater infrastructure to manage urban runoff. Available from the American Society of Civil Engineers, www. asce.org/publications; ISBN: 978-07844-1489-7 (2017, soft cover, 74 pp., $60.00). Performance Comparison of Biogas Anaerobic Digesters Using Next Generation DNA Sequencing Microbe Detectives Technical and Operational Advisory Group Microbe Detectives recently published its inaugural microbiome study, Performance Comparison of Biogas Anaerobic Digesters Using Next Generation DNA Sequencing. This study used 60 samples from 21 digesters representing a variety of industries, feedstocks, reactor design, and operational conditions. Microbial community data and digester operation and outcome data were used to understand the relationships between operation, community members, and outcomes.

Each digester and site study had specific digester microbiomes that were more similar to each other than to other digesters. This suggests that microbial community results are site-specific. The community composition associated with optimum results will vary between sites. Despite this limitation, some general community trends were observed across the samples studied, and these may be used to make general conclusions about digester operation and community structure: • Higher relative abundances of total archaea, pseudomonads, and commomonads correlated to higher percent methane (CH4) in produced gas. • Thermophilic conditions and blanket-type reactors correlated to higher archaea relative abundances and higher percent CH4 in produced gas. • Chemical oxygen demand removal correlated directly to CH4 production. • Higher volatile fatty acids (VFA)-to-alkalinity ratios and lower pH in the ranges observed (pH 6.7 to 7.8 and VFA: alkalinity 0.04–0.24) correlated to higher archaea relative abundances. • Digesters treating municipal wastes harbored more diverse

and even communities than digesters treating only industrial wastes, possibly due to the regular addition of wasteactivated sludge. On the basis of these results, several key microbial indicators were identified for use in tracking changes in a digester microbiome: • Community diversity (number of microbe types) • Community evenness (how evenly microbe types are distributed) • Total relative abundance of total methanogens (total archaea) • Key methanogen groups: Methanobacterium spp., Methanosaeta spp., Methanothermobacter spp. This report also proposes several key performance indexes based on these indicators to help operators use microbial community analysis to inform and improve system operation. Available from Microbe Detectives, https://microbe detectives.com/2017-digester-studyresults (2017, 64 pp., $2,500). Sustainability in the Water–Energy–Food Nexus Anik Bhaduri, Claudia Ringler, Ines Dombrowsky, Rabi Mohtar, and Waltina Scheumann There is no doubt that the interconnectedness between food, energy, water security, and environmental sustainability exists and is becoming amplified with increased globalization. It has been recognized that efforts to address only one part of a systemic problem by neglecting other inherently interlinked aspects may not lead to desirable and sustainable outcomes. From this perspective, policy- and decisionmaking requires a nexus

approach that reduces trade-offs and builds synergies across sectors, and helps reduce costs and increase benefits for humans and nature compared with independent approaches to the management of water, energy, food, and the environment. In the past, work related to the water–energy–food nexus has looked at the interactions between water and food or water and energy, but there has been a reluctance to bring forward a broader systematic perspective that captures the multiple sectors and resource dependencies while understanding the cost to the environment if we neglect these linkages. This book is a compilation of

13 papers published previously as a special issue of Water International. It contains significant pieces of work on the water– energy–food nexus, focusing on relevant tools, solutions, and governance at local and broader human scales. Available from CRC Press/ Routledge, www.crcpress.com; ISBN: 9781138222076 (2016, hard cover, 236 pp., $155.00). https://doi.org/10.1002/awwa.1016

M ED IA P U LS E | FEB R U A R Y 2018 • 110: 2 | JO U R NA L AWWA

AWWA Section Meetings

AWWA Section

2018 Meetings

Section Contact

Alabama–Mississippi*

Oct. 14–16, Birmingham, Ala.

Alaska*

May 7–9, Girdwood, Alaska

Angie Monteleone, (907) 561-9777

Arizona*

May 2–4, Phoenix, Ariz.

Debbie Muse, (480) 987-4888

Atlantic Canada*

Sept. 16–19, Membertou, N.S.

Clara Shea, (902) 434-6002

British Columbia*

May 13–15, Penticton, B.C.

Carlie Hucul, (604) 630-0011

California–Nevada*

Oct. 22–25, Palm Springs, Calif.

Tim Worley, (909) 291-2102

Chesapeake*

Aug. 28–31, Ocean City, Md.

Rachel Ellis, (443) 924-1032

Connecticut

May 23–25, Brewster, Mass.

Romana Longo, (860) 604-8996

Florida*

Nov. 25–29, Championsgate, Fla.

Peggy Guingona, (407) 957-8449

Georgia*

July 15–18, Savannah, Ga.

Eric Osborne, (678) 583-3904

Hawaii*

Feb. 6–8, Honolulu, Hawaii

Susan Uyesugi (808) 356-1246

Illinois*

Mar. 19–22, Springfield, Ill.

Laurie Dougherty, (866) 521-3595, ext. 1

Indiana*

•

Dawn Keyler, (317) 331-8032

Intermountain*

Oct. 10–12, Midway, Utah

Alane Boyd, (801) 580-9692

Iowa*

Oct. 16–18, Dubuque, Iowa

David Scott, (515) 283-2169

Kansas*

Aug. 28–31, Topeka, Kans.

Hank Corcoran Boyer, (785) 826-9163

Kentucky–Tennessee*

July 8–11, Nashville, Tenn.

Kay Sanborn, (502) 550-2992

Mexico

November, date and location TBD

Alfredo Ortiz Garcia, 52(812) 033-8036

Michigan*

Sept. 11–14, Kalamazoo, Mich.

Bonnifer Ballard, (517) 292-2912, ext. 1

Minnesota*

Sept. 18–21, Duluth, Minn.

Mona Cavalcoli, (612) 216-5004

Missouri*

Mar. 25–28, Osage Beach, Mo.

Gailla Rogers, (816) 668-8561

Montana*

May 15–17, Missoula, Mont.

Robin Matthews-Barnes, (406) 546-5496

Nebraska*

Nov. 7–8, Kearney, Neb.

Mary Poe, (402) 471-1003

New England (NEWWA)*

Sept. 16–19, Stowe, Vt.

Katelyn Todesco, (508) 893-7979

New Jersey*

Mar. 20–23, Atlantic City, N.J.

Mona Cavalcoli, (866) 436-1120

New York*

Apr. 10–12, Saratoga Springs, N.Y.

Jenny Ingrao, (315) 455-2614

North Carolina*

Nov. 4–7, Raleigh, N.C.

Catrice Jones, (919) 784-9030, ext. 1002

North Dakota*

Oct. 16–18, Grand Forks, N.D.

David Bruschwein, (701) 328-5259

Ohio*

Aug. 27–30, Columbus, Ohio

Laura Carter, (844) 766-2845

Ontario*

Apr. 29–May 2, Niagara Falls, Ont.

Michéle Grenier, (866) 975-0575

Pacific Northwest

Apr. 24–27, Tacoma, Wash.

Kyle Kihs, (503) 760-6460

Pennsylvania*

May 8–10, Pocono Manor, Pa.

Don Hershey, (717) 774-8870, ext. 101

Puerto Rico*

May 17, San Juan, P.R.

Odalis De La Vega, (787) 900-9737

Quebec*

Mar. 13–14, Ville de Québec, Que.

Stephanie Petit, (514) 270-7110, ext. 329

Rocky Mountain*

Sept. 15–18, Denver, Colo.

Ann Guiberson, (720) 404-0818

South Carolina*

Mar. 10–14, Myrtle Beach, S.C.

Phyllis Peterson, (803) 358-0658

South Dakota*

Sept. 12–14, Deadwood, S.D.

Jodi Johanson, (605) 997-2098

Southwest*

Oct. 28–30, Baton Rouge, La.

Don Broussard, (337) 849-0613

Texas*

Apr. 22–26, San Antonio, Tex.

Mike Howe, (512) 238-9292

Virginia*

Sept. 10–13, Virginia Beach, Va.

Geneva Hudgins, (434) 386-3190

West Virginia*

May 20–23, Davis, W.Va.

Shan Ferrell, (304) 340-2006

Western Canada*

Sept. 18–21, Winnipeg, Man.

Audrey Arisman, (403) 709-0064

Wisconsin*

Sept. 12–14, Madison, Wis.

Jill Duchniak, (414) 423-7000

*Includes exhibit; for information, call the section contact (see far right column). • Indicates that the 2018 meeting has already occurred. TBD—to be determined 84

AWWA SE CT ION ME E T ING S | F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 8 • 1 1 0 :2 | J O U R N AL AWWA

James D. Miller, (256) 310-3646

https://doi.org/10.1002/awwa.1009

Buyers’ Resource Guide Find a company or product quickly Visit the Buyers’ Resource Guide online at www.awwa.org/journal

Products and Services Total Water Solutions

rS Wate olutio l n ta ®

BUYERS’ RESOURCE Pr

Scan to access online version

Dedicated to the World’s Most Important Resource®

uct

GUIDE v S er

Thank you for doing business with the advertisers and members of AWWA. B U YER S ’ R ES O U R C E G U ID E | FEB R U A R Y 2018 • 110: 2 | JO U R NA L AWWA

Buyers’ Resource Guide

ADVERTISING SECTION

Analytical Services and Testing Labs LEGIONELLA Special Pathogens Laboratory specializes in the detection, control, and remediation of Legionella and waterborne pathogens. Internationally renowned for clinical and environmental expertise in Legionnaires’ disease prevention, our integrated platform of evidence-based solutions for Total Legionella Control includes Legionella and waterborne pathogen testing, consulting and education, and ZEROutbreak® protection (ASHRAE 188 compliance). (877) 775-7284; www.SpecialPathogensLab.com.

Associations DUCTILE IRON PIPE The Ductile Iron Pipe Research Association (DIPRA) provides accurate, reliable, and essential engineering information about iron pipe to water and wastewater professionals. Ductile iron pipe is the best answer to America’s water infrastructure needs, and DIPRA’s mission is to help others appreciate its advantages. Contact us at www.dipra.org. AWWA Service Provider Member

Certification ACCREDITED PRODUCT CERTIFICATION, ANALYSIS, AND TESTING Water Quality Association’s Product Certification is the recognized label for both Gold Seal and Sustainability Certification. Both programs are accredited by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and Standards Council of Canada (SCC) to test and certify products for conformance with the NSF/ANSI standards. Contact us at goldseal@wqa.org. AWWA Service Provider Member

Certification ANALYTICAL SERVICES, PRODUCT TESTING, AND CERTIFICATION Underwriters Laboratories Inc (UL). UL is your trusted partner for certification of products used in the water treatment and distribution system. UL is a fully accredited, third-party certification body that certifies a wide variety of products that are directly added to or come into contact with drinking water. For more information visit www.UL.com/water. 333 Pfingsten Rd., Northbrook, IL 60062 USA; (847) 664-3796; waterinfo@ul.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

BUY E RS’ RE SOURC E G U I D E | F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 8 • 1 1 0 :2 | J OU R NA L AWWA

Chemical Feed Equipment, Systems, and Handling CHLORINE AND CHEMICAL FEED SCALES Force Flow manufactures chemical monitoring and control systems for chlorine, hypo, fluoride, polymer, caustic, and all other chemicals used in water treatment. Weight-based (scales) and ultrasonic systems for monitoring cylinders, ton containers, day tanks, carboys, and bulk storage tanks. Safely and accurately monitor chemical usage, feed rate, and level. Automate day tank refilling with the Wizard ARC Controller, and add chemical feed flexibility with the new MERLIN Automatic Onsite Chemical Dilution System. Contact us for more information at (800) 893-6723 or by fax at (925) 686-6713, or visit www.forceflow.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

PRECISION INSTRUMENTS AND DRY CHEMICAL FEEDERS Eagle Microsystems Inc. specializes in the engineering and design of dry chemical feed systems. The VF-100 Dry Chemical Feeder is a rugged directdrive feeder that is available with a wide range of options and accessories to meet any project needs. Eagle Microsystems Inc. also designs and manufactures weighing products, analytical equipment, and process control equipment. Eagle Microsystems Inc., 366 Circle of Progress Dr., Pottstown, PA 19464 USA; phone: (610) 323-2250; fax: (610) 323-0114; Info@EagleMicrosystems.com; www.EagleMicrosystems.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

WATER TREATMENT Blue-White® Industries is a leading manufacturer of peristaltic and diaphragm chemical metering pumps. These pumps are designed to handle challenges associated with chemicals used for the treatment of water and wastewater. They have features and capabilities the industry requires: accurate feed, high pressure ratings, and advanced electronics. (714) 893-8529; sales@blue-white.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

Chemicals ANALYTICAL SERVICES AND CHEMICAL SOLUTIONS PROVIDER American Water Chemicals (AWC) manufactures specialty chemicals for pretreatment and maintenance of membrane systems and is ISO 9001:2008 certified. We improve membrane system performance and optimize cost of operation by diagnosing and solving complex problems using advanced analytical methods. AWC is a pioneer in advanced membrane autopsy techniques and investigative services. For more information call (813) 246-5448; info@membranechemicals.com; visit www.membranechemicals.com.

MEMBRANE CLEANERS International Products Corp. manufactures membrane cleaners that restore 100% flux at safe pH ranges. Our cleaners are compatible with UF, RO, and ceramic membranes used for food and beverage, heavy oil, automotive, wastewater, water recycling, desalination, medical, and other applications. For information or free samples, call Michele Christian at (609) 386-8770 or e-mail membrane@ipcol.com.

B U YER S ’ R ES O U R C E G U ID E | FEB R U A R Y 2018 • 110: 2 | JO U R NA L AWWA

Chemicals WATER TREATMENT Chemtrade Solutions. Chemtrade Solutions LLC manufactures and markets a variety of inorganic chemicals for our North American municipal and industrial water treatment customers. Products include • Aluminum sulfate (alum) • Aluminum chlorohydrate (ACH) • Polyaluminum choride (PACl/PACs) • Ferric sulfate • Calcium hydroxide • Liquid ammonium sulfate Contact us at WaterChem@chemtradelogistics.com or (800) 255-7589. Visit our website: www.chemtradelogistics.com.

Coatings and Linings LEAD REDUCTION, LEAK PREVENTION AND CORROSION CONTROL The patented ePIPE process restores pipes in place, providing superior leak protection and reduction of lead and copper leaching from underground and in-building water supply pipes. Pipes protected with the ePIPE epoxy-lined piping system reduce leaching of toxic lead and copper into drinking water to well below EPA and WHO cutoff levels. Contact: Virginia Steverson, vsteverson@aceduraflo.com; direct, USA and Canada: 714-564-7730; office: (888) 775-0220; cell: 714-795-4767. AWWA Service Provider Member

Computer Software and Services COMPLIANCE REPORTING AND PROCESS CONTROL DATA SYSTEMS Water information systems by KISTERS integrate separate water/wastewater databases (SCADA, LIMS, metering, etc.) to improve data quality, save time, and increase ease of water quality compliance reporting. Automate QA/QC, processing, and sharing of information—including stormwater, ecological, GIS, and raster climate data—for collaborative and defensible decisions. Details at www.KISTERS.net/NA/compliance. AWWA Service Provider Member

CONSULTANTS Copperleaf provides decision analytics to companies managing critical infrastructure. Our enterprise software solutions leverage operational, financial, and asset data to help our clients make investment decisions that deliver the highest business value. Copperleaf Technologies, 2920 Virtual Way, Ste. 140, Vancouver, BC V5M 0C4 Canada; (888) 465-5323; marketing@copperleaf.com; www.copperleaf.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

BUY E RS’ RE SOURC E G U I D E | F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 8 • 1 1 0 :2 | J OU R NA L AWWA

Computer Software and Services HYDRAULIC MODELING Bentley’s fully integrated water and wastewater software solution addresses the needs of owner–operators and engineers who contribute to the water infrastructure life cycle. Bentley provides modeling, design, and management software for water distribution, wastewater, and stormwater systems; transient analysis; GIS and mapping; and road and plant infrastructure. For more information, visit www.bentley.com/wtr. AWWA Service Provider Member

ONLINE COMMUNITY PLATFORM FluksAqua. More than a community of water professionals. Founded in 2015, with offices in Montreal and Paris, our rapidly growing community already receives over 20,000 visitors per month from more than 50 countries while gaining more and more followers. We have the experience of our community at heart. FluksAqua is the world’s first online collaborative platform designed by and for water utility professionals. Our goal is to transform drinking water, water management, and wastewater treatment through the sharing of knowledge and information. For more information, visit www.fluksaqua.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

Consultants FULL-SERVICE WATER AND WASTEWATER CONSULTING SERVICES A $2 billion global management, engineering, and development firm, Mott MacDonald delivers sustainable outcomes in transportation, buildings, power, oil and gas, water and wastewater, environment, education, health, international development, and digital infrastructure. Mott MacDonald in North America (www.mottmac.com/americas) is a vibrant infrastructure development and engineering company with 64 offices. AWWA Service Provider Member

Contractors FULL-SERVICE SUPPLIER AND INSTALLER Unifilt Corp. Since 1977, with more than 4,000 installations operating worldwide, Unifilt has provided state-of-the-art solutions for potable/ wastewater treatment facilities. Complete packaged solutions (media removal, installation, and guaranteed component compatibility): • Vacuum/hydraulic/manual removal • Hydraulic/manual installation • Underdrain cleaning/evaluation/repair • Evaluation of existing materials/systems • The Unifilt Air Scour • NSF-approved anthracite, sand, garnet, gravel, wheeler balls, and uni-liners that meet or exceed AWWA B100-09. (800) 223-2882; www.Unifilt.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

B U YER S ’ R ES O U R C E G U ID E | FEB R U A R Y 2018 • 110: 2 | JO U R NA L AWWA

Corrosion Control, Cathodic Protection Equipment, and Materials GALVANIC ANODES (MAGNESIUM AND ZINC) Interprovincial/International Corrosion Control has manufactured/distributed the following corrosion control products since 1957: • Anodes—magnesium/zinc • Impressed current anodes • Thermitweld products • Test stations, rectifiers • Professional engineering design • Plus many other industry-related products For superior quality and service, contact ICCC, Ontario, Quebec/Maritimes, Alberta: phone: (905) 634-7751; fax: (905) 333-4313. Lewiston, N.Y.: (800) 699-8771. Contact@Rustrol.com; www.Rustrol.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

Distribution DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM EFFICIENCY SUEZ Advanced Solutions (Utility Service Co. Inc.). Our distribution program includes condition assessments, leak location, V&H exercising, pipe rehabilitation, ice pigging, and smart water solutions, helping you reduce costs, improve operations, and make the right decisions to manage your system. Phone: (855) 526-4413; fax (888) 600-5876; help@utilityservice.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

SERVICE LINE CONNECTIONS Whether you are tapping a large-diameter water main or installing a new residential service line on a distribution system, Mueller Co. manufactures a complete line of solutions including drilling and tapping machines, tapping sleeves, tapping valves, service brass, service saddles, meters, setters, and boxes. moreinfo@muellercompany.com; www.muellercompany.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

Disinfection Equipment and Systems OZONE The Aqua ElectrOzone™ ozone generation system is applied in potable water, wastewater/water reuse and industrial applications requiring ozone treatment for taste and odor control, bleaching/color removal, oxidation and disinfection. For smaller applications, the Aqua Electrozone M-Series is a modular system capable of ozone production ranging from15 ppd to 540 ppd. (815) 654-2501; www.aquaelectrozone.com.

BUY E RS’ RE SOURC E G U I D E | F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 8 • 1 1 0 :2 | J OU R NA L AWWA

Engineering Services WATER AND WASTEWATER Greeley and Hansen is a leader in developing innovative engineering, architecture, and management solutions for a wide array of complex water, wastewater, and infrastructure challenges. The firm has built upon more than 100 years of proven engineering experience in all phases of project development and implementation to become a premier global provider of comprehensive services in the water sector. Dedicated to designing better urban environments worldwide. Contact: Jim Sullivan, (800) 837-9779 or jsullivan@greeley-hansen.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

Filtration ACTIVATED CARBON Haycarb USA Inc. is one of the world largest manufacturers of coconut shell– based activated carbons. Our production facilities are NSF and ISO certified and meet AWWA standards. Haycarb has been in the business for over four decades and the products have been proved for drinking water applications. For more information on Haycarb products, please call toll-free 855-HAYCARB (429-2272). AWWA Service Provider Member

ADVANCED ARSENIC REMOVAL SYSTEMS ISOLUX® is a proven, affordable well-head water treatment solution designed specifically to remove arsenic. All ISOLUX systems use cartridges filled with a patented zirconium filter media that has been verified for 99% to zero arsenic removal. There’s no backwashing, and practically no maintenance beyond cartridge replacement. (480) 315-8430; sales@isolux-arsenicremoval.com.

BIOLOGICAL FILTRATION AdEdge Water Technologies specializes in the design, manufacturing, and supply of water treatment solutions, specialty medias, legacy, and innovative technologies that remove arsenic, iron, manganese, nitrate, perchlorate, radionuclides, and other contaminants from water for municipal, private, and industrial clients. Please contact us at (866) 8ADEDGE or online at www.adedgetech.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

FILTER HOUSING AND CARTRIDGES Meets AWWA drinking water standards! Harmsco proudly supplies EPA LT2compliant filtration installations across the United States, North America, and the same standards worldwide! For more information on Harmsco products, please call us: (800) 327-3248, email us: sales@harmsco.com, or visit us: www.harmsco.com.

B U YER S ’ R ES O U R C E G U ID E | FEB R U A R Y 2018 • 110: 2 | JO U R NA L AWWA

Filtration FILTER MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION SUEZ Advanced Solutions (Utility Service Co. Inc.) provides filter condition assessments, media sampling, cleaning and replacement, concrete and steel rehabilitation, underdrains, and filter equipment. We handle all your filter needs from a one-time media cleaning to full filter house rehabilitation and maintenance. Phone: (855) 526-4413; fax: (888) 600-5876; help@utilityservice.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

FILTER MEDIA Since 1935 Anthracite Filter Media Co. has been providing anthracite, sand, gravel, garnet, greensand, and activated carbon that meet or exceed AWWA and NSF standards. Most materials are warehoused at several locations throughout the country, facilitating quick delivery. For more information, please contact us at 6326 West Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90043-3803 USA; (800) 722-0407 or (310) 258-9116; fax: (310) 258-9111; www.AnthraciteFilter.com; sales@AnthraciteFilter.com.

FILTER MEDIA Anthrafilter has provided filter media replacement across North America since 1976. We offer service to all types of filters including gravity, pressure, traveling bridge-type systems, and others; underdrain repairs; removal, disposal, supply, and installation; as well as anthracite filter media, filter sands and gravels, garnet, greensand, activated carbon, etc. Our efficient, clean, and safe methods reduce filter downtime. We provide quality, efficiency, and customer satisfaction. USA: phone: (800) 998-8555 or (716) 285-5680; fax: (716) 285-5681. Canada: phone: (519) 751-1080; fax: (519) 751-0617. www.anthrafilter.net. AWWA Service Provider Member

FILTER MEDIA CEI is your worldwide leader in providing filter media to the water filtration industry. Anthracite, gravel, sand, garnet, greensand plus, activated carbons, resins, and much more. All exceed AWWA B100 Standards. All are NSF approved. USA and Overseas. Same day proposals. Excellent customer service. We are your “One Company For All Your Filter Media.” Phone: (800) 344-5770; fax: (888) 204-9656; Rick@ceifiltration.com; www.CEIfiltration.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

FILTER MEDIA, ANTHRACITE Carbonite Filter Corp. produces superior-quality anthracite filter media with uniformities of 1.40 or less guaranteed. Carbonite has been used successfully by thousands of municipal and industrial filter plants. Our products meet ANSI/AWWA B100 Standards and are NSF Standard 61 certified. POB #1, Delano, PA 18220 USA; phone: (570) 467-3350; fax: (570) 467-7272; carbon1@ptd.net; www.carbonitecorp.com.

BUY E RS’ RE SOURC E G U I D E | F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 8 • 1 1 0 :2 | J OU R NA L AWWA

Filtration FILTER MEDIA, ANTHRACITE CEI Anthracite manufactures the highest quality anthracite. Our anthracite is custom manufactured to your size and UC (uniformity coefficient) requirements. Our anthracite can be made to a UC as low as 1.3. Our dry anthracite is only 50 pounds per cubic foot, unlike the water soaked anthracite from other plants. No paying for water weight here. NSF Certified. Exceeds AWWA B-100 Standards. (570) 459-7005; Rick@ceifiltration.com; www.ceifiltration.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

FILTER SAND AND GRAVEL Southern Products and Silica Co. Inc. Since 1933, SPS has provided high-quality filter media, quartz pebbles, and well gravel packs to our customers. Our materials are rounded quartzite sand and gravel, washed, and screened to size, in compliance with AWWA specifications, and NSF-61 certified. 4303 US Hwy. 1 N., Hoffman, NC 28347 USA; (910) 281-3189, ext. 1; www.sandandgravel.net. AWWA Service Provider Member

FILTRATION PRODUCTS SAFNA is an ASME and National Board-certified manufacturer of filter housings, tanks, pressure vessels, and RO skids, offering • Single and multi-bag filter housings • Single and multi-cartridge filter housings • Storage tanks and pressure vessels • Carbon steel, stainless steel 304, and stainless steel 316 materials • NSF61 coatings and linings • ASME certification For more information, contact us at (626) 599 8566 or at info@safna.com; www.safna.com.

FULL SERVICE SUPPLIER/INSTALLER Since 1977, with 5,000+ installations operating worldwide in municipal/ industrial applications, Unifilt has provided state-of-the-art manufacturing, distribution, removal, and installation of filtering materials for potable/ wastewater treatment facilities. Whether a system requires minor repairs or major upgrades, we have the experience to diagnose and fix even the most complex problems. Our air-scour solution for filter media cleaning features an introductory trial. Fast, easy installation (no media removal or underdrain replacement required). Made in the USA. (800) 223-2882, www.Unifilt.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

REVERSE OSMOSIS FEED WATER SPACER SWM is the global leader in reverse osmosis feed spacer and center tube technologies with over 40 years of experience. We deliver time-tested quality products and next-generation innovations and solutions to solve your toughest RO membrane challenges. As SWM we now bring even more capabilities to customers. Visit us at www.swmintl.com.

B U YER S ’ R ES O U R C E G U ID E | FEB R U A R Y 2018 • 110: 2 | JO U R NA L AWWA

Gaskets and Sealing PIPE GASKETS Specification Rubber Products Inc. Domestic manufacturer of gaskets and sealing solutions since 1968. • Barracuda® RJ gaskets in safety orange • Push-on gaskets • MJ and MJxIPS transition gaskets • Filler, flat, and AMERICAN Toruseal® Flange Gaskets • SBR, EPDM, Nitrile, Fluoroelastomer (Viton®, etc.) compounds available • Products are NSF-61 and UL listed and conform to ANSI/AWWAC111/A21.111 • Sold through PVF manufacturers and distributors (800) 633-3415; www.specrubber.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

Geographic Information Systems EQUIPMENT DISTRIBUTORS Seiler Instrument is a family owned firm established in 1945. Geospatial scanning, UAV, survey and mapping sales, service, training, and support are what we excel at. Our staff of professionals is committed to a personal hands-on approach and our service excellence goes well beyond just a sale. (888) 263-8918; solutions@seilerinst.com; www.seilerinst.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

Hydrants FIRE HYDRANTS Mueller Co. manufactures a comprehensive range of dry and wet barrel fire hydrants marketed under the trusted brands of Mueller®, US Pipe Valve & Hydrant®, and Jones®. Available in an almost infinite range of configurations, these products are often complemented by hydrant safety devices, indicator posts, and post indicator valves. moreinfo@muellercompany.com; www.muellercompany.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

Hydrants, Accessories, and Parts VALVES AMERICAN Flow Control is a division of AMERICAN Cast Iron Pipe Company, founded in Birmingham, Ala., in 1905. In addition to fire hydrants and valves, AMERICAN manufactures ductile iron and spiral-welded steel pipe for the waterworks industry. Contact us at (205) 325-7957 or bmyl@american-usa.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

BUY E RS’ RE SOURC E G U I D E | F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 8 • 1 1 0 :2 | J OU R NA L AWWA

Instrumentation REMOTE WIRELESS MONITORING Telog, A Trimble Company offers a comprehensive remote monitoring system for water distribution and waste water collection utilities. The Telog system provides an automated means of collecting, archiving, presenting, and sharing asset data so utilities can improve operations and fulfill regulatory compliance. TrimbleWater_ContactUs@trimble.com; www.trimblewater.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

TREATMENT PLANT EQUIPMENT Analytical Technology Inc. designs and manufactures a wide variety of innovative instrumentation for the water and wastewater markets and distributes both domestically and internationally through a system of independent manufacturers’ representatives and distributors. In addition to water quality monitors, ATI also provides a full line of industrial and municipal gas detectors measuring up to 33 different gases. Collegeville, Pa.; phone: (800) 959-0299; fax: (610) 917-0992; sales@analyticaltechnology.com; www.analyticaltechnology.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

Laboratory and Field-Testing Equipment INSTRUMENTATION Myron L® Co.’s ULTRAPEN™ PT1 is a groundbreaking new conductivity/TDS/ salinity pen. The PT1 features the accuracy and stability of benchtop lab equipment with the convenience of a pen. Constructed of durable aircraft aluminum, this pen is fully potted for extra protection with an easy-to-read LCD and one-button functions. The PT1 is an indispensable instrument in the water quality professional’s toolkit. www.myronl.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

RAPID MICROBIOLOGICAL MONITORING SOLUTIONS LuminUltra’s Rapid Microbiological Monitoring Solutions—based on 2nd Generation ATP—afford your team the ability to pinpoint problem areas within a system, apply corrective action (e.g. flushing), and ensure that these actions were effective using a simple 5-minute field test with on-the-spot results. These solutions—including field ready test kits, portable equipment and cloud-based software—can save you a tremendous amount of time, money and water. s such, it is an ideal complement to your water management plan. Ask us how at sales@luminultra.com AWWA Service Provider Member

B U YER S ’ R ES O U R C E G U ID E | FEB R U A R Y 2018 • 110: 2 | JO U R NA L AWWA

Leak Detection ACOUSTIC LEAK DETECTION Echologics provides high-quality and actionable information about buried water distribution and transmission main infrastructure, helping to optimize capital investments and repair and rehabilitation programs; this safely extends the operating life of critical water main assets. Echologics is a leader in pipe condition assessment, leak detection, and continuous leak monitoring solutions. Contact: Stadnyckyji@echlogics.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

LEAK DETECTION SubSurface Leak Detection offers the most sensitive leak noise correlators, correlating loggers, and water leak detectors available. Choose the DigiCorr correlator, the LC-2500 correlator, the ZCorr correlating loggers, or any of our five different water leak detectors. (775) 298-2701; www.subsurfaceleak.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

WATER NETWORK MONITORING Fluid Conservation Systems is the instrumentation expert for water loss recovery. Our combined experience, technical expertise, and unrivaled wireless monitoring solutions have made us world leaders within the drinking water industry with a reputation for innovation, quality, and service. We specialize in premier water network monitoring solutions by offering a complete set of equipment for virtually all leak detection and pressure management needs. For more information call (800) 531-5465, e-mail sales@fluidconservation.com, or visit www.fluidconservation.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

Meters ADVANCED METERING INFRASTRUCTURE The Mi.Net® system links meters, distribution sensors, and control devices in an efficient wireless network for real-time access. This smart, migratable solution provides the ultimate in flexibility and scalability, allowing you to cost-effectively add advanced capabilities to fixed networks or drive-by solutions without replacing the entire system. (800) 323-8584; www.muellersystems.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

AMI IMPLEMENTATION AND MAINTENANCE SUEZ Advanced Solutions (Utility Service Co. Inc.) offers a risk-free, turnkey financed solution that bundles meters with AMI technology, installing and integrating into your existing system. Then, we take care of your system during its lifetime. Phone: (855) 526-4413; fax (888) 600-5876; help@ utilityservice.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

BUY E RS’ RE SOURC E G U I D E | F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 8 • 1 1 0 :2 | J OU R NA L AWWA

Meters AMR/AMI Kamstrup is a world-leading supplier of ultrasonic meters and meter reading solutions. For 70 years, we have enabled utilities to run better businesses while inspiring smarter, more responsible solutions for the communities you serve. We are opening a new US production facility in 2018 to meet the high demand for our metering solutions. To learn more, call (404) 835-6716; e-mail info-us@kamstrup.com, or visit kamstrup.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

AMR/AMI SYSTEMS Sensus helps a wide range of public service providers—from utilities to cities to industrial complexes and campuses—do more with their infrastructure. We enable our customers to reach farther through the application of technology and data-driven insights that deliver efficiency and responsiveness. We partner with them to anticipate and respond to evolving business needs with innovation in sensing and communications technologies, data analytics, and services. Learn more at www.sensus.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

AMR/AMI SYSTEMS Formed in 1903, the Zenner/Minol group is a global company focused on meter production, AMR/AMI systems, and sub-metering contracts. Zenner/Minol serves customers in 90 countries with plants on five continents including the United States. Zenner USA, 15280 Addison Rd., Addison, TX 75001 USA; phone: (855) 593-6637; fax: (972) 386-1814; marketing@zennerusa.com; www.zennerusa.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

AMR/AMI, METER DATA MANAGEMENT, AND LEAK DETECTION Master Meter is a high-service solutions provider specializing in advanced digital water metering, data delivery, and utility intelligence software. Our innovative smart water and IoT technologies portfolio helps utilities manage a dynamic business environment, and their rapidly evolving role within a smart cities strategic plan. For more information, call (800) 765-6518 or visit www.mastermeter.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

METERS, AMR/AMI, AND ANALYTICS Badger Meter is an innovator in flow measurement, control and communication solutions, serving water utilities, municipalities, and commercial and industrial customers worldwide. The company’s products measure water, oil, chemicals, and other fluids, and are known for accuracy, long-lasting durability, and for providing and communicating valuable and timely measurement data. For more information, call (800) 616-3837; www.badgermeter.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

B U YER S ’ R ES O U R C E G U ID E | FEB R U A R Y 2018 • 110: 2 | JO U R NA L AWWA

Meters WATER UTILITY GASKETS Specification Rubber Products Inc. Domestic manufacturer of gaskets and sealing solutions sinc 1968. • Patented MeterSeal™ molded gaskets have a molded bulb on the ID to help with mismatched faces and uneven torque on bolts. • Drop-in MeterSeal™ gaskets and traditional drop-in meter gaskets have a patented tab to assist with installation. • Both styles meet the physical properties specified in Table 4 of ANSI/AWWA C111/A21.11. • Made in the USA, NSF-61 certified. (800) 633-3415; www.specrubber.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

Pipe CLEANING TOOLS AND EQUIPMENT Pipeline Pigging Products Inc. Our Municipal Series Poly Pigs are internal pipeline-cleaning devices that are propelled by line pressure to remove flow-restricting deposits. All have the ability to negotiate short-radius bends, tees, valves, and multidimensional piping. Call (800) 242-7997 or (281) 351-6688 for distributor or factory-certified service information; www.pipepigs.com.

DUCTILE IRON PIPE AMERICAN Ductile Iron Pipe is a division of AMERICAN Cast Iron Pipe Company, founded in Birmingham, Ala., in 1905. In addition to ductile iron, AMERICAN manufactures spiral-welded steel pipe, fire hydrants, and valves for the waterworks industry. Contact us at (205) 307-2969 or jordanbyrd@american-usa.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

JOINT RESTRAINT EBAA Iron Inc. is the leader in pipe joint technology, manufacturing, and specializing in pipe restraints and flexible expansion joints for the water and wastewater industry. With products that save time and money, EBAA is 100% AIS compliant and 100% Made in the USA! Products: • Joint restraint for ductile iron, steel, PVC, and HDPE pipelines (MEGALUG® mechanical joint restraint) • Flexible expansion joints • Restrained couplings • Restrained flange adapters Contact us at (800) 633-9190; contact@ebaa.com; www.ebaa.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

BUY E RS’ RE SOURC E G U I D E | F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 8 • 1 1 0 :2 | J OU R NA L AWWA

Pipe PIPE CLAMPS AND COUPLINGS Krausz Industries, the creator of HYMAX, develops, designs, and manufactures market-leading couplings and clamps for connecting and repairing pipes for both potable water and sewage. In more than 90 years of industry leadership, and millions of installations, Krausz has earned a solid reputation for providing products that meet installers’ field needs. Phone: (855) 457-2879; fax: (352) 304-5787; info@krauszusa.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

PIPE JOINT MATERIAL Mercer Rubber Company manufactures rubber expansion joints for the water and wastewater treatment, power, industrial, and chemical industries as well as HVAC commercial and marine work. Our specialty is developing custom products for a specific job, from a single small joint to hundreds of large-diameter joints. info@mercer-rubber.com; www.mercer-rubber.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

PIPE, PVC Diamond Plastics Corp. manufactures gasketed PVC pipe in diameters from 1½ in. through 60 in. for water distribution, transmission, irrigation, drainage, and sewage applications, including AWWA C900 products from 4 to 60 in. With seven plants across the United States and more than 30 years of experience in production, Diamond is one of the largest manufacturers of quality pipe products in North America. POB 1608, Grand Island, NE 68802 USA; (800) PVC-PIPE; diamondplastics@dpcpipe.com; www.dpcpipe.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

PIPE-JOINING MATERIALS X-Pando Products Co. is the manufacturer of unique sealing compounds that expand as they set, and can be used on most threaded pipes and fittings for most liquids, gases, and liquid gases at high pressures and temperatures. Nontoxic, UL® certified to NSF/ANSI 61 and 372. Meets requirements of FDA, USDA, NASA, and API. X-Pando Special No. 2 for use on cement-lined pipes to be welded. 204 Stokes Ave., Ewing, NJ 08638 USA; phone: (609) 394-0150; fax: (609) 989-4847; sales@xpando.com.

PIPELINE CONDITION ASSESSMENT For utilities with aging pipeline infrastructure, Echologics’ condition assessment technology determines the structural strength of buried assets and helps optimize rehabilitation and replacement programs. ePulse® condition assessments use acoustic signals and advanced computer algorithms to assign pipe “grades” based on the actual condition of each segment. (866) 324-6564; www.echologics.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

B U YER S ’ R ES O U R C E G U ID E | FEB R U A R Y 2018 • 110: 2 | JO U R NA L AWWA

Pumps PUMPS While in the business of making water work for you, look to A.Y. McDonald to provide the pumps you need, ranging from boosters to submersibles. As the leading manufacturer and distributor of water works, plumbing, pumps, and high pressure gas parts, learn more about A.Y. McDonald by calling (800) 292-2737. AWWA Service Provider Member

PUMPS Gorman-Rupp manufactures a complete line of sewage pumping systems and pressure booster/water reuse stations, including pumps, motors, and controls. Our ReliaSource® line of lift stations provides dependability and ease of service, and our commitment to total system responsibility means you make only one call to source and service your entire system. Please contact Vince Baldasare at (419) 755-1011 or grsales@gormanrupp.com, or visit www.GRpumps.com.

PUMPS SEEPEX Inc. develops, manufactures, and globally markets progressive cavity pumps for delivering low to highly viscous, aggressive, and abrasive media. SEEPEX offers pre-engineered chemical metering systems for use in a wide variety of chemical dosing and water treatment applications, including sodium hypochlorite disinfection processes. The fully packaged skids are available with SEEPEX’s NSF/ANSI 61 Standard-certified metering pumps. SEEPEX Inc., 511 Speedway Dr., Enon, OH 45323 USA; phone: (937) 864-7150; fax: (937) 864-7157; sales.us@seepex.com; www.seepex.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

Safety Equipment and Devices CHLORINE EMERGENCY SHUTOFF SYSTEMS Halogen Valve Systems is the leading manufacturer of electronically actuated emergency shutoff systems for chlorine and sulfur dioxide 150 lb cylinders and ton containers. In the event of a leak, the controller receives a signal from a leak detector or panic button and instantly sends a signal to the actuators, closing all valves within seconds. • Eclipse™ Actuators for ton containers and 150 lb cylinders • Terminator™ Actuators for ton containers and 150 lb cylinders • Hexacon™ Controller for controlling up to six Eclipse actuators • Duplex™ Controller for single & dual Eclipse applications • Gemini™ Controller for single & dual Terminator applications 17961 Sky Park Circle, Ste. A, Irvine, CA 92614 USA; phone: (949) 261-5030; fax: (949) 261-5033; info@halogenvalve.com; www.halogenvalve.com.

100

BUY E RS’ RE SOUR C E G U I D E | F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 8 • 1 1 0 :2 | J O U R NA L AWWA

Safety Equipment and Devices DISINFECTION EQUIPMENT AND SYSTEMS TGO Technologies Inc. ChlorTainer is a high-pressure containment vessel into which a 1-ton or 150-lb chlorine gas cylinder is processed. If the cylinder should leak, chlorine gas is contained within the vessel and processed at a normal rate. All of the chlorine gas is used, and no hazardous waste is generated. Phone: (800) 543-6603; fax: (707) 576-7516; sales@tgotech.com; www.tgotech.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

LADDER SHIELDS R B Industries. Our trademarked Ladder Gate® Climb Preventive Shield controls access to fixed ladders on tanks, towers, buildings, and other structures. The angled sides prevent reaching around the shield to gain access to the ladder. Sturdy, maintenance-free. Easily installed. Visit us at www.laddergate.com.

PIPE TOOLS ICS, Blount Inc. ICS® is a world leader in concrete and pipe power cutters and equipment including the patented PowerGrit® diamond chains designed to cut through pipe from one side and not worry about the kickback that can happen with a traditional circular blade saw. Contacts: Jessica Gowdy DeMars, (503) 653-4687; Joe Taccogna, (503) 653-4644. 4909 SE International Way, Portland, OR 97222-4601 USA; (800) 321-1240; marketing@icsdiamondtools.com; www.icsdiamondtools.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

Tanks ASSET MAINTENANCE, REHABILITATION, AND HIGH-PERFORMANCE COATINGS SUEZ Advanced Solutions (Utility Service Co. Inc.) created the Tank Maintenance Program over 30 years ago, delivering peace of mind by providing financed rehabilitation and maintenance—including all repairs, lifetime coatings warranty, annual condition assessments, emergency services, and all future renovations. Phone: (855) 526-4413; fax: (888) 600-5876; help@utilityservice.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

DEMOLITION Allstate Tower Inc. is your first choice for steel storage tank, stack, or tower dismantling. With more than 75 years of combined knowledge and experience, we can dismantle your structure to meet your expectations. POB 25, Henderson, KY 42419 USA; phone: (270) 826-9000, ext. 4601; fax: (270) 827-4417; sales@watertank.com; www.allstatetower.com.

B U YER S ’ R ES O U R C E G U ID E | FEB R U A R Y 2018 • 110: 2 | JO U R NA L AWWA

101

Tanks PRESTRESSED CONCRETE DN Tanks specializes in the design and construction of AWWA D110 prestressed concrete tanks for potable water, wastewater, chilled water, and other liquids. DN Tanks is the largest producer of wire- and strand-wound prestressed concrete tanks in the world and provides large-scale construction capacity, unmatched technical expertise, and proficiency in multiple types of proven tank designs to provide customized liquid storage solutions for their customers. (855) DNTANKS; www.dntanks.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

STEEL WELDED Caldwell Tanks Inc. has turnkey design–build capabilities that enable us to provide solutions to our customers, no matter the size or scope. Being the only contractor that constructs all styles of elevated tanks, the options are almost limitless. Our award‐winning tanks are constructed on a towering tradition of 130 years of excellence. Phone: (502) 964‐3361; fax: (502) 966‐8732; Sales@CaldwellTanks.com; www.CaldwellTanks.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

TANK COVERS Apex Domes represents the pinnacle of precision-engineered aluminum geodesic covers. Apex Domes are fully compliant with AWWA specifications. Constructed entirely out of aluminum, utilizing proprietary component fabrication, Apex Domes are corrosion resistant, virtually maintenance free, and designed for extended service life. Apex domes are available for new construction, retrofit applications, customized designs, and include specialized coating and interior insulation options. Dome sizes range from 12 to 1,000 feet in diameter. When you specify Apex Domes, you get the strongest space frame design, clear span construction, factory direct installation, watertight design, and a superior dome design built to reduce vapor loss. Project pricing is competitive with any supplier. Connect with Apex Domes—aluminum covers that outperform! (620) 423-3010; www.AluminumDomes.com, apexdomes.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

TANK COVERS CST Industries celebrates 125 years as the world’s largest designer and manufacturer of custom aluminum domes and covers for all water/wastewater applications. CST’s OptiDome® is a flush batten aluminum dome that features an enclosed gasket design protecting against ultraviolet exposure and sealant degradation. Exposed and non-exposed sealant designs are available around the nodes. OptiDome meets design codes such as Eurocode, Aluminum Design Manual 2010, IBC 2012, and AWWA-D108. CST Industries, 498 N Loop 336 E, Conroe, TX 77301 USA; (844) 44-TANKS; www.cstindustries.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

102

BUY E RS’ RE SOUR C E G U I D E | F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 8 • 1 1 0 :2 | J O U R NA L AWWA

Tanks TANK ERECTION International Tank Service Inc. is a full-service tank construction company specializing in • Field-erected storage tanks • Water standpipes, reservoirs, and aboveground storage tanks • Tank modification and repair • Foundations • Tank jacking and leveling • AWWA, API, and FM Codes Our professional experience, knowledge, and dedication make us the best choice for your next tank project. 1085 S. Metcalf St., Lima, OH 45804 USA; phone: (419) 223-8251; fax: (419) 227-4590; butch@ITStank.com; www.ITStank.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

TANK ERECTION, RESTORATION, AND INSPECTION Classic Protective Coatings Inc. specializes in superior-quality water storage tank rehabilitation; offers safety, security, mixing system mechanical upgrades, or elevation changes; and provides the largest high-production welding, sandblasting, waterblasting, industrial coating, and containment equipment nationwide. Our crews hand-paint complex logos. Classic Protective Coatings Inc., N7670 State Hwy. 25, Menomonie, WI 54751-5928 USA; phone: (715) 233-6267; fax: (715) 233-6268; www.classicprotectivecoatings.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

TANK ERECTION, RESTORATION, AND INSPECTION—ELEVATED CHANGES Pittsburg Tank & Tower Co. is a full-service provider of elevated and ground storage tanks as well as inspection and maintenance of existing tanks. We work in all 50 states and provide you with the expertise needed to complete the task required with safety and quality being the top priorities. Tank modification on tanks from 5,000 gal to 5 mil gal capacity. Our patented Cobra tank solution provides stainless steel GST that never requires maintenance. POB 913, Henderson, KY 42419-0913 USA; phone: (270) 826-9000, ext. 4601; fax: (270) 767-6912; sales@pttg.com; www.watertank.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

TANK INSPECTION, WET OR DRY, AND CLEAN-OUTS—USED, ELEVATED Pittsburg Tank & Tower Co. provides interior in-service inspections performed by our remotely controlled submergible robot and exterior inspections by personnel trained in OSHA regulations. Inspections meet tank inspection requirements of AWWA, NFPA, USEPA, and OSHA. Owner receives a bound report with recommendations and cost estimates, a video of the interior, and pictures of the exterior. 1 Watertank Place, POB 913, Henderson, KY 42419-0913 USA; phone: (270) 826-9000, ext. 4601; fax: (270) 767-6912; sales@watertank.com; www.watertank.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

B U YER S ’ R ES O U R C E G U ID E | FEB R U A R Y 2018 • 110: 2 | JO U R NA L AWWA

103

Tanks TANKS—BOLTED Tank Connection specializes in providing high-quality storage tank and aluminum dome options for water storage applications. Tank Connection’s precision-bolted RTP is the #1 bolted tank design selected worldwide. Tanks are designed to meet a wide range of standards including AWWA, AISC, NFPA-22, and FM requirements. The proprietary fusion epoxy powder and advanced glass coating technologies are superior to all other coatings available in the market. Tank Connection operates multiple ISO 9001-certified QMS storage tank manufacturing facilities in the United States. Contact the experts in liquid storage to find practical solutions to all of your storage related needs. Tank Connection, Parsons, KS 67357 USA; (620) 423-3010; www. tankconnection.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

TANKS—STEEL, BOLTED CST Industries celebrates 125 years as the world’s largest manufacturer of factory-coated storage tanks for municipal and industrial water and wastewater applications. CST manufactures Aquastore® glass-fused-to-steel (enamel) coated, TecTank™ (formerly Columbian TecTank®) epoxy-coated, stainless steel, and galvanized tanks. Tanks are manufactured in US ISOcertified facilities and meet all standard design codes such as AWWA D103, ANSI/NSF Standard 61, AISC, FM codes, and NFPA Standard 22. CST Industries, 903 E 104th St., Ste. 900, Kansas City, MO 64131 USA; (844) 44-TANKS; www.cstindustries.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

TANKS—STEEL, BOLTED Tank Connection specializes in providing high quality storage tank and aluminum dome options for water storage applications. Tank Connection’s precision-bolted RTP is the #1 bolted tank design selected worldwide. Tanks are designed to meet a wide range of standards including AWWA, AISC, NFPA-22, and FM requirements. The proprietary fusion epoxy powder and advanced glass coating technologies are superior to all other coatings available in the market. Tank Connection operates multiple ISO 9001-certified QMS storage tank manufacturing facilities in the United States. Contact the experts in liquid storage to find practical solutions to all of your storage related needs. Tank Connection, Parsons, KS 67357 USA; (620) 423-3010; www. tankconnection.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

WATER STORAGE CST Industries, the manufacturer of Aquastore®, celebrates 125 years of business. Aquastore storage solutions include tanks, reservoirs, standpipes, and composite elevated tanks. Aquastore’s Vitrium™ glass-fused-to-steel/enamel coating and Edgecoat II™ technology is a low-maintenance, NSF-approved coating that never needs painting. Aquastore tanks have low life-cycle costs and meet all standard design codes such as AWWA D103, ANSI/NSF Standard 61, AISC, FM codes, and NFPA Standard 22. CST Industries, 345 Harvestore Dr., DeKalb, IL 60115 USA; (844) 44-TANKS; www.aquastore.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

104

BUY E RS’ RE SOUR C E G U I D E | F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 8 • 1 1 0 :2 | J O U R NA L AWWA

Tanks WATER STORAGE Westeel’s water storage tanks and ponds are a durable, cost-effective means to store water for firefighting, rainwater collection, agriculture, municipal and residential reserves, greenhouses, and garden centers. Easy to erect and expand, they are a highly cost-effective option when flexibility and cost of installation and transportation are key factors. Westeel.com. 1-888-WESTEEL (937-8335).

WIRE-WOUND PRESTRESSED CONCRETE Preload is the world’s leader in wire-wound prestressed concrete tank design and construction. Since 1930, Preload’s tanks have met the water storage and wastewater treatment needs of thousands of communities and businesses. Our tanks are offered in a wide variety of custom dimensions and sizes with architecturally styled treatment that complements any environment. Built to the AWWA D110 Standard and ACI 372, Preload tanks require no routine maintenance, thereby providing a long service life and superior return on investment. (888) PRELOAD; www.PRELOAD.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

Treatment Plant Equipment TOOLS, EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES For 180 years, Pollardwater has been a leading supplier for water and wastewater operations with quality products at an affordable price. Our catalog and eCommerce capabilities make it easy for our customers to do business the way they want, with seamless product ordering and account management. For more information, or to request a free catalog, contact us at (800) 437-1146; info@pollardwater.com; or visit www.pollardwater.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

WATER AND WASTEWATER USABlueBook is the water and wastewater industry’s leading source for MRO equipment and supplies. Thanks to a nationwide distribution network and extensive selection of over 64,000 products, 95% of USABlueBook customers receive in-stock orders in one to two days. Request your free catalog today— call (800) 548-1234 or visit www.usabluebook.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

Valves CONTROL VALVES Singer™ automatic control valves are available for pressure, flow, pump, altitude, and relief applications. Whether it is water loss management in Asia or urban distribution demands in the United States, we provide water loss management solutions to governments, cities, and contractors around the world. For more information, contact singer@singervalve.com; www.singervalve.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

B U YER S ’ R ES O U R C E G U ID E | FEB R U A R Y 2018 • 110: 2 | JO U R NA L AWWA

105

Valves LINE STOP EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES

Advanced Valve Technologies supplies line stop equipment including the EZ™ insertion valve. Quick, economical, and under-pressure installs feature removable bonnets for either permanent valves or temporary line stops. One-hour installation for sizes 4–12 in., about 4 hours for sizes 14, 16, 20, and 24 in. 800 Busse Rd., Elk Grove Village, IL 60007 USA; (877) 489-4909; www.avtfittings.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

PRESSURE-REDUCING CONTROL VALVES OCV Control Valves manufactures valves for water management and water conservation control, sizes 1¼ to 24 in. Common applications include reducing, pump control, electronic, level control, and relief/surge. Certifications include ISO 9001, NSF/ANSI 61-G, and ARRA/AIS compliant. Visit us online at www.controlvalves.com for ValveMaster, our sizing software. For more information contact us at (888) OCV-VALV, (918) 627-1942, or sales@controlvalves.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

VALVE INSERTION EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES Advanced Valve Technologies machines and manufactures the highest-quality insertion valves, installation equipment, and custom components for professional installers. The EZ™ line of insertion valves is offered through 24 in. 800 Busse Rd., Elk Grove Village, IL 60007 USA; (877) 489-4909; www.avtfittings.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

VALVES In the market for water works or plumbing valves? Find all you need in one place: A.Y. McDonald. Get more from each of our product lines, including water works, plumbing, pumps, and high pressure gas, by reaching out to our customer service department at (800) 292-2737. AWWA Service Provider Member

VALVES Flomatic Corp. is a leading worldwide manufacturer of high-quality valve products for water and wastewater since 1933. We specialize in check valves, silent check valves, butterfly valves, plug valves, automatic control valves, and air/vacuum valves. Compliant with ARRA and new low-lead laws and NSF/ANSI 61. Phone: (800) 833-2040; fax: (518) 761-9798; flomatic@ flomatic.com; www.flomatic.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

VALVES Val-Matic® Valve & Manufacturing Co. is an ISO 9001:2008-certified company, with a complete valve line that is NSF/ANSI 372-certified lead-free. NSF/ANSI 61-certified air valves feature T316SS trim/floats. Non-slam check valves with low head loss. Standard and 100% port Cam-Centric® Plug Valves. NSF/ANSI 61 Certified American-BFV® Butterfly Valves feature field-adjustable/ replaceable seats. Ener•G® efficient AWWA ball valves for pump control applications. FloodSafe® inflow preventers protect potable water systems. (630) 941-7600; valves@valmatic.com; www.valmatic.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

106

BUY E RS’ RE SOUR C E G U I D E | F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 8 • 1 1 0 :2 | J O U R NA L AWWA

Water Treatment ADVANCED ARSENIC REMOVAL SYSTEMS ISOLUX® is a proven, affordable well-head water treatment solution designed specifically to remove arsenic. All ISOLUX systems use cartridges filled with a patented zirconium filter media that has been verified for 99% to zero arsenic removal. There’s no backwashing, and practically no maintenance beyond cartridge replacement. (480) 315-8430; sales@isolux-arsenicremoval.com.

INTEGRATED TREATMENT SOLUTIONS AdEdge Water Technologies specializes in the design, manufacturing, and supply of water treatment solutions, specialty medias, legacy, and innovative technologies that remove arsenic, iron, manganese, nitrate, perchlorate, radionuclides, and other contaminants from water for municipal, private, and industrial clients. Please contact us at (866) 8ADEDGE or online at www.adedgetech.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

METERING PUMPS ProMinent Fluid Controls Inc. are experts in chemical feed and water treatment. The reliable solutions partner for water and wastewater treatment and a manufacturer of components and systems for chemical fluid handling. Based on our innovative products, services, and industry-specific solutions, we provide greater efficiency and safety for our customers—worldwide. Phone: (412) 787-2484; fax: (412) 787-0704; sales@prominent.us; www.prominent.us. AWWA Service Provider Member

RADIUM, URANIUM, AND OTHER SELECT CONTAMINANTS Water Remediation Technology LLC (WRT) provides cost-efficient water treatment processes and proprietary treatment media for the removal of radium, uranium, ammonia, chromium, strontium, arsenic, and other select contaminants. WRT’s full-package solutions represent the most efficient and environmentally progressive services in the industry for meeting regulatory compliance standards. Contact Ron Dollar, V.P. Sales & Marketing, info@wrtnet.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

WATER TREATMENT Hungerford & Terry Inc. For more than 100 years, an innovative manufacturer of filtration systems to treat for iron, manganese, hydrogen sulfide, arsenic, and radium. High-efficiency ion exchange systems to treat for hardness, nitrates, perchlorate, etc. Forced draft/vacuum degasifiers, condensate polishers, and demineralizer systems. (856) 881-3200; sales@hungerfordterry.com; www.hungerfordterry.com. AWWA Service Provider Member

Well Systems and Equipment ASSET MAINTENANCE, REHABILITATION, AND DRILLING SUEZ Advanced Solutions (Utility Service Co. Inc.) provides well and pump rehabilitation and maintenance. The innovative asset maintenance solution provides ongoing well, pump, and motor rehabilitation. The program guarantees the well and pump yield for a flat annual fee. Phone: (855) 526-4413; fax: (888) 600-5876; help@utilityservice.com. AWWA Service Provider Member B U YER S ’ R ES O U R C E G U ID E | FEB R U A R Y 2018 • 110: 2 | JO U R NA L AWWA

107

Advertisers

ACE18 64 www.awwa.org/ace18

Jacobs/CH2M www.jacobs.com

American Flow Control www.american-usa.com

John Wiley & Sons Inc. www.wiley.com

Cover 4

Aqua-Aerobic Systems Inc. www.aquaelectrozone.com

Kennedy Valve Co., a Div. of McWane www.kennedyvalve.com

A.Y. McDonald Mfg. Co. www.aymcdonald.com

M32: Computer Modeling of Water Distribution Systems www.awwa.org/M32

Career Center www.awwa.org/careers

Cover 2

Core & Main www.coreandmain.com

ECT2 www.ect2.com

Ferguson Enterprises Inc. www.ferguson.com/waterworks

McWane Ductile www.mcwaneductile.com

59, 70

Cover 3

Partnership for Safe Water www.awwa.org/partnershipforcleanwater Sustainable Water Management Conference www.awwa.org/sustainable18

Errata

Errata--Industry News December 2017 In Industry News, in the December 2017 issue of Journal AWWA (Vol. 109, No. 12, p. 78), the International Water Association was incorrectly identified as being in Prague, the Netherlands, rather than in Prague, the Czech Republic. Journal AWWA regrets the error. https://doi.org/10.1002/awwa.1014

Errata--The Spirit of a Water Professional In “The Spirit of a Water Professional” by David B. LaFrance in the December 2017 issue of Journal AWWA (Vol. 109, No. 12, p. 10), Jack Mannion was incorrectly referred to as Jake Mannion. Journal AWWA regrets the error. https://doi.org/10.1002/awwa.1011

10 8 FEBRUARY 2 0 1 8 • 1 1 0 : 2 | J O U R N A L AW WA

mcwaneductile.com

BUILDING IRON STRONG UTILITIES FOR GENERATIONS • Ductile Iron Pipe features up to a 37 percent larger interior diameter than other pipe materials, saving money and energy. • An unparalleled lifespan of more than 100 years reduces material, installation, and maintenance costs. • McWane Ductile Iron Pipe is made from up to 95% recycled material, meaning it’s better for the environment than any other pipe product. POCKET ENGINEER Available for iOS + Android or online at pe.mcwane.com

IN 1929, AMERICAN INVENTED THE MECHANICAL JOINT. TODAY WE BRING YOU ALPHA™. A L M O S T A N Y M AT E R I A L . N O T I M E AT A L L .

Few things in the waterworks industry have been as innovative as the Mechanical Joint. Times have changed. And so has AMERICAN. Introducing the AMERICAN Flow Control Series 2500 with ALPHATM restrained joint ends. Now, you can use the same valve for ductile iron, HDPE, PVC, and even cast iron pipe. Unlike MJ, the restraint accessories come attached, leaving only one bolt on each end to tighten. That saves you time and money. The AMERICAN Series 2500 with ALPHATM restrained joint ends – it’s the only gate valve you’ll ever need.

www.american-usa.com PO Box 2727, Birmingham, AL 35207 • Ph: 1-800-326-8051 • Fx: 1-800-610-3569 EOE/Vets/Disabilities ALPHA™ is a licensed trademark of Romac Industries Inc. (U.S. Patent 8,894,100) DUCTILE IRON PIPE

FLOW CONTROL

I N T E R N AT I O N A L

S P I R A LW E L D P I P E

STEEL PIPE