Money, conservation, and water loss, page 5 Fall 2013
Smart Distribution Systems Technology bringing storage tanks into 21st century, page 14 Also inside: —Groundwater treatment, page 20
ÂŽ
Laser Marked Water Level Meters Levelogger Junior Edge
101 P7 Water Level Meter The Solinst 101 Water Level Meter with P7 Probe features an extremely durable, laser marked PVDF flat tape, with an enhanced dog bone design to reduce adherence to the side of well casing.
t P7 Submersible Probe measures water levels and total well depth t Consistent measurements with sensor located at the tip of probe t Certified Traceable to National Standards The PVDF flat tape is laser marked every 1/100 ft or each mm; lengths up to 5000 ft (1500 m). Flat tape has robust tensile strength and electrical efficiency by using 6 strands of copper coated stainless steel and 13 strands of stainless steel in each conductor. P7 Probe is engineered to allow submersion to 1000 ft. (300 m). Sensor at the tip of the probe provides consistently accurate measurements in wells, boreholes, and cascading water, with almost zero displacement.
The Levelogger Junior Edge is a costeffective water level and temperature datalogger. It features a Hastelloy pressure sensor, 5-year battery (based on one reading / minute), and memory for 40,000 level and temperature data points. Levelogger Junior Edge has an accuracy of 0.1% FS. Available in 5m (15ft) or 10m (30ft) ranges.
Peristaltic Pump
102 Water Level Meter Standard 102 Water Level Meter lengths to 1000 ft (300 m). The 102M Mini Water Level Meter 80 ft (25 m) length.
t Precise laser markings every 1/100 ft or each mm t Two narrow diameter probe options t Easily spliced strong flexible cable
Compact and lightweight, the Solinst 12V Peristaltic Pump is designed for field use. Variable speed motor control delivers from 120 ml/min to almost 3.5L/min pumping rates.
www.solinst.com High Quality Groundwater and Surface Water Monitoring Instrumentation Solinst Canada Ltd., 35 Todd Road, Georgetown, ON L7G 4R8 Fax: +1 (905) 873-1992; (800) 516-9081 Tel: +1 (905) 873-2255; (800) 661-2023 instruments@solinst.com
Vol. 2, No. 4 Fall 2013
FEATURED ARTICLES 10 Online and Doing Fine By Jill Ross
Mesa Water District’s cutting-edge system treats amber water for a 100% local water supply. 14 Smart Distribution Systems By Peter S. Fiske, Ph.D.
Page 10
Technologies bring storage tanks into the 21st century. 17 Out with the Oil, in with the New By Nathan Nutter, PE, Jeff Wold, and Gary Gin, RG
It’s important to know about water-flush line shaft turbine pumps and their applications.
COLUMNS 20 Engineering Your Business by Ed Butts, PE, CPI Groundwater Treatment Page 14
Part 3(a): Disinfection—Chlorination
26 Safety Matters by Jack Glass, MS, CIH Wellness Programs: A Bargain at Any Cost The smallest employers can have outstanding wellness programs. The views expressed in the columns are the authors’ opinions based on their professional experience.
ge 5
s, pa
ter los
d wa
n, an
ervatio
13 Fall 20
About the cover
ns ey, co
Mon
ms Systecentury, tion st tribu s into 21 rt Dising storage tank Smalog y bring no Tech 14 page ide:
ent,
treatm ins Also ndwater —Grou
page
20
A 430,000 gpd groundwater well source and treatment building for the Centreville Water Works in Centreville, Alabama is pictured. Photo submitted by Calvin Cassady of The Cassady Co. Inc. in Tuscaloosa, Alabama. ®
DEPARTMENTS 2 Editor’s Note: Is Your Message Getting Through? 4 In This Issue 5 All Things Groundwater: Money, Conservation, and Water Loss 6 Industry Newsline 7 The Log 28 Featured Products 28 Coming Events 30 Newsmakers 31 Public Groundwater Systems Journal Qualification Form 32 Index of Advertisers
The Public Groundwater Systems Journal (ISSN #2166-6512) is published quarterly by the National Ground Water Association, 601 Dempsey Rd., Westerville, OH 43081. Printed and mailed at Beaver Dam, Wisconsin, and additional mailing offices. Postal acceptance: Periodical (requester subscription circulation) postage paid at Westerville, Ohio, and at additional mailing offices. Postmaster: Send address changes to Public Groundwater Systems Journal, 601 Dempsey Rd., Westerville, OH 43081. Canada Post/ Publications Mail Agreement #40739533. Return address: 4960-2 Walker Rd., Windsor, ON N9A 6J3.
www.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
Public Groundwater Systems Journal Fall 2013 1/
EDITOR’S
NOTE
Is Your Message Getting Through? recently sat in on a Webinar about writing that would have been perfect for you. The title was “Write for Readability”—but I’m not concerned about you brushing up on nouns, verbs, and adjectives. There won’t be a test at the end. At the heart of the hour was this— getting through to your audience. And I think you’ll agree that’s critical whether you’re writing for your Web site or talking to a customer on the phone. Discussed were programs that measure average number of characters and syllables in words. Also analyzed were average words in sentences and sentences in paragraphs. A written message is best retained when its words average five characters or less and two syllables or less. Fourteen words or less is the goal for sentences, with paragraphs having no more than three sentences. Sound too simplistic? Thinking maybe it’s okay for a book for tween girls, but not an ad promoting a new feature at your community water system? Well, the Wall Street Journal hits those goals with its articles every day. And I know what you do is complex, but admit it. It’s a whole new level of complexity when you’re trying to explain the U.S. economy. The Webinar’s instructor put it this way: Professors at Harvard University can read at a very high level, but that doesn’t mean they always want to do so.
I
So what about your water system? Does your Web site explain what you provide the average homeowner so they can understand it—and more importantly recall it? Or does the site look more like a study guide for an engineering test? When you’re talking to a customer in person or on the phone, is your message to the point or does it sound more like a lecture for system professionals? When a customer has a concern about their water, they don’t want you to recite the 48 slides you saw at the mains and piping workshop. They want an explanation of what it will take to resolve the problem. And they want it simple and sweet. At the end of the day, all the customer really wants is their water safely supplied to their home and family every day. This doesn’t mean writing or talking down to people. It simply means giving customers a message they can understand. Go back and look at your Web site. Read all of the brochures you provide again. Practice any talk you give on occasion one more time. Better yet, give the talk to a friend who doesn’t know a lot about community water systems and see if they understand it. That is a test, and it’s one you can’t afford to fail.
Thad Plumley is the editor of Public Groundwater Systems Journal and director of information products at the National Ground Water Association. He can be reached at tplumley@ngwa.org.
Advertise your products and services to the public groundwater industry’s most influential readership. Contact John Bacon, MBA, at (352) 331-3525 or jbacon@naylor.com or Jason Zawada at (352) 333-3353 or jzawada@naylor.com. ● ● ●
John Bacon, MBA
More than 29,000 readers every issue. More than 24,000 work at community groundwater systems. Others reside in professions also allied to the field. Readers reside in every state.
Disclaimer Public Groundwater Systems Journal and the National Ground Water Association provide information for guidance and information purposes only. This publication is not intended to provide investment, tax, or legal advice. The information contained herein has been compiled from sources deemed reliable and it is accurate to the best of our knowledge and belief; however, Public Groundwater Systems Journal and the National Ground Water Association cannot guarantee as to its accuracy, completeness, and validity and cannot be held liable for any errors or omissions. All information contained herein should be independently verified and confirmed. Public Groundwater Systems Journal and the National Ground Water Association do not accept any liability for any loss or damage howsoever caused in reliance upon such information. Reader agrees to assume all risk resulting from the application of any of the information provided by Public Groundwater Systems Journal and the National Ground Water Association. Trademarks and copyrights mentioned within Public Groundwater Systems Journal are the ownership of their respective companies. The names of products and services presented are used only in an educational fashion and to the benefit of the trademark and copyright owner, with no intention of infringing on trademarks or copyrights. No endorsement of any third-party products or services is expressed or implied by any information, material, or content referred to in the Public Groundwater Systems Journal. Advertising Disclaimer Advertisers and advertising agencies assume liability for all content (including text, representation, and illustrations) of advertisements printed and also assume responsibility for any claims arising therefrom made against the publisher. The publisher reserves the right to reject any advertising that it believes is not in keeping with the publication's standards or is deemed unsuitable or misleading.
Jason Zawada
2/ Fall 2013 Public Groundwater Systems Journal
www.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
Asset Management for GroundwaterSupplied Public Water Systems Discover what’s needed to keep a groundwater-supplied public water system operating efficiently during this one-day NGWA short course. December 5 — Nashville, Tennessee Keeping the system operating efficiently is dependent on both proper management and maintenance—and knowing what to do when an unforeseen circumstance occurs. During this course, you will learn about: s 'ROUNDWATER ASSETS AND HOW to value them s #HANGES IN VALUE FROM NEW TO remaining useful life s %FlCIENT MANAGEMENT OF YOUR ASSETS s 0LANNING FOR REHABILITATION and replacement s $ETERMINING SOURCE CONDITIONS s !SSESSING WATER QUALITY AND HOW to monitor changes s %STABLISHING TRIGGERS TO USE INVASIVE measures s !VOIDING CATASTROPHIC FAILURES s 0ROPER OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE SOURCE AND EQUIPMENT
For more information on this course and to register, log on to WWW .'7! ORG %VENTS %DUCATION OR CALL .'7! CUSTOMER SERVICE -ONDAY &RIDAY A M P M %4 AT
IN THIS
ISSUE
elcome to the Fall 2013 issue of Public Groundwater Systems Journal, a publication created by the National Ground Water Association for those working at public water systems served by groundwater.
W
Our final issue of the year contains three feature stories. The first is titled “Smart Distribution Systems” by Peter S. Fiske, Ph.D. Beginning on page 14, it focuses on technologies in distribution systems that are being used to stabilize and improve water quality. Among the technologies discussed are active mixing, in-tank aeration, and automated disinfectant control. Fiske details the methods and points out that deploying multiple water quality improvement strategies within the distribution system can mean significantly lower cost and maintenance than those required for treatment plant changes. He adds that water distribution is now an opportunity to improve water quality as it travels from the water treatment plant to the customer. The feature article “Out with the Oil, In with the New” on page 17 by Nathan Nutter, PE, Jeff Wold, and Gary Gin, RG, tells why it is important to know about water-flush line shaft turbine pumps and their applications. The authors say older wells and potable supply storage tanks can have oil in them, posing a concern to water quality and water treatment equipment. However, they point out one way to completely eliminate the presence of oil in a well pump is to use a water-flush lubrication system. A water-flush lubrication system uses system water to lubricate the shaft bearings. The article details how it does so and what the benefits are of using such systems. “Online and Doing Fine” on page 10 by freelance writer Jill Ross tells how the Mesa Water District in Orange County, California, upgraded their treatment facility and, in doing so, became one of two districts in Orange County that is able to serve all of its customers’ tap water Jill Ross demand with local water 4/ Fall 2013 Public Groundwater Systems Journal
supplies. The cutting-edge system earned Mesa Water an outstanding groundwater project award in protection from the National Ground Water Association in 2012. Mesa sits above a portion of Orange County’s groundwater basin that stores a supply of amber-colored water hundreds of feet below the clear water reserves. Its system, which increased its capacity from 5.8 million gallons per day to 8.6 million gpd, uses a newer technology—nanofiltration—to treat the increasing color levels, while also stopping the migration of the colored water into the primary portions of the aquifer. Columnist Ed Butts, CPI, PE, continues to tackle an always-important topic in the latest installment of Engineering Your Business on page 20. As part of his series titled “Groundwater Treatment” Butts covers the most common form of disinfection: chlorination. He details the history of Ed Butts, PE, CPI chlorination, some of the controversy surrounding its use, how it works, and how it can rid wells of coliform bacteria and viruses, iron and manganese scale, and hydrogen sulfide. The final column in the issue is the latest installment of Safety Matters. Authored by Jack Glass, MS, CIH, it is titled “Wellness Programs: A Bargain at Any Cost” and begins on page 26. It says companies of any size can have an effective wellness program. They can take many forms, and range in cost from absolutely nothing to hundreds of dollars per employee. But Glass says one thing Jack Glass, MS, CIH is for certain—they all end up saving employers money in the long run. In fact, a recent study has shown the average return on investment for wellness programs is $5.81 to every $1.00 invested.
Advancing the expertise of groundwater professionals and furthering groundwater awareness.
Chief Executive Officer Kevin McCray, CAE kmccray@ngwa.org NGWA President Dan Meyer, MGWC, CVCLD Director of Information Products/Editor Thad Plumley tplumley@ngwa.org Director of Business Development/ Editorial Adviser Don Harvard dharvard@ngwa.org Senior Editor Mike Price
mprice@ngwa.org
Copyeditor Wayne Beatty
wbeatty@ngwa.org
Production and Design Janelle McClary jmcclary@ngwa.org Advertising John Bacon Jason Zawada
jbacon@naylor.com jzawada@naylor.com
Circulation Coordinator Katie Neer kneer@ngwa.org Contributing Writers Ed Butts, PE, CPI; Al Rickard, CAE; Jill Ross, Lana Straub; Jennifer Strawn; and Alexandra Walsh Editorial, Advertising, & Publishing Offices 601 Dempsey Rd., Westerville, OH 43081 (800) 551-7379 Fax: (614) 898-7786 ©Copyright 2013 by the National Ground Water Association. All rights reserved.
www.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
ALL THINGS
GROUNDWATER
Money, Conservation, and Water Loss discussed the latest Black & Veatch survey and report in the summer issue of Public Groundwater Systems Journal. The survey included Black & Veatch’s list of the top 10 water industry issues. I focused on the No. 1 issue: aging infrastructure, and how asset management can contribute to resolving it. For this installment, we’ll discuss three other issues that made the top 10 and how they are connected to each other as well as to aging infrastructure. In order, the other issues are funding/availability of capital, water availability and conservation, and water loss/non-revenue water. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency conducted its fifth Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey and Assessment in 2011. The purpose was to anticipate the 20-year capital investment needs of approximately 52,000 community water systems and 21,400 non-community water systems. The scope of the survey, and thus its findings, excluded capital projects related to dams, raw water reservoirs, future growth, and fire protection. Based on the survey, medium community water systems (serving 3301 to 100,000 persons) and small community water systems (serving 3301 and fewer persons) combined for a total 20-year need of $226 billion. I’m confident aging infrastructure carries the majority of the blame for these high dollar totals. It also validates the issue of funding/availability of capital. Common sense tells us there’s probably not going to be enough available money in grants or loans to assist everyone with needs, and therefore we had better develop plans to help ourselves. A good place to begin is with the industry issues of water availability/conservation and water loss/non-revenue water. Reducing water loss can be a major step towards conservation. It helps guard against the depletion of our aquifers and can be a key factor in the sustainability of the overall resource. It also lessens pumping times, thereby conserving energy and chemicals used for treatment. Reducing water loss means a reduction in expenses required to produce water not billed for. These savings mean more money remains in the coffers of the system that can be used for operations, growth, and capital projects. I once had a no-nonsense water system manager explain water loss to me like this. “If you pumped the water, and you didn’t sell the water, then you lost the water.” Using today’s terms, that’s non-revenue water. In the industry, we understand that some non-revenue water is not lost. We usually don’t bill for line flushing, municipal facilities, firefighting, etc., but we should be metering it, or at least be using reasonably accurate estimates of the amount used.
I
www.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
In some cases such as meter inaccuracies, billing errors, and unknown/unmetered consumption, not only could the cost be recovered, but also the profit. It’s the non-revenue water that we can’t account for that drives our operational costs up and needlessly has a negative impact on the system’s bank account. It doesn’t matter if the loss is caused by leaks, meter inaccuracies, theft, billing errors, or unknown and unmetered consumption—it costs the system money and it can be reduced. Using real cost-to-produce data from a system that I’m familiar with, I want to illustrate the financial impact water loss can have. All systems are different, but this is typical of those that are small to medium in size. We’ll make the assumption that this is a typical system producing 5 mgd and has a 20% water loss, or 1 mgd. Its source is groundwater and its total cost to produce is 40 cents per 1000 gallons. They are losing $400 per day due to water loss. That translates to $146,000 per year and $2.9 million over the 20-year EPA assessment period. If the system was using surface water as a source, its total cost to produce would be $1.10 per 1000 gallons. That totals the loss at $1100 per day, $401,500 per year, and more than $8 million during the same 20-year span. These examples only consider the actual loss of the cost to produce. In some cases such as meter inaccuracies, billing errors, and unknown/unmetered consumption, not only could the cost be recovered, but also the profit. I’ve never known a system that couldn’t use additional profits. Obviously, you have to determine your actual cost to produce, and finding and reducing water loss costs money as well as additional man-hours. Everyone is running 100 miles per hour just trying to keep their system going, but working toward a reduction in water loss is an investment in the future and an effort that can deliver short- and long-term rewards. Our industry’s aging infrastructure needs immediate attention, and funding could become more difficult to obtain in the coming years. Reducing high-percentage water losses is not the one and only cure. But done correctly, it can certainly be a huge help to water systems with their finances, conservation, and overall efficiency.
Don Harvard is the editorial adviser of Public Groundwater Systems Journal and director of business development at the National Ground Water Association. He can be reached at dharvard@ngwa.org.
Public Groundwater Systems Journal Fall 2013 5/
INDUSTRY
NEWSLINE
Largest UV Disinfection Treatment Plant Opens in North America
USGS Provides Insight on Vulnerability of Public-Supply Wells to Contamination
The Greater Cincinnati Water Works added a new layer to its drinking water treatment process in October by opening an ultraviolet disinfection plant. The $30 million treatment plant makes this utility “the largest in North America to use UV disinfection along with sand filtration and carbon absorption,” Gannett’s Cincinnati Ohio News reported. The upside of UV disinfection is that it cleans water without adding chemicals, odors, or taste to the water supply, nor does it remove beneficial chemicals. Gannett provided a short description of the technology: “Ultraviolet rays are energy-rich electromagnetic rays found in the natural spectrum of sunlight. They are in the range of the invisible shortwave light, having a wavelength ranging from 100 to 400 nanometers. How small is a nanometer? By comparison, the diameter of a human hair is 50,000 to 100,000 nanometers.” According to the EPA, UV disinfection is not as cost-effective as chlorination, “but costs are competitive when dechlorination is used and fire codes are met.” On the positive side, UV disinfection is user-friendly and space efficient, EPA said. Some related regulatory advice from the EPA is that “any UV disinfection system should be pilot tested prior to full-scale operation to ensure that it will meet discharge permit requirements for a particular site.”
Key factors have been identified that help determine the vulnerability of public-supply wells to contamination. A U.S. Geological Survey report describes these factors, providing insight into which contaminants in an aquifer might reach a well and when, how, and at what concentration they might arrive. About one-third of the U.S. population gets their drinking water from public-supply wells. The study, “Factors Affecting PublicSupply-Well Vulnerability to Contamination: Understanding Observed Water Quality and Anticipating Future Water Quality,” explored factors affecting public-supply-well vulnerability to contamination in 10 study areas across the nation. Measures that are crucial for understanding such vulnerability include the sources of the water and contaminants in the water that infiltrate the ground and are drawn into a well, the geochemical conditions encountered by
CH2M HILL, Philadelphia Water Release White Papers on Contamination Warning Systems CH2M HILL, a global full-service consulting, design, construction and operations firm, and the Philadelphia Water Department released a series of white papers to disseminate knowledge and industry best practices gained from the city water department’s Contamination Warning System Demonstration Pilot Project. As part of a larger water security initiative, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency awarded grants to water utilities in four major cities, including 6/ Fall 2013 Public Groundwater Systems Journal
Philadelphia, to institute full-scale contamination warning systems. This effort was to build upon what had already been developed by the EPA with the Greater Cincinnati Water Works. The designed and deployed pilot systems feature online water quality monitoring, optimized sampling and analysis, consumer complaint surveillance, enhanced security monitoring, and public health surveillance systems, along with consequence management. The goal of the project, which began in 2010 and is now complete, was to create the components of a sustainable system capable of accurately detecting contaminants or events which could lead to contamination in real time. Using advanced monitoring technologies and enhanced surveillance, the contamination warning system makes it possible to collect, integrate, analyze, and communicate water quality issues, thereby minimizing the transport of contaminated water through the Philadelphia Water Department’s distribution system and providing the department time to communicate and respond to a contamination event.
the groundwater, and the range of ages of the groundwater that enters a well. The study found conditions in some aquifers enable contaminants to remain in the groundwater longer or travel more rapidly to wells than conditions in other aquifers. Direct pathways, such as fractures in rock aquifers or wellbores of non-pumping wells, frequently affect groundwater and contaminant movement, making it difficult to identify which areas at land surface are the most important to protect from contamination. An unexpected finding is that human-induced changes in recharge and groundwater flow caused by irrigation and high-volume pumping for public supply changed aquifer geochemical conditions in numerous study areas. Changes in geochemical conditions often release naturally occurring drinking-water contaminants such as arsenic and uranium into the groundwater, increasing concentrations in public-supply wells. For more information, visit www.usgs .gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=3656.
Philadelphia Water and CH2M HILL produced the white papers as part of the project’s final efforts to share as broadly as possible the knowledge and experience gained from the pilot with other water utilities. Visit www.ch2mhill .com/iws to download the full series of white papers.
Rice Lake Utilities Provides Convenient Way Online to Receive and Pay Bills Rice Lake Utilities in Rice Lake, Wisconsin, announced it has launched on doxo to deliver its customers added convenience to pay bills and manage their accounts. Provided by doxo is a free digital file cabinet where users can receive bills and other documents from Rice Lake Utilities or any other connected service provider. Users can organize account information and make payments directly from their doxo account online or via the doxo mobile app. Rice Lake Utilities customers can connect on doxo by going to www.doxo .com/ricelake or by downloading the doxo iPhone or Android app. www.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
THE
LOG
NEWS FROM THE NATIONAL GROUND WATER ASSOCIATION
NGWA Announces 2013 Award Winners NGWA congratulates the recipients of its annual Awards of Excellence, Outstanding Groundwater Project Awards, and Divisional Awards. The awards will be presented this December during the 2013 NGWA® Groundwater Expo and Annual Meeting in Nashville, Tennessee. Long-time NGWA member Ronald B. Peterson has received the Association’s top honor as the 2013 recipient of the Ross L. Oliver Award for outstanding contributions to the groundwater industry. Peterson is an employee of Baroid Industrial Drilling Products out of South Jordan, Utah. The other 2013 NGWA award recipients follow. Outstanding Groundwater Project Awards: • City of Phoenix, City of Phoenix Aquifer Storage and Recovery Wells—Groundwater Supply Award • ARCADIS, Numerical Analysis of Groundwater/Surface Water Interference at Blackfoot Bridge Project— Groundwater Protection Award • ARCADIS, Protection of Public Supply Well Installation Relative to Superfund Sites—Groundwater Remediation Award. Awards of Excellence: • Chunmiao Zheng, Ph.D., professor at the University of Alabama and professor/chair and director at the Center for Water Resources, Peking University, China— M. King Hubbert Award for major science contributions to the knowledge of groundwater • Arthur E. Becker, MGWC, CPG, general manager, Environmental Drilling Division, SGS North America— Robert Storm Interdivisional Cooperation Award • Gregory D. Buffington, PE, Layne Christensen Co., Aurora, Illinois; Leonard Konikow, Ph.D., U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia; and Evan Nyer, retired from ARCADIS, Tampa, Florida—Life Member Awards • Steve Maslansky, Maslansky Geoenvironmental, Prescott, Arizona—Individual Safety Advocate Award • Michael Gefell, ARCADIS, Lakewood, Colorado— Technology Award • Wes McCall, Geoprobe Systems, Salina, Kansas— Special Recognition Award • U.S. Senator Bernard Sanders (I-Vermont)— Groundwater Protector Award (presented earlier this year during the 2013 NGWA Washington Fly-in in February) • Carl Lee, Milby Co., Elkridge, Maryland— Standard Bearer Award. Divisional Awards: • John Selker, Ph.D., Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, and Scott Tyler, Ph.D., University of Reno, Reno, Nevada—John Hem Excellence in Science & Engineering Award for significant scientific or engineering contributions to the understanding of groundwater
www.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
• Brent Murray, PG, Environmental Quality Inc., Tequesta, Florida—Keith E. Anderson Award for outstanding contributions to NGWA’s Scientists and Engineers Division • Mike Benet, North American Specialty Products, Willow Park, Texas—Manufacturers Division Special Recognition Award • Jim Paulhus, F.W. Webb, Cranston, Rhode Island— Supplier of the Year Award. To read more about NGWA awards, which honor the best of the best in the groundwater industry, visit www.NGWA .org/Awards.
NGWA Offers Course on Asset Management for Groundwater-Supplied Public Water Systems Discover what is needed to keep a groundwater-based public system operating efficiently during this one-day NGWA course designed for those with dedicated or multiple responsibilities. This course will be offered on December 5 in Nashville, Tennessee. Do you think of the groundwater, and the equipment that pumps and distributes it, as assets? Do you know how to properly value them? Keeping the system operating efficiently depends on both proper management and maintenance—and knowing what to do when an unforeseen circumstance occurs. During this course, you will learn about: • Groundwater assets and how to value them • Changes in value from new to remaining useful life • Efficient management of your assets • Planning for rehabilitation and replacement • Determining source conditions • Assessing water quality and how to monitor changes • Establishing triggers to use invasive measures • Avoiding catastrophic failures • Proper operation and maintenance of the source and equipment. For more information and to register, visit www.NGWA.org.
PGWSJ Web Site Provides Timely News The Public Groundwater Systems Journal not only provides all of the content found in every issue, but it enables those working at community water systems to stay up to date on the latest happenings in the water industry with a news section updated regularly. All of PGWSJ’s issues dating back to the first one last year are available in an easy-to-read e-format so you can view them wherever you are and send articles to colleagues. The e-format also enables you to add articles to a variety of social media platforms. The social media feeds from the National Ground Water Association’s Facebook and Twitter accounts can be found on the site as well. Head to www.publicgroundwatersystems journal.com and bookmark it today. Public Groundwater Systems Journal Fall 2013 7/
PGWSJ Staff Exhibits at H2O-XPO in Louisville he H2O-XPO took place October 1-3 in Louisville, Kentucky, and the Public Groundwater Systems Journal was there. The event is the annual conference of the National Rural Water Association. It takes place every other year and is colocated with the Association of Equipment Manufacturers’ ICUEE conference and the iP Utility Safety Conference & Expo. The result is a huge event with a packed exhibit hall, acres of equipment
T
Thad Plumley is the editor of Public Groundwater Systems Journal and director of information products at the National Ground Water Association. He can be reached at tplumley@ ngwa.org.
8/ Fall 2013 Public Groundwater Systems Journal
exhibits outdoors, and hours of educational sessions. The H2O-XPO portion brings together water and wastewater utility personnel from large and small systems for an annual event featuring sessions on operations, management, working with water boards, and governance. Combined, there were more than 17,500 attendees. Participants came from all 50 states, all 10 Canadian provinces, and 50 other countries. There were also a record 862 exhibitors, and the show floor hit a record 1,173,957 net square feet when counting indoor and outdoor exhibits. PGWSJ Editor Thad Plumley and PGWSJ Editorial Adviser Don Harvard were at the event in the booth of the National Ground Water Association,
The H2O Expo combined with the Association of Equipment Manufacturers’ event and the result was a huge outdoor area of machinery and tools as well as a packed exhibit hall. meeting attendees and fellow exhibitors, adding new readers to the journal’s circulation, and sitting in on the professional development offerings. One of the event’s highlights was the drawings of a raffle that supported the NRWA Water Political Action Committee. The drawing took place on the final day in the exhibit hall and was for more than 40 prizes. The prizes ranged from a Kentucky flintlock rifle, an iPod, and $1000 cash. All told, the raffle raised more than $16,000. www.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
Retha Mattern and Ryan Caya of Bismarck State College were on hand to meet attendees in the NRWA H2O section of the exhibit hall.
NRWA President Doug Anderton (right) stopped by the Public Groundwater Systems Journal booth to visit with PGWSJ Editorial Adviser Don Harvard. Anderton is the manager of the Dade County Water & Sewer Authority in Trenton, Georgia.
The NRWA also presented several awards at its Tribute to Excellence Ceremony. The Minnesota Rural Water Association won the Association of the Year award. Among its accomplishments are retaining its 17-member staff that has a combined 225 years of service and recently starting a customer notification system that can contact thousands through phone lines, e-mails, and text messages. Little Falls, New York, won the Environmental Achievement award for its plan for bio-solids reuse. The town has a population of 4800 along the Mohawk River and is located in the center of the state. It is combatting extreme cold, ice
formation, snail invasions, and the cost of using more than 90,000 gallons of fuel to dispose of bio-solids with a new ecological approach in an abandoned coal mine reclamation project. This land application is now responsible for a sustainable hay production initiative. The 2014 NRWA Water Pro Conference will take place October 6-8, 2014, in Seattle, Washington, and PGWSJ will be in attendance. Also look for PGWSJ staff at the American Water Works Association’s Annual Conference and Exposition, June 8-12, 2014, in Boston, Massachusetts. —By Thad Plumley
’T N O D S MIS ! OUT
' R O U N D W A T E R % X P O
A Sound Investment $ECEMBER s .ASHVILLE 4ENNESSEE s 53!
Make a sound investment in your future by attending this year’s NGWA Groundwater Expo! IMPROVE YOUR BOTTOM LINE
,EARN WHAT S NEW DURING WORKSHOPS ONˆ s 6&$S FOR COMMERCIAL USE s (AZMAT TRANSPORTATION s #$, QUALIFICATIONS AND MORE
DISCOVER SOLUTIONS Explore the exhibit hall— s /PEN HOURS OVER TWO DAYS s (UNDREDS OF EXHIBITORS s 3CORES OF NEW PRODUCTS
EXPAND YOUR HORIZONS
'ROW PROFESSIONALLY AND PERSONALLYˆ s -EET WITH THOUSANDS OF YOUR PEERS s 'AIN INSIGHT ON NEW OPPORTUNITIES s $ISCUSS FUTURE POSSIBILITIES
WWW 'ROUNDWATER%XPO COM s s www.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
Public Groundwater Systems Journal Fall 2013 9/
Online and Doing Fine Mesa Water District’s cutting-edge system treats amber water for a 100% local water supply. By Jill Ross t was an ambitious goal, but today the Mesa Water District is one of only two Orange County water districts to be 100% locally reliable and able to serve all of its customers’ tap water demand with local water supplies. And, for southern California water customers, that’s a big deal. It took two years and a team of the brightest engineers and contractors to complete the upgrade of Mesa Water’s unique treatment facility. As of Decem-
I
Jill Ross is a former editor of Water Well Journal and worked for the National Ground Water Association from 1996 to 2004. Today, she does freelance work from home. She can be reached at jillross72@gmail.com.
“We can now guarantee a long-term supply of water going forward for the next 15 to 20 years.” ber 2012, the Mesa Water Reliability Facility (MWRF) is online and operating as planned. The project finished under budget, and its additional output has helped the district reach the Mesa Water Board’s long-standing vision of providing 100% of customers’ water needs with local water supplies, eliminating Mesa Water’s dependence on costly and unreliable sources of water imported from northern California and the Colorado River.
10/ Fall 2013 Public Groundwater Systems Journal
The Mesa Water Reliability Facility protects groundwater and uses less energy than the district’s older system. It also enables Mesa Water to be one of two water districts in Orange County, California, to be 100% locally reliable. “To be able to deliver a 100 percent local water supply and control our costs, it’s just phenomenal,” says Mesa Water’s district engineer, Phil Lauri, who joined Mesa Water in June 2012. “We can now guarantee a long-term supply of water going forward for the next 15 to 20 years.” Additionally, by becoming 100% reliant on local water supplies, Mesa Water will use energy more efficiently www.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
Figure 1.
and less energy overall, which means less greenhouse gas will be created, thus reducing the district’s carbon footprint. The facility earned Mesa Water an outstanding groundwater project award in protection from the National Ground Water Association in 2012.
Mesa Water’s Groundwater Sources Mesa Water is fortunate to sit above a portion of Orange County’s groundwater basin that stores a supply of ambercolored water hundreds of feet below clear water reserves. This amber water has a slight tint and sulfur smell from the ancient redwood forests that used to grow in the area, but the water is of high quality and safe to drink. Mesa Water’s groundwater source is from eight wells in the coastal portion of the Orange County Groundwater Basin. The groundwater basin in this area consists of upper aquifers that generally have little or no color and lower aquifers that generally have higher levels of color. Figure 1 shows the general location of the presence of water with color in the lower aquifers. The upper and lower aquifers are separated in most areas with a series of aquitards that impede the flow of water. With the development of water supply wells in the area that pump from the upper aquifer, the groundwater pressure gradient between the upper and lower aquifers has increased. This increase in pressure gradient resulted in the migration of amber water from the lower aquifers to the upper aquifers, resulting in an increase in color in several of the production wells in the area. Figure 2 shows the general cross section of the basin with the generalized concept of the situation. The district’s original water treatment facility (called the Colored Water Treatment Facility) first went online in 2001 to tap this mostly unused water source. The facility used an ozone filtration process to remove the color and odor from the water, and for its first 10 years of service it met the daily water needs of 110,000 residents. The facility also helped to keep the amber water from seeping into the region’s clear water reserves. Soon after the CWTF came online, the salinity of the water from the source wells increased. Mesa Water worked with the Orange County Water District to install additional monitoring wells and discovered the presence of shallow aquifers that could be serving as a conduit of seawater to the source wells for the CWTF. An increase in bromide also came with the increase of salinity and caused the formation of bromide, which www.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
Figure 2.
was just starting to be regulated with the Disinfection Byproducts Rule. A bromate-reduction system was installed, but the bromate treatment process significantly increased the cost for treating the water. Over time, the level of the color in the source wells showed an increase from 120 color units to more than 200 color units. The level of color was reaching the effective treatment limit of the ozone and biological filtration technology. Something had to be done.
A New Plan In response, Mesa Water began an ambitious improvement project to upgrade its treatment facility and increase its capacity from 5.8 million gallons per day to 8.6 million gpd, increasing water production by 50%. Mesa Water wanted to use a newer technology—nanofiltration—to treat the increasing color levels. Other system modifications were planned as well to stop the migration of the colored water into the primary portions of the aquifer. Working with the Orange County Water District and the Municipal Water District of Orange County, Mesa Water embarked upon the CWTF Improvements Project (the name was later changed to the Mesa Water Reliability Facility). The project included negotiation of a revised water quality program agreement with OCWD, and the design and construction of a new treatment facility. The overall project was budgeted at $21 million, and planning and construction was slated to begin in January 2010. Its construction was completed in December 2012. Mesa Water contracted with MWH Constructors, a global, full-service engineering, consulting, and construction company headquartered in Broomfield, Colorado, to provide design review and to manage the construction of the project. As a quality control step, Mesa Water prequalified general contractors with water treatment construction experience. The construction contract was awarded to Brutoco Engineering and Construction of Fontana, California. Tetra Tech, a provider of consulting, engineering, and technical services headquartered in Pasadena, California, and SPI, a consulting engineering firm focused on the application of membrane technology, headquartered in Carlsbad, California,
MESA WATER DISTRICT/continues on page 12 Public Groundwater Systems Journal Fall 2013 11/
MESA WATER DISTRICT/from page 11 also collaborated on design review. A cost estimate for membrane treatment was completed in April 2009. The report estimated a capacity of 8700 acre-feet per year with a capital cost of $14.7 million, plus annual operations and maintenance costs of $505 per acre-foot, for a total unit cost of $167 per acre-foot. Mesa Water had entered into an agreement with OCWD to participate in a water quality program whereby the capital costs of the original CWTF and the increased operating costs for treatment would be recovered by exempting the district from payment of the Basin Equity Assessment (the amount a groundwater-producing agency pays OCWD for pumping above the allotment set by OCWD each year). Mesa Water negotiated an amendment to the agreement to allow for the additional capital costs for replacing the ozone/biological filtration technology with membrane technology and increasing the plant capacity. A key provision of the agreement was the modification of the pumps in the two source wells (Well No. 6 and Well No. 11), which are located on the treatment plant site. The geology in the area is complex with a series of faults trending along the Newport Inglewood fault zone. “We learned from this project that you can’t put enough emphasis on preplanning from the technical point of view,” says Mesa district engineer Lauri. “You must be sure that whatever you are implementing is economically sound.” All this preplanning enabled the project to go off with rarely a hitch. “We had a very, very low incidence of change
12/ Fall 2013 Public Groundwater Systems Journal
orders,” he adds. “The final tally was less than two percent, and less than five percent is phenomenal.” As well, Lauri credits teamwork as a major factor for the success. “There’s immense value in having a strong team in place, not only from an engineering/construction standpoint, but the community as well,” he says, citing the partnerships with OCWD and other water supply agencies in the area that helped to make this project possible.
Getting Started Originally, OCWD had requested that Mesa Water construct new wells away from the site outside of the two faults that surround the property. This would place the wells in an area that had aquifers with confining layers, which would assure the water pumped was from the lower aquifers with the higher color levels and minimize pumping from the shallower aquifers that may be drawing seawater toward the site. A compromise was reached where flow restrictors were placed on the pump intakes to limit pumping to below 750 feet below ground surface in Well No. 11 and 600 feet below ground surface in Well No. 6. Both wells are about 1000 feet deep with screened intervals from 300 feet below ground surface to 1000 feet below ground surface. General Pump Co. of southern California rebuilt the pumps with modified intakes. The flow restrictor consisted of an annular ring to limit the flow to where at least 95% of the water is entering the pump intake from below the flow restrictor. BESST dye testing was used to document the performance of the flow restrictor, using three air lines installed with the pump.
www.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
Carollo Engineers, headquartered in Walnut Creek, California, designed the treatment system. Raw water is pumped from one or both wells through treatment trains to allow flexibility in the flow rate. The raw water first goes through auto backwashing sand separators, and a scale inhibitor is added as a protective measure upstream of cartridge filters, which are used for the final protective barrier upstream of nanofiltration membranes. Two primary nanofiltration screens are the heart of the process. The primary nanofiltration is a two-stage system with concentrate recycle that achieves 95% system recovery. A secondary nanofiltration system treats the primary nanofiltration concentrate, increasing the overall plant recovery from 95% to 98%. Post-treatment of nanofiltration permeates (the water that passes through the pores of the nanofiltration membrane) uses air stripping to remove hydrogen sulfide and methane from the water. Prior to entering the degasifiers, the pH of the nanofiltration permeate is adjusted to 6.3–6.4 using carbon dioxide to facilitate removal of the hydrogen sulfide. Carbon dioxide and caustic soda are added to the effluent to adjust the water pH to 8.5–8.6 and create bicarbonate alkalinity for water stability. The water is sent back through the system for a “polishing” one last time and the treated water is then stored in an on-site reservoir.
Other Benefits As Orange County’s most self-sufficient and sustainable water district with 100% local reliability, Mesa Water also benefits from having a 100% reliable “backup” supply of imported water. The benefits provided by the MWRF include:
• Groundwater cleanup by keeping the amber water from migrating into the clear water basin • Hundreds of years of a local, drought-proof water supply for Mesa Water’s service area • More imported water supply for other Southland municipalities and water agencies that depend on that source • Lowering the district’s energy use, greenhouse gas emissions, and carbon footprint to less than half of what it was before • Better control by Mesa Water of its water affordability and quality • Opportunities for the public to learn about the value and stewardship of water as a precious resource. Lauri also credits the far-reaching vision of Mesa Water’s boards of directors, going back for several decades, in making this project a reality. “Mesa Water has achieved the long-standing vision of the district’s past and present board of directors by becoming one hundred percent locally reliable,” said James R. Fisler, current president of Mesa Water’s Board of Directors. In addition to refurbished wells, the upgraded site includes a 15,000-square-foot demonstration garden featuring a miniature redwood forest to commemorate the ancient redwood trees that once blanketed the local coastal plain. As earlier mentioned, it was the ancient redwoods that gave the deep groundwater its amber color. The garden also showcases a wide range of plants and flowers that thrive with little water in a dry climate. PGWSJ
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS CAN MAKE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PROJECT SUCCESS AND FAILURE. NGWA Members ConsensusDocs are a better Receive way to build and help you 20% Disco unt achieve better project results! ConsensusDocs contracts are developed by owners, contractors, sureties, and design professionals to advance the project’s best interest. Special guidance for water well drilling and related services is available, including public works wells, large commercial and industrial wells, and high-volume irrigation wells.
www.NGWA.org/ConsensusDocs
www.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
Public Groundwater Systems Journal Fall 2013 13/
(COVER STORY)
Smart Distribution Systems Technologies bring storage tanks into the 21st century. By Peter S. Fiske, Ph.D. rinking water quality is becoming an increasing challenge for water system operators across the United States. Not only are groundwater sources under increasing stress, but new regulatory requirements, such as the Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule (Stage 2 D/DBP Rule), are forcing water utilities to adopt new strategies for keeping up with regulatory obligations, and satisfying the public’s
D
Peter S. Fiske, Ph.D., is the CEO of PAX Water Technologies in Richmond, California. As CEO, Fiske oversees all aspects of technology development, product design and testing, and technical communication. Fiske received his Ph.D. from Stanford University and MBA from the University of California at Berkeley.
demand for safe, good-tasting drinking water. Traditionally, improvements in drinking water quality were addressed by improvements to water sources (e.g., new wells) and upgrades to water treatment plants. However, these approaches can be time-consuming and involve costly major upgrades to facilities. This is why an increasing number of utilities have started to use technologies in the distribution system itself to stabilize and improve water quality.
Tanks—Problem or Solution? Tanks can cause significant problems in maintaining distribution system water quality. Operators must often deal with tanks that are bigger than needed to satisfy demand and where the water quality
14/ Fall 2013 Public Groundwater Systems Journal
Active mixing circulates the entire tank volume in order to eliminate stratification and other water quality problems. implications of poor mixing and inadequate turnover have been overlooked in their design. Because this design allows little natural mixing and aeration to occur—even the best water quality deteriorates before reaching customers. In addition, water levels within tanks are often dictated by pressure or emergency reserve requirements. As a result, tank detention times can significantly contribute to a system’s total water age. When residual levels decline, biofilm growth occurs rapidly, especially during the summer months. www.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
Forcing turnover has been the traditional approach for reducing water age in tanks, but it involves trade-offs. For example, forced turnover sometimes requires extra pumping, resulting in higher energy use, and can lower tank operating levels. This can leave a distribution system vulnerable in an emergency. Some tanks require manual intervention to force turnover. Above-grade tanks often become thermally and chemically stratified, causing old, warm water to become trapped at the top of a tank. Stratification, once established, can be difficult to disrupt, even with much forced turnover (Figure 1). Thermal stratification can lead to disinfectant residual loss, biofilm development, and top water with elevated temperatures, thus posing particular risks for chloraminated systems. Another traditional approach to reducing water age involves installing baffles inside finished water storage tanks. Unfortunately, baffles produce plug flow inside a tank, increase water age in a finished water tank, and restrict lateral flow resulting in thermal stratification. Some tanks are outfitted with separate inlets and outlets to promote water movement inside the tank. However, computational fluid dynamic modeling illustrates that having separate inlets and outlets rarely improves mixing.
ing circulation inside a tank, sediment accumulation and biofilm development can be significantly reduced.
In-Tank Aeration Some utilities are struggling with compliance with the Stage 2 D/DBP Rule and looking to deploy technologies in the distribution system to address the problem. Aeration has been proven to be effective in removing THMs (the most common regulated DBP) and some utilities are installing aeration technologies inside water storage tanks.
Results from recent case studies are encouraging. At Stanly County Public Utilities in Albemarle, North Carolina, a spray aeration system reduced THM levels to zero from an average of 78 mg/L (Figure 2). Several aeration technologies are available. There are bubble-based systems, surface aerator systems, and spray aeration systems (Figure 3). Because each technology has a different effec-
ANY TANK. ANY SIZE.™
Eliminate Ice Formation in Your Tank for Good Introducing the new PAX Water Mixer (PWM100) for small tanks s -OST POWERFUL MIXER IN ITS CLASS s !CTIVE VORTEX MIXING s %ASY INSTALL SELF RIGHTING DESIGN s YEAR WARRANTY
Active Mixing Another approach is to install active mixing systems inside water storage tanks (see photo on page 14). These systems continuously mix water and, if sized correctly, maintain well-mixed conditions in all tanks. Mixing can improve disinfectant residual levels, lower water temperatures, and stabilize water quality. However, mixers are additional equipment and they must be powerful enough to achieve the required performance level. Active mixing also provides broader benefits to water utilities in the form of asset protection. Water tanks are an expensive asset and can quickly become a costly liability if they are not maintained and protected. In northern climates, ice can damage tank interiors. Active mixing systems can eliminate ice formation in water tanks, allowing utilities to avoid costly repairs. Plus, by maintainwww.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
SMART DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS/continues on page 16
Tank interior before mixer
24 hours after mixer installed
Ice-free tank after one week
For more information on the PWM100 or the PAX Water Mixer Family, call 1.866.729.6493 www.paxwater.com
Public Groundwater Systems Journal Fall 2013 15/
Figure 1. Storage tank temperature data (500,000 gallons). Sixty percent forced cycling may not be enough to disrupt thermal stratification.
Figure 2. A pilot study on an in-tank aeration system in an elevated storage tank operated by Stanly County Public Utilities in North Carolina reduced THM levels to zero.
Figure 3. In-tank aeration using sprayers.
SMART DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS/from page 15 tiveness and reliability level, designing a reliable aeration system with predictable results is not straightforward. In addition, each technology’s cost and maintenance can vary widely.
Disinfectant Control Disinfectant residual control is a critical part of maintaining water quality in the distribution system. Achieving the right balance of disinfectant in tanks can be challenging.
䡲
Long-term well and wellfield decline?
䡲
Wells not performing as expected from the beginning as expected?
䡲
Water quality issues or concerns?
䡲
Need creative solutions to water supply?
䡲
Ground water is what we do
䡲
Specialists in sustaining and improving well and wellfield performance
䡲
Ground water system biofouling and biocorrosion — total solution experts
䡲
Certified and licensed in multiple states
䡲
We tackle your “weird well problems”
䡲
Training — get a handle on things yourself
䡲
Working across the USA and internationally
Smith-Comeskey Ground Water Science LLC www.groundwaterscience.com 16/ Fall 2013 Public Groundwater Systems Journal
Too little disinfectant entering the distribution system can allow some parts of the distribution system to fall below the required minimum levels, allowing bacteria and other harmful pathogens to flourish. Too much disinfectant can create other water quality problems, like DBP formation or taste and odor issues. Some utilities are having great success by installing automated residual boosting systems in water storage tanks in the distribution system that continuously monitor and adjust residual levels to maintain uniform, high-quality water. These systems can help eliminate the need for manual dosing while stabilizing residual levels in tanks. By applying disinfectant boosting only in areas with historically low residual levels, water operators are able to dial back residual disinfectant levels leaving the treatment plant, lowering DBP levels in other parts of the distribution system.
Balanced Trade-Offs Yield Superior Results Deploying multiple water quality improvement strategies within the distribution system often means significantly lower cost and maintenance than those required for treatment plant changes. It makes sense to first exhaust technology improvements within a distribution system before making treatment plant changes to achieve compliance. And now, with new technologies—active mixing, in-tank aeration, and automated disinfectant control—water distribution has become an opportunity to continuously improve water quality as it travels from the treatment plant to the customer. PGWSJ www.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
Out with the Oil, In with the New It’s important to know about water-flush line shaft turbine pumps and their applications. By Nathan Nutter, PE, Jeff Wold, and Gary Gin, RG
ignificant quantities of oil in older wells and potable supply storage tanks are well documented. Older wells may have more than 100 feet of oil stagnating in the well.1 Potable storage has been known to have multiple inches of oil floating on the tank’s water surface. Oil in potable water supplies poses a concern regarding water quality and
S 1
Weber Water Resources, Chandler, Arizona. 2013. Weber has found multiple wells with oil lubrication having more than 100 feet of oil buildup in the casing.
water treatment equipment. Disinfection byproducts (DBPs) are formed when chlorine mixes with oil. As aquifer levels decline, oil residing in the annular space may pump oil into a chlorinated water stream, potentially increasing DBPs in the distribution system. Many municipal line shaft turbine well pumps use oil as the lubricating fluid between the shaft and the shaft bearings. Oil weeps through helical grooves in the bearings, providing lubrication as the shaft spins. The oil makes
MESA WATER DISTRICT/continues on page 18
Nathan Nutter, PE, has worked for Carollo Engineers in Phoenix, Arizona, for seven years and has 12 years in water resources consulting. His focus is in water resource management, specifically through the use of aquifer storage and recovery wells. He can be reached at nnutter@carollo.com. Jeff Wold has worked for Weber Water Resources LLC in Chandler, Arizona, for 26 years. He is a senior project manager working on a diverse range of potable water projects in Arizona and California. He can be reached at jwold@weberwater resources.com. Gary Gin, RG, is the city hydrologist for Phoenix, and is currently working on implementing and operating Phoenix’s first ASR wellfield. The City of Phoenix is the recipient of the 2013 NGWA Outstanding Project in Groundwater Supply Award. He can be reached at gary.gin@phoenix.gov.
www.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
(Top) A water-flush system with a filter, flowmeter, and solenoid valve. (Above) Annular space between casing and column pipe. Public Groundwater Systems Journal Fall 2013 17/
Water from system is conveyed to wellhead through small copper pipe.
MESA WATER DISTRICT/from page 17 its way from the wellhead to the top of the bowl assembly, where it discharges into the annular space between the well casing and the column pipe. The oil then either floats to the surface of the water in the annular space, or if the pump is running and the water level is close to the bowl assembly, is sucked into the bowl assembly and discharged to the distribution system or treatment facility. Increasingly strict U.S. Environmental Protection Agency water quality standards will likely result in the installation of more treatment systems. The industry has already seen a greater number of arsenic treatment facilities, granulated activated carbon (GAC) vessels, and reverse osmosis membrane systems constructed throughout the country due to stricter standards. When groundwater mixed with oil encounters any of these treatment systems, potential clogging of the media/membranes may occur and reduce the process’ life cycle. Replacing arsenic media in a 12-foot-diameter tank with a 3-foot media depth costs between $70,000–$90,0002, including material 2
Vendor quotes provided for cities of Prescott, Arizona, and Sedona, Arizona estimates. 2013.
3
GAC quotes from Cabot Norit for internal Carollo Engineers projects in the western United States. 2013.
and labor. Replacing GAC in a similar sized tank and a 7-foot bed depth costs between $25,000–$35,000.3 One way to completely eliminate the presence of oil in a well pump is to use a water-flush lubrication system. A water-flush lubrication system uses system water to lubricate the shaft bearings. Pressurized water from the distribution system is conveyed to the wellhead and inner column through a small-diameter copper pipe (half-inch or less). Similar to oil, the water then flows by gravity through the bearings to the top of the bowl assembly, out of the discharge port, and into the annulus. The water lubricates the bearings as it passes through each bearing.
Similar but Different Although similar in operation and setup, there are some differences between an oil-lube system and a water-flush system. The bearings of a water-flush system have multiple, vertical grooves etched out of them, typically ¼-inch × ¼-inch, to increase the wetted area of the bearings. Another difference is that of the tube tension assembly as various modifications can be made to the tube tension assembly to make it work for a water-flush system. Functionally, a water-flush system requires a filter, flowmeter, and solenoid valve to operate (see top photo on page 17). The filter is recommended because the system water usually has particu-
18/ Fall 2013 Public Groundwater Systems Journal
lates in it that could pose problems for the bearing/shaft tolerances if allowed to flow through the bearing grooves. Fifty-micron filters have been used effectively in Arizona for this application.4 The flowmeter is used to ensure water is flowing to the bearings. Programming associated with the flowmeter provides a safety measure for the lubrication system in that if the flowmeter registers a flow below a set low-flow value, it locks out the pump from starting. This is critical because if inadequate flow is moving over the bearings, the bearings could boil the water and seize up. The solenoid valve is provided to enable greater flow to the bearings when the pump is running versus normal flow through a bypass line when the pump is not running. The bypass line on the water-flush system ensures that air is not being entrained in the inner column. Introducing air to an unlined, scheduled-steel inner column has shown to build colonies of iron reducing bacteria.5 These can grow into colonies large enough to plug water-flush bearing grooves, which could effectively overheat shaft bearings and seize the shaft to the bearings. Therefore, it is important to keep air out of the water-flush piping. There are multiple benefits to using a water-flush system other than just fixing potential issues related to oil in the potable distribution system. Recharge credits for the water-flush water may be received if the water is deemed by any authorities to be counted for credits. In Arizona, recharge credits can be accumulated using surface water as the water-flush source. Groundwater used as the lubricating fluid, though, would not be counted towards recharge credits. Assuming an average water-flush rate of 3 gpm, a credit of more than 1.5 mg of water could be banked.6 4
Phoenix, Arizona, Well 299 and Well 300. 2013. 5 Weber Water Resources and City of Phoenix inner column test performed in 2010. Test results revealed growth along welded seam of schedule 80 pipe after successive “wet/dry” cycles. Tests confirmed growth of iron reducing bacteria. 6
Average City of Phoenix, Well 299 and Well 300 water-flush lubrication rate. 2013.
www.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
Table 1. Comparison of Oil-Lube and Water-Flush Systems Issue
Oil-Lube
Introduced to distribution system
Potential for disinfection byproduct formation, or clogging of treatment systems such as arsenic media, granulated activated carbon, or RO membranes
No issues as it was system water to begin with
Maintenance
Daily maintenance; scheduled filling of oil reservoir or tank
Change filter every few weeks or months depending on filter condition
Residual effect
Oil buildup in casing or distribution system
Slight potential for DBP increase in well due to recharge of chlorinated water; can be pumped out during first few minutes of pumping
Potential benefits
New technologies emerging to directly recover oil out of discharge port at bottom of well and return it to surface for reuse
Recharge credits
Lubrication characteristics
Excellent
Poor; need greater wetted area
Water-flush system bearings.
Another benefit of using water-flush systems is they do not need to be tended to on a daily basis. They do not have reservoirs that need to be filled, flow adjustments to be made, or oil drums/ containers to dispose of. To put the system into operation, the operator simply opens a ball valve to allow system water to flow to the bearings and bleeds off air through another valve at the wellhead. When the air is bled off, the operator closes the bleed valve and walks away. At sites in Phoenix, Arizona, equipped with waterflush systems, the operators change a filter approximately once a month. Otherwise, there is no maintenance.
Water-Flush
pump their operators will operate and maintain. Finally, to replace an oil-lube system with a water-flush system, the following steps would need to be taken: 1. Pull the pump. 2. Modify the inner column: • The shaft would need to be upgraded from 1045 carbon steel to stainless steel. • Grooves would need to be cut into the bearings for additional wetted area and flow. 3. Change the tube tension assembly setup. 4. Connect water-flush piping. 5. Open valve to system and bleed off air at wellhead.
The total cost to convert from an oillube system to a water-flush system would be about $35,000 to $40,000 for a pump set at 500 feet below surface. Water-flush lubrication will not be applicable for all deep well turbine pumps. However, they can be beneficial for applications where the water will flow directly to a treatment train with processes including GAC, arsenic media and/or membranes, for aquifer storage and recovery wells (recharge credits), and for water providers that simply want to ensure oil does not become a nuisance to the standard operation of the drinking water system. PGWSJ
The Industry’s Choice for Geothermal and Well-Grouting
Pros and Cons Table 1 is a summary of the pros and cons to each system. It must be stated that using a submersible pump eliminates any of the issues associated with lubrication. However, submersible pumps have drawbacks as well, and it is up to the owner to decide which style of
www.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
CG-500/031/GT
High Capacity Geothermal Series
ÜÜÜ°V i }À ÕÌ°V ÊÊUÊÊ708.354.7112 Public Groundwater Systems Journal Fall 2013 19/
By Ed Butts, PE, CPI
Groundwater Treatment Part 3(a): Disinfection—Chlorination
isinfection is the process used to kill or otherwise deactivate harmful microorganisms, often referred to as pathogens, in water which have the potential of causing disease, the primary concern generally for human beings. As opposed to sterilization, which is used to destroy all microorganisms, disinfection is used strictly for the purpose of rendering pathogens incapable of causing disease, either through outright destruction of the pathogen itself or by deactivating the ability of the pathogen to reproduce and multiply. Disinfection can be accomplished using many different methods. However, all of the most common methods will typically fall into one of the three following types:
D
1. Disinfection using heat (boiling of water, distillation) 2. Disinfection using radiation (ultraviolet) 3. Disinfection using chemical methods (chlorination, ozone, iodine). As shown above, although there are many various forms and types of disinfection methods, the primary methods we are mainly concerned with are those that are used for groundwater supplies and are therefore the methods to which we will limit our discussion—namely chlorination, ultraviolet, and ozone. Ed Butts, PE, CPI, is the chief engineer at 4B Engineering & Consulting, Salem, Oregon. He has more than 35 years experience in the water well business, specializing in engineering and business management. He can be reached at epbpe@juno.com.
Because the use of chlorination involves so much detailed discussion, we will split the topic of disinfection into two parts. Chlorination will be discussed this issue in Part 3(a) while ultraviolet and ozone will be discussed in Part 3(b) next issue.
Chlorination Chlorination is by far the most common method used for disinfection of drinking water supplies. The controversy regarding the continued use of chlorine as a disinfecting agent for potable water systems has resulted in a strong, as well as divisive, argument over the past several decades. Historically, chlorine has been used as the primary means to disinfect potable water supplies since the early 1900s and is still the most common disinfectant used in water treatment. The current use of chlorine for water systems can basically be divided into two distinct purposes: 1. As a primary full-time disinfectant for potable and wastewater supplies 2. As a short-term disinfection agent for “shock” or temporary disinfection of wells, water lines, reservoirs, and other water facilities during or after construction, repair, or maintenance. The effectiveness of chlorination as a disinfecting agent is highly dependent on several factors—pH, water temperature, turbidity or cloudiness of the water, interfering agents such as iron or manganese, chlorine strength, and the contact time.
20/ Fall 2013 Public Groundwater Systems Journal
History of Chlorine as a Disinfectant Chlorine has been used as the primary means of disinfecting water supplies since the early part of the 20th century. The first permanent chlorination facility in the world was built in 1902 in Belgium. The first recorded major U.S. city to practice chlorination of its water supply was Jersey City, New Jersey, in 1908. The dramatic drop of incidents of typhoid and other waterborne diseases were quickly attributed to the extended use of chlorine as a disinfecting agent during this period. Chlorination continued to be used as the primary choice for water disinfection throughout the 20th century until the 1980s when concern regarding the resistance to chlorine by giardia and cryptosporidium, two common surface waterborne parasites, was revealed. In addition, in 1974 researchers discovered that trihalomethanes, a class of contaminants containing a suspected carcinogen (chloroform), were formed in drinking water as a result of chlorinating water that contained natural organic matter. Since most surface water supplies are known to often contain levels of natural organic matter, this created widespread concern, especially given the fact that most large cities in the United States had traditionally used surface water as their primary source of drinking water for decades.
Chlorine’s Advantages Even with these concerns, chlorine has remained to this day as the primary means of disinfecting potable water supwww.NGWA.org
plies due to its many advantages—solubility in water; overall effectiveness; ease of application; relative safety; its unique property of maintaining an active residual in water that can be verified, monitored, and controlled; and to many people, its primary advantage of low cost. Even with the recent and rapid advances in the use of ozone and ultraviolet light for water and wastewater treatment, chlorine remains one of the most effective methods in current use that can adequately and predictably destroy most waterborne pathogenic (harmful) bacteria and viruses. In addition to the use of chlorine as a disinfectant, chlorine is also a powerful oxidant that is often used to control algae, oxidize iron and manganese, destroy hydrogen sulfide, control biological growth, and remove many taste and odor problems. Chlorine is commercially available in three basic forms: an aqueous type (chlorine gas) and the two hypochlorites (sodium hypochlorite and calcium hypochlorite). Each of these forms has its own advantages and disadvantages and the pros and cons associated with each type must be evaluated based on the proposed application and use.
Chlorine Gas Chlorine gas is most often used by larger municipalities, those that typically use more than 10-20 pounds per day of chlorine due to its relative higher risk in handling, injecting, and storing. It is available in full (100%) strength and is usually introduced into a system using a method of vacuum withdrawal with an arrangement in which chlorine gas is removed from a prefilled cylinder (containing 100 up to 2000 pounds of chlorine gas), followed by injection directly into the point of application. Chlorine gas is rarely used for the routine disinfection of wells and water lines, except in applications requiring large quantities of chlorine such as a large diameter well, a long pipeline, or deep/difficult well rehabilitation.
Sodium Hypochlorite Sodium hypochlorite is the most popular form of chlorine used for the disinfection of water and wastewater supplies. It is often referred to as bleach www.NGWA.org
or liquid bleach, and is commercially available in strengths of 1%, 5.25%, 10%, 12.5%, 15%, and 30% as a chlorine product. This means that one gallon of a 12.5% sodium hypochlorite solution will typically contain close to the equivalent of one pound of chlorine. Commonly available liquid bleach, such as Clorox and Purex, is usually sold as 5.25% sodium hypochlorite. Sodium hypochlorite can also be generated on-site by using specialized equipment that produces a weak, but fairly stable, chlorine solution (0.8%) from salt or, in some cases, brine or seawater. In this process, liquid chlorine is created by exposing the salt or saline water to an electrolytic arc that results in a solution of sodium hypochlorite plus some off-gassing of a chlorine vapor. This equipment is currently becoming popular, is in use in many water systems throughout the country, and represents a viable alternative to the use of gaseous chlorine, especially in residential or populated areas where concerns over the potential accidental release of gaseous chlorine is always present. Commercially available sodium hypochlorite in the 5%-12% solution strength range has a very limited shelf life (often losing up to 50% of its strength in less than six months) and is prone to off-gassing and problems with controlling a stable mixture strength, especially in applications using “neat� or full strength solutions and in warmer weather climates. In most cases, for optimum control of sodium hypochlorite solutions, batch mixtures should be limited to a 7-10 day maximum cycle (turnover) and should be mixed within a range of a 5%-50% (5000-50,000 mg/L) solution strength.
Calcium Hypochlorite An alternative to the on-site generation of sodium hypochlorite is also available using calcium hypochlorite. This system uses pre-manufactured, compressed tablets consisting of 30%80% of chlorine as calcium hypochlorite with an inert binder. Water is allowed to flow through or over the tablets, causing a slow but predictable dissolving process which results in a weak, but fairly stable, solution of hypochlorite.
Another method of introducing calcium hypochlorite involves the dropped introduction of chlorine pellets or small tablets directly into a well or basin. This type of system operates using a pre-programmed timer/motor which drives a rotating disc with openings just large enough to permit individual pellets to fall through the openings and down into the well. The operator can select the frequency and number of chlorine pellets to be dropped into a particular well, based on the adjustment of the disc slots and timer. This type of chlorinator system is generally used to help with the control of iron bacteria and hydrogen sulfide in water wells by maintaining an active chlorine residual in the well itself and not as a primary or reliable means of providing disinfection of a water system. Calcium hypochlorite, just as with sodium hypochlorite, has its own unique set of limitations and potential problems. Due to the calcium component within calcium hypochlorite, there is a much greater potential of plugging of the feed lines, pumps, and injection points occurring due to precipitation. This is especially prevalent in systems with higher pH levels (above 7.5) or water conditions conducive to calcium precipitation. In addition, calcium hypochlorite solutions must be constantly agitated and mixed to prevent calcium cycles of rebinding and precipitation. Both types of hypochlorite, when mixed with water to form a chlorine solution, can be adversely affected and weakened from many contaminants, such as iron or hardness, in the water supply. In many cases, a water softener or other form of pre-treatment must be used to create the solution feed water supply. All of these systems, however, represent a reasonable alternative to gas chlorine, especially in water systems with fairly low chlorine demands or where the use of chlorine gas represents an unacceptable safety risk. The most important factor when considering the use of chlorine for constant disinfection of a potable or wastewater system is to apply the proper form of chlorine for the dosage and volume needed, always considering all safety aspects (including the
ENGINEERING/continues on page 22 Public Groundwater Systems Journal Fall 2013 21/
Figure 1. Effect of pH on chlorine.
ENGINEERING/from page 21 location of the facility), and the level of skill and experience of the individuals who will be operating and maintaining the system.
How Does Chlorine Do Its Job? When chlorine is added to water at pH values between 4-7, two compounds known as residual fractions are rapidly formed, hypochlorous acid and hydrochloric acid. Above a pH level of around 7.5, hypochlorous acid begins to break down to elemental hydrogen along with a hypochlorite ion. The distribution of each compound depends on the water’s pH, with hypochlorous acid predominant at pH levels below 7.5 and the hypochlorite ion predominant at pH levels higher than 7.5. With the possible exception of chlorine dioxide, hypochlorous acid is the most effective disinfecting agent of all the chlorine compounds. The proportion of hypochlorous acid is commonly known in the water treatment field as free available chlorine residual, which is easily measured through use of a titration test where the level of free chlorine is determined via color comparison against a known standard. Although it is a relatively weak acid, the germicidal effectiveness of hypochlorous acid is due to the relative ease with which it can penetrate the cell walls of parasitic bacteria and viruses. Conversely, the hypochlorite ion is a relatively poor disinfectant; therefore, effective disinfection at levels above 7.5 diminishes rapidly and above a pH of 9.0 becomes very low. Chlorine is a unique and somewhat contradictory chemical when used for common water treatment, while the
most efficient disinfection will generally occur at pH levels between 5.0-6.5, where hypochlorous acid is 90%-95% efficient. However, as a biocide agent the oxidative strength of chlorine occurs at higher pH values (Figure 1). Since maintaining a lower pH level just for effective disinfection is usually impractical due to concerns over possible corrosion issues, a compromise using higher levels of chlorine with adequate contact time must be employed. Also, while the use of chlorine gas can lower pH, solutions of chlorine, in the form of sodium and calcium hypochlorite, are alkaline chemicals that usually raise pH. For example, a 50 mg/L strength of chlorine, when mixed into water with a natural pH of 7.1, can elevate the pH to as much as 7.6, depending on the buffering capacity (alkalinity) of the water. This potential impact on pH must be considered when designing a chlorination system, as a higher pH level will dramatically lower the biocide effectiveness of chlorine, sometimes to the point of ineffective disinfection. Although there is still some disagreement as to exactly how chlorine works, it is believed that the mechanism of chlorine as a disinfecting agent is due to what chlorine does to a contaminant on a cellular level. As with most chemical disinfecting agents, chlorine appears to enter the cell wall of the contaminant and, depending on the specific organism, affects one or more of the enzyme systems within the contaminant, which then results in deactivation of the organism or an inability to reproduce. In the case of most bacteria, chlorine is believed to cause an adverse reaction to the respiratory, transport, and/or nucleic acid component of the bacteria strain, while with viruses, chlorine causes deactivation of the protein coat of the virus. In any event, for inactivation to occur, the disinfecting agent must have the proper dosage, adequate time, and the right chemical and environmental conditions for the disinfectant to be able to penetrate the organism’s cell wall, then seek out and disrupt the interior functions of the contaminant in order to work effectively. For chlorine, this relationship of time and the right environmental conditions is referred to as contact time, more commonly referred to as “CT” values. CT
22/ Fall 2013 Public Groundwater Systems Journal
values vary depending on the specific organism, the temperature and pH of the water, and the chlorine dosage. The coliform group of bacteria generally requires less CT values than other organisms such as Giardia lamblia (giardia). For this reason, current water quality regulations in the United States require a disinfectant to provide a 99.9% (3-log) inactivation for giardia organisms and a 99.99% (4-log) inactivation for viruses. Because giardia requires longer CT values than bacteria or viruses with chlorine, a system with adequate effectiveness against giardia will almost certainly deactivate any bacteria and viruses also present. As an example, in order to deactivate greater than 99.6% of E. coli bacteria at a pH level of 7.0 will require a contact time of around 3 minutes, using a free available chlorine (FAC) level of .05 mg/L, while at a pH level of 8.5, this same level of FAC will require 20 minutes of contact time for the same level of deactivation. A full discussion of calculating CT values is beyond the scope of this article but, needless to say, it is vital for anyone associated with the disinfection of drinking water to understand the methods of calculating the correct CT value for the system in question. The stakes to health are simply too great to do otherwise. As opposed to many other systems, determining the actual contact time within a pipeline is a relatively easy task and is accomplished by simply dividing the volume of the pipeline length by the flow rate; this is often referred to as “plug flow.” Calculating the actual contact time in a reservoir or basin, however, is more complicated due to the possible short-circuiting of water within the storage vessel caused by temperature differences, stratifications, and induced currents within the reservoir itself. Tracer studies using a dye or a specific inert chemical, such as fluoride or phosphates, are often used to determine the actual contact time in this type of structure. Calculating the appropriate CT value is simply a matter of multiplying the level of chlorine by the contact time with the water before delivery to the first customer. Another factor known to potentially hinder effective chlorination is the physical state of the treated water. Water www.NGWA.org
with high levels of turbidity (cloudiness or dirtiness) or suspended material can have an adverse effect as the material could interfere with the disinfection process by either “hiding” the offending pathogens from the chlorine or impose an additional chemical demand on the chlorine, possibly resulting in insufficient remaining levels for disinfection. All natural waters have some type of accumulated need for chlorine, which is usually based on background levels of turbidity, iron, manganese, hydrogen sulfide, and other constituents that must be considered when applying chlorine for disinfection. The combined effect of these constituents is called the chlorine demand of the water, which must be calculated for each individual application. Finally, for optimum performance and disinfection, chlorine, regardless of type, should always be applied in direct proportion to the flow rate and adequate mixing should be employed just beyond the point of injection.
Chlorinating Water Wells In the previous section, I introduced the history and background of the use of chlorine for full-time injection and for use in potable and wastewater systems. In this section, we will explore the many ways chlorine, in its various forms, is used for water well disinfection and maintenance. Before we begin, however, I wish to reiterate a warning I have used before. Working with any chemical, including chlorine, is a specialized and potentially hazardous task requiring the proper training and education. No individual should be allowed to work with or around any chemical in any way unless they have received the required training and are using the appropriate safety equipment. Application of chemicals in water wells or pipelines, especially any form of chlorine and acids, are known to liberate fumes and vapors, as well as generate possible explosive hazards, which can be very dangerous to health. Proper safeguards and ventilation must be used whenever working with chemicals in water wells or in any enclosed area. That said, for those of us in the water well business, there is perhaps no more important use of chlorine than when it is needed to disinfect or rehabilitate new www.NGWA.org
or old wells. The previous discussion regarding the critical relationship between pH, temperature, and chlorine levels is just as important to consider when chlorinating a well as it is when using chlorine for full-time disinfection. In most well applications, we are attempting to rid the well of two separate, but often coincidental, problems: 1. Coliform bacteria and viruses 2. Iron and manganese scale, hydrogen sulfide.
Coliform Bacteria and Viruses Although this portion refers primarily to coliform bacteria and viruses, for basic reference I am also including any pathogenic (harmful) parasites, such as giardia, cryptosporidium (crypto), or any other parasites that may fall within this category. When present, parasites such as giardia are generally found in surface water sources, shallow wells under the influence of surface water, or wells with inferior seals with exposure to shallow water. Typically, their physical size and living environment will usually result in their removal long before they can reach deeper groundwater sources. However, they have been detected in deep wells where logic would have dictated they should not have been. Wells that are known to have inferior or shallow sanitary seals or those that extract water from shallow locally recharged sources, such as rivers or streams, are particularly vulnerable. The presence of any giardia, crypto, or other common surface water parasite in a properly constructed deep groundwater well should immediately cause the grout seal, well casing, or source of water to be suspect. In fact, the presence of these parasites in a groundwater well is so rare that routine examination for these contaminants is not usually performed. The ever continuing competition for water, however, is creating conditions in some areas where the possibility of someday encountering these contaminants will increase, especially in regions served by very shallow wells recharged by surface water in areas with heavy wildlife traffic. Unfortunately, there is currently no easy procedure for determining the presence of parasites, and testing is generally performed by using an expensive
and time-consuming microscopic examination. Therefore, these tests are often not performed, even when the cause is suspect. Because the possibility of giardia or crypto contamination is fairly remote for most wells, for the purposes of this article we shall limit the majority of our discussion of pathogens to bacteria and viruses. The use of chlorine to deactivate or kill potentially harmful bacteria and viruses in water wells is well documented. Chlorine has been used as the primary chemical for routine well disinfection for decades and continues to be the chemical of choice for most routine well disinfection procedures. Chlorine is one of the most versatile and effective chemicals for the deactivation of coliform bacteria and viruses. When we examine a well for sanitary quality, we generally perform a test for the presence of coliform bacteria. The total coliform group of bacteria is the most common method used to determine the acceptability of a water source for several reasons. First of all, although coliform bacteria are numerous in nature, they are typically absent in uncontaminated, clean water supplies but are commonly found in large volumes in contaminated water supplies. Secondly, the coliform groups are relatively easy to identify and quantify by using common and widely accepted tests. Thirdly, total coliform is always present when the more serious pathogenic organisms are present. Even though most coliform bacteria are actually harmless to humans, their presence in water provides an “indication” that more serious and potentially harmful coliform group bacteria may also be present. This is the reason why coliform bacteria are often referred to as an “indicator bacteria.” Generally, there are three groups of coliform bacteria that are examined in water well work: total coliform, fecal coliform, and E. coli. The presence of total coliform, by itself, does not necessarily mean that the source is contaminated, but it does indicate that one or more of the more serious types of bacteria, such as fecal or E. coli bacteria, may be present. In most cases, when total coliform is detected, additional tests are performed to verify either the presence or absence of fecal or E. coli bacteria.
ENGINEERING/continues on page 24
Public Groundwater Systems Journal Fall 2013 23/
ENGINEERING/from page 23 As I previously indicated, I do not believe that continuous chlorination should be used as a permanent solution to a fecal or E. coli bacteria problem, unless there is no other alternative. Even then, additional precautions such as a chlorine residual monitor should be used as a secondary level of protection. At the most, chlorination should be used as an interim measure for the control of fecal or E. coli bacteria until a more reliable and permanent solution is found, such as well redrilling or replacement. The risk of illness is simply too great to depend totally on chlorine for the removal of fecal or E. coli bacteria. In addition, well systems that demonstrate a return of any coliform bacteria following a successful negative test should be suspect and the cause thoroughly investigated. The coliform group of bacteria, as a type of bacteria commonly found in nature, will often be present in new wells and wells that recently received repair. Introduction of coliform bacteria can occur from tools, drilling fluids, drill pipe, pumps, drop pipe, wire, and the list goes on. Basically, anything exposed to the natural atmosphere that can come in contact with anything going down the well can cause the introduction of bacteria into the well. Essentially, there are two basic avenues that can result in the introduction of coliform bacteria into a well. One is original drilling and pump installation processes. The other is well or pump repair. While these may sound like the same process, in reality they are two completely different procedures. Original drilling processes include the activities related to the original construction of the well, including the original pump installation. This represents the first and usually most severe exposure of the well to bacterial contamination. Because there are so many variables and available ways to introduce bacteria into the system, the original well construction can often be the cause of an ongoing bacteria problem that can last for years. First of all, it is imperative that all water used in the drilling process be potable or, at the very least, free from any bacteria or viruses. Pre-chlorination should be done for all water used during drilling and before it is introduced into
Figure 2. Shock procedure for disinfecting drilled wells at 100 mg/L +.
the well. Also, it is not enough to trust that water used for drilling obtained from a neighboring well is free from bacteria. A proper dose of chlorine (at least 50 mg/L) should be applied to any water entering the well, regardless of the source. In addition, tools and equipment lying on the ground or the bed of a service truck also represent excellent paths for bacteria or viral contamination. This equipment should be kept as dry and clean as possible, covered until needed, and washed down with a chlorinated solution before placing into the well. This procedure, as laborious as it sounds, includes items such as drill rods, bits, and well casings. Although the original well construction represents the first and easiest path for well contamination, I personally believe that a well or pump repair is the most frequent cause for bacterial contamination of a well. This is due to the dirty working environment, opening of the well to the atmosphere and environment, the large amount of equipment usually placed on the ground during repair that is removed from and reinstalled in the well, and, most importantly, the fairly rapid and stressed environment present during this work. Usually, the drillers or pump men performing this work are under a time pressure to get the well operating again, applied from the homeowners and their own supervisors. This time pressure often results in skipping routine steps of disinfection they may usually follow during a new installation. They may be apprehensive to introduce chlorine into the system that will prevent the homeowners from
24/ Fall 2013 Public Groundwater Systems Journal
immediately using the water after the pump is installed, fearing complaints from the homeowners. The key is to enact and enforce a routine procedure for all employees that requires them to follow a procedure checklist, including the proper chlorination of all equipment installed in the well for all wells, new construction and repair. A minimum level of 50 mg/L of an active chlorine solution should be used with all drilling fluids and applied, using a wand sprayer or other device, to all tools and equipment. This level should also be used as the minimum concentration for routine disinfection of waterlines, reservoirs, and pressure tanks. Where significant levels of dirt, mud, or iron are present, they should be removed and the level of chlorine raised to 100 mg/L to ensure full deactivation of all bacteria and viruses. Finally, for the worst cases, a level of 200 mg/L is often warranted. All of these chlorine strengths can be easily determined from Figure 2. When performing chlorination of a finished well or pump installation, several important steps need to be initially observed. First of all, the well may need to be pumped to remove any residual drilling fluids or dirty water that could interfere with the chlorine. Second, the chlorine solution must be applied to all surfaces within the well. This can be helped by circulating the solution throughout the well by returning pumped water to the well and maintaining this circulation for up to 6 hours. Third, adequate contact time throughout all locations including the pressure tank, offset and drop pipe, and well casing must be provided to enwww.NGWA.org
able full disinfection (usually overnight or 12 hours is sufficient), and finally, full pumping of the well to provide complete removal of the chlorine followed by a period of one to two days before obtaining a negative bacteria test is recommended. Maintaining good work site housekeeping also goes a long way in avoiding contamination of a well. Keeping work sites as clean as possible; covering all unused equipment with a tarp or cover; keeping tools, drilling, and pumping equipment off the ground by using blocking; and wiping down and preventing an accumulation of dirt on tools, drill rods, bits, and other equipment will assist with preventing contamination.
Iron, Manganese, and Hydrogen Sulfide Although problems with bacteria or viruses represent a greater hazard, problems associated with the presence of iron, manganese, or hydrogen sulfide are usually more visible to the customer and therefore usually more of an immediate concern to the customer. This is due to the aesthetic and taste and odor effects these contaminants place on the water system. The use of chlorine in a water well for iron or manganese is generally performed to remove minor levels of the oxides and hydroxides deposited in the well. However, periodic use to control hydrogen sulfide gas is well documented and widely practiced. In many cases, pre-scrubbing of the wellbore or screen is preferred before the application of chlorine to lower the chlorine demand and provide greater access to the deposits, especially where significant amounts of slime or thick deposits are present. This is a case where the application of chlorine in very high strengths, applied with jetting or swabbing, may be necessary to effectively dissolve the deposits and oxidize any remaining iron or manganese. Special types of chemicals are available from various manufacturers that, when added to chlorine, enhance the disinfection and oxidizing strength. Often, the use of chlorine alone will not be adequate by itself and the additional use of other chemicals may also be warranted.
made at this point. Once again, if at all Iron bacteria represents a contaminant with unique properties in that it can possible, chlorination should not be used as a permanent method of controlbe easily transported from well to well on tools or other equipment, and once in ling fecal or E. coli bacteria from groundwater supplies. Using a disinfecthere, is almost impossible to get back tant to control these contaminants repreout. Although there is currently some controversy that iron bacteria can actusents nothing more than a “band-aid” ally be transported between wells, cussolution to a problem that deserves tomers who never had any problem with closer scrutiny. Elimination of the bacteiron bacteria often report that the probria itself, through source reconstruction lem started just after their well or pump or replacement, will almost always was serviced. provide a better and safer long-term Obviously, if iron bacteria is introsolution. duced into a well during repair, this can To summarize, the effectiveness of present a major risk to the well contracchlorine depends on five basic factors: tor, as well as the customer, and all 1. pH level necessary safeguards to prevent this 2. Temperature occurrence should be observed, for sim3. Contact time ple good housekeeping reasons if nothing else. This includes, but is not limited 4. Concentration of chlorine 5. Interfering substances (turbidity, iron, to, wiping and washing down all tools manganese, hydrogen sulfide gas). and equipment with a chlorinated solution between jobs and fully disinfecting In the next issue we will wrap up each well after construction or repair. this two-part series of disinfection by Basically, if you practice good site exploring the many uses of ozone and housekeeping and chlorinate as necesultraviolet systems for water well work, sary to prevent any bacterial contamina- including routine disinfection and tion, you will generally also take care of rehabilitation. the risk of transporting iron bacteria in Until then, work safe and smart. * * * ** ** * ** * the process, if that is actually *how it* * PGWSJ gets there. Unfortunately, iron bacteria is typically resistant to shock chlorination and complete removal is not feasible. The key to iron bacteria—as well as , , iron, manganese, and hydrogen sulfide—is control rather than removal. Long-term control usually involves The REGAL™ Gas Chlorinator is made with pride in the USA using specialized and sets the standard for safety, reliability and economy. acids designed for REGAL also leads the industry in green technology: water well work or lowering energy costs and chemical costs by using continuous feeding 100% chlorine which is a natural element. of chlorine down the well. Iron bacteria is ★ ALL-VACUUM DESIGN ★ EASY TO MAINTAIN & CLEAN one contaminant that ★ ENGINEERED FOR LESS DOWNTIME & CORROSION RESISTANCE can often be con★ FEWEST PARTS ★ FAST DELIVERY trolled or prevented with just a little For more info, call Anna at 1-800-327-9761 more common sense and care. A final word of 1044 SE Dixie Cutoff Road, Stuart, FL 34994 USA caution should be Tel: 772-288-4854 • Fax: 772-287-3238
MADE IN THE USA
RED WHITE BLUE and GREEN too!
www.regalchlorinators.com • Email: regal@regalchlorinators.com
www.NGWA.org
Public Groundwater Systems Journal Fall 2013 25/
By Jack Glass, MS, CIH
Wellness Programs: A Bargain at Any Cost The smallest employers can have outstanding wellness programs. f you’re like most small businesses, you might feel as though a wellness program for employees is something only mega-corporations can offer. In reality, wellness programs can take many forms, and can range in cost from absolutely nothing to hundreds of dollars per employee. But one thing is for certain. They all end up saving the employer money in the long run. In fact, a recent study has shown the average return on investment for wellness programs is $5.81 to every $1.00 invested. With this in mind, even the smallest of employers can have a truly outstanding wellness program. Wellness programs can take various forms. A program can incorporate one, several, or all of the following wellness components.
I
Office Design
Wellness is not simply about physical conditioning. Employee wellness should be both physical and mental. These considerations can reduce eyestrain, headaches, carpal tunnel syndrome, and neck strain. Selecting ergonomically designed furniture has been shown to relieve stress and strain in many employees with pre-existing issues such as sciatica, shoulder pain and neck pain, and weak abdominal muscles.
Housekeeping Thorough and effective cleaning will prevent the accumulation of odors, mold, and mildew. Cleaning will also help prevent the spread of common infections, colds, and diseases. Using a low toxicity anti-microbial cleaner can enhance the “green” environment of the office.
A well thought out, ergonomically designed office doesn’t need to cost any more than a haphazardly designed office. Simply considering traffic patterns, placement of computer screens and telephones, and adequate working space can have great impact on employee comfort.
Fitness and Exercise
Jack Glass, MS, CIH, is the principal consultant for J Tyler Scientific Co. and has more than 20 years of experience as an environmental health consultant. He has consulted on toxic exposures, risk management, and indoor air quality. In addition, he has provided litigation support in several areas including mold, asbestos, indoor air quality, and confined space entry.
This initiative is usually the first one most employers consider when developing a wellness program. It is certainly the most visual aspect of a company’s program. In order for a healthy fitness and exercise program to be effective, it will take commitment and endorsement on the part of management. A fitness and exercise program can cost zero—such as promoting a one-
26/ Fall 2013 Public Groundwater Systems Journal
million-step lunch club, or a coffee break office lap—or can incorporate an in-house, fully staffed fitness center. In reality, there is little evidence to show that greater expense actually leads to greater health. Simply having a corporate environment that encourages exercise is the most important step in any fitness environment. Other tips to enhance employee fitness include encouraging a one flight up, two flights down walking policy if your building has a stairwell, and providing door bins so employees walk and deposit messages as an alternative to sending internal e-mails. In fact, the possibilities and ideas are only limited by the company’s creativity. Also, keep in mind many public fitness centers offer significant discounts for group or corporate memberships.
Nutrition Recently, the media and various public figures have been directing attention towards America’s addiction to fast foods, sugary drinks, and countless other poor food choices. If a company has an in-house cafeteria, the chef can be instructed to provide healthy alternatives during every meal period. General Electric, for instance, developed a lunch program where each meal choice earns a chip based on its nutritional quality. The healthier the selection, the higher the value of the chip. This encouraged healthier eating by allowing the employees to save more money. Another client installed an outdoor eating area surrounded by a covered www.NGWA.org
walkway that encouraged walking and discussion during meals, even in nasty weather. Make nutritional information available in the company lunchroom. Many Web sites and food distributors provide free posters listing nutritional content and encouraging food-healthy choices.
on their co-workers due to the elimination of secondhand smoke. Nearly every state, the American Cancer Society, the American Lung Association, and even cigarette manufacturers provide an enormous amount of information and tools an employer can use to create and enforce a smoking policy in their particular situation.
Healthy Habits
Weight Loss This can be a touchy subject. While it is always good to encourage healthy weight management and a healthy body mass, everyone’s body is unique. What may be a comfortable muscle fat ratio for some may not be for others. Unless you are specially trained or an expert on this topic, you should avoid making specific suggestions and comments to any individual. It is important not to create an uncomfortable environment for any employees. All the same, this doesn’t preclude an employer from making available weight loss opportunities to the entire staff. For instance, if enough employee interest can be demonstrated, Weight Watchers will bring weekly meetings onsite to offices. Also, local and county departments of health may be able to provide a multitude of free or low-cost weight loss incentives, programs, or advice.
Counseling Wellness is not simply about physical conditioning. Employee wellness should be both physical and mental. Many health insurance programs provide behavioral and mental health counseling. And these mental health counselors can further direct employees to other specific counseling resources such as Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous, suicide hotlines, and even lactation counseling for breastfeeding support and education.
Smoking Cessation Although the U.S. continues impressive declines in the number of smokers, this group still accounts for close to 20% of adults who are 18 and over. At the same time, a little over 20% of the population are former smokers. Assisting smokers in giving up this habit will have an immediate impact on their wellness and might have a long-term impact www.NGWA.org
Vaccinations Although there are some groups and public figures that deny the validity of vaccinations, the scientific and medical communities are consistent in their recommendation for the widespread use of vaccinations. Larger employers may be able to host a seasonal flu vaccine clinic in their offices. Smaller companies can encourage their workers to take advantage of free clinics provided by state and local governments and some pharmacies. The only cost to the employer in promoting attendance at free vaccine clinics is providing the opportunity for employees to attend to get their shots. For each employee vaccinated, that person’s ability to contract an illness has been eliminated and has also reduced that person’s potential to spread the illness to others who haven’t been vaccinated. Immunity can occur with as little as a 20% vaccination rate. This means the population has significantly reduced its chances of a widespread epidemic.
Physicals No one should undertake a new physical routine or make drastic changes to their lifestyle without first seeking the advice of a qualified medical professional. Providing for, or encouraging, the entire staff to get a general physical promotes their ability to make good decisions about their health and wellness and may also provide early detection of a previously unknown condition. These physicals can be provided under the employee’s own medical insurance at an occupational medicine clinic or even at a mobile clinic that comes right to the company’s doorstep. Investing in these physicals is a surefire way to show the staff their employer truly cares about their well-being and wants to encourage improvement.
There’s a reason why the habit of hand washing starts to be drilled into youngsters in preschool. It’s the easiest and one of the most effective ways there is to prevent the spread of communicable illnesses. Outdoor work site crews should always have clean water, soap, and towels they can use to wash up following dirty tasks, prior to eating and drinking, and after using the restroom. This simple step will go a long way to reducing illness as well as reducing exposure to hazardous substances.
Indoor Air Quality Our environment is key to our wellbeing. For example, changing filters on the HVAC system and inspecting the operation of dampers, motors, and fans helps to ensure employees are working in a safe and healthful atmosphere and can provide a good base to launching a new employee wellness program.
Coaching We’re not talking here about the grizzled football coach screaming at you to push harder. Coaching includes providing information to make good choices, instructing how to use fitness equipment, and giving advice on how to create and maintain a healthy diet. Coaching can also incorporate the traditional fitness coach who pushes someone to reach their next milestone. Do not underestimate the value of management’s leadership by example. Whether a company has 12 or 1200 employees, seeing and knowing their managers, supervisors, and owners are actively participating in the company’s wellness program is the most effective coaching of all. PGWSJ Check Out the Journal’s New Web Site Public Groundwater Systems Journal has a new Web site! Head to www.publicground watersystemsjournal.com to stay up to date on the latest happenings in the water industry as the site is regularly updated with industry news. The site also has the entire content of every issue available so you can browse past issues no matter where you are and send articles to colleagues and friends. Check it out today!
Public Groundwater Systems Journal Fall 2013 27/
COMING
EVENTS
December 1–5/ 2013 Florida Section of the American Water Works Association Fall Conference/ ChampionsGate, Florida. Web: https://m360.fsawwa.org/event .aspx?eventID=47884 December 3–6/ 2013 NGWA Groundwater Expo and Annual Meeting/ Nashville, Tennessee. PH: (800) 5517379, Fax: (614) 898-7786, E-mail: customerservice@ngwa.org, Web: www .NGWA.org December 5/ Asset Management for Groundwater-Based Public Supply Systems short course/ Nashville, Tennessee. PH: (800) 551-7379, Fax: (614) 898-7786, E-mail: customerservice @ngwa.org, Web: www.NGWA.org
2014 February 25–26/ NGWA Conference on Hydrology and Water Scarcity in the Rio Grande Basin/ Albuquerque, New Mexico. PH: (800) 551-7379, Fax: (614) 898-7786, E-mail:customerservice@ngwa .org, Web: www.NGWA.org/RioGrande February 27–28/ Applying Water Data Science to Proactively Identify and Manage Groundwater Risks/ Albuquerque, New Mexico. PH: (800) 551-7379, Fax: (614) 898-7786, E-mail: customerservice@ngwa.org, Web: www .NGWA.org March 9–15/ National Groundwater Awareness Week/ PH: (800) 551-7379, Fax: (614) 898-7786, E-mail: customer service@ngwa.org, Web: www.NGWA.org March 18–24/ WQA Aquatech USA/ Orlando, Florida. Web: http://s36.a2zinc .net/clients/WQA/WQA2014/public/enter .aspx May 6–7/ Maintaining Water Quality in the Distribution System/ New Brunswick, New Jersey. Web: www.cpe.rutgers.edu/ courses/current/eo0201ca.html
FEATURED
PRODUCTS
Xylem Extends Mobile Access with Goulds Water Technology Catalog iPhone App Goulds Water Technology, a brand of Xylem Inc., a global water technology company focused on addressing the world’s challenging water issues, is expanding its mobile application offerings with the launch of a product and literature catalog application for iPhone, iPad, and Android. The mobile app enables industry professionals to gain one-touch access to brochures, submittals, performance curves, drawings, applications, part lists, and installation and operation manuals for the brand’s pumps and package systems for the commercial buildings and residential markets. The Goulds Water Technology mobile product and literature catalog gives engineers, consultants, and designers real-time access to the complete product portfolio in a simple interface. The iPhone app underscores efficiency through features including quick search functionality, automatic updates, easy to navigate app design, simple view and sort, and in-app view and e-mail capabilities. The Goulds Water Technology catalog app is free and available for downloading from the iTunes Store or the Google Play Store.
WaterSignal Introduces First Wireless System to Continuously Monitor Water Usage in Real Time
*Dates shown in red are National Ground Water Association events.
To help building owners, managers, and engineers detect water spikes related to potential catastrophic leaks, 28/ Fall 2013 Public Groundwater Systems Journal
WaterSignal introduces the first wireless system that continuously monitors water usage in real time. Using breakthrough technology, a self-contained and non-intrusive monitor listens to the pulse of the water meter, and real-time data is sent wirelessly to a Web site portal to view the property’s water consumption by the month, day, or hour. And if a major leak occurs, much like an energy surge popping a circuit breaker, the device alerts the manager or engineer that a water spike above the preset limit has taken place. The alert can be sent to both a computer and a smartphone for the manager to act upon and can be customized for business hours as well as after hours and weekends. While the WaterSignal monitoring system can help reduce the catastrophic costs associated with undetected leaks, the data the system collects plays a vital role in the building manager’s water conservation efforts. WaterSignal has thoroughly tested the monitoring device for more than four years in multihousing complexes, commercial office buildings, and school systems.
Schneider Electric Announces StruxureWare for Water
Schneider Electric, a global specialist in energy management, announced the release of StruxureWare for Water, a suite of applications that gives full visibility into energy, operation, and process control across the entire water cycle. StruxureWare for Water is part of Schneider Electric’s StruxureWare software, the company’s platform of integrated software applications that will help its customers maximize business performance and be more efficient and sustainable.
www.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
Open, scalable, and easy to incorporate into third-party and legacy systems, StruxureWare for Water transforms—in real time and from shop floor to top floor—the massive amount of data into meaningful information, enabling the utility to make informed decisions and take decisive actions. StruxureWare for Water integrates all process control in the water or wastewater infrastructure—from electrical distribution and motor and pump control, to chemical and biological treatment, safety, and energy monitoring. By combining real-time water network data, historical analyses, and hydraulic modeling, StruxureWare for Water helps reduce operation costs and service interruptions while maintaining consistent water pressure and improving water quality. Promote Your Product in PGWSJ If you have a product that you would like to be considered for PGWSJ ’s Featured Products section, send a release to Mike Price, Public Groundwater Systems Journal, 601 Dempsey Road, Westerville, OH 43081. You can also send it by e-mail to mprice@ngwa.org.
www.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
Public Groundwater Systems Journal Fall 2013 29/
NEWSMAKERS NEW ADDITION David Bardsley, PG, a horizontal and vertical well drilling executive, joined Directed Technologies Drilling Inc. as national business development manager. Bardsley will be responsible for business development and technical support activities for DTD’s business lines including horizontal environmental well installations, water supply construction, and trenchless utility and pipeline installation. Based in Phoenix, Arizona, he will work David Bardsley, closely with consulting PG firms, federal agencies, pipeline companies, and other DTD clients to use horizontal directional drilling to solve subsurface challenges. APPOINTMENT American Public Works Association member and city of Gainesville, Florida,
Public Works Director Teresa Scott, PE, PWLF, has been reappointed to the Federal Emergency Management Agency National Advisory Council. On a national level, Scott served on APWA’s Emergency Management Technical Committee for six years, serving as chair for two years, and is also currently a member of the APWA Emergency Management Mitigation Subcommittee. PROMOTION GZA GeoEnvironmental Inc., an environmental and geotechnical consulting firm, announced David M. Leone, PE, has been promoted to associate principal at the company’s corporate offices in Norwood, Massachusetts. BUSINESS NEWS David M. Leone, SJE-Rhombus PE announced that the company’s Engineered Municipal Water Control Solutions businesses will unify their market presence
30/ Fall 2013 Public Groundwater Systems Journal
and leadership position under the master brand Primex. This name unifies SJE’s subsidiaries (CSI Controls, Control Works Inc., and Best Controls Co.) under one master product brand and provides the foundation for significant growth in municipal water control panel markets. CERTIFICATION National Pump Co., a Glendale, Arizona, manufacturer of vertical turbine and submersible pumps and packaged pumping systems with six locations throughout the United States, announced that after rigorous testing and analysis, its vertical and submersible turbine pump bowl assemblies are certified to the NSF/ANSI 61-G and NSF/ANSI 372 safety standards, complying with the lead-free requirements of the U.S. Safe Drinking Water Act, which goes into effect in January 2014. NPC will continue to participate in ongoing auditing programs to ensure continued compliance.
www.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
Qualification Form Please fill out the following information to apply for a free subscription to the Public Groundwater Systems Journal! Free subscriptions to U.S./Canada residents only. International residents can purchase a one-year subscription for $135 USD. 䡺 Check here if you want to receive Public Groundwater Systems Journal.
Select the category that best describes your work. Operators of groundwater-supplied community water systems complete this section: 䡺 a. Management 䡺 b. Operator
Wholesale suppliers and distributors of pumps and water treatment equipment complete this section: 䡺 x. Supplier of equipment for groundwater-supplied community water systems
Manufacturers of industrial pumps, water well supplies, and treatment equipment complete this section: 䡺 x. Manufacturer of products and equipment for groundwater-supplied community water systems
䡺 o. Other (please specify) __________________________ ____________________________________________
Contractors complete this section: 䡺 x. Contractor who works on or with groundwater-supplied community water systems
Scientists, engineers complete this section: 䡺 x. Scientist or engineer who works with groundwater-supplied community water systems
佥
Fax it!
佥
Mail it!
佥
E-mail it!
614 898.7786 601 Dempsey Rd., Westerville, OH 43081 USA customerservice@ngwa.org
* Name __________________________________________________________________________________________________________ * Title ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ * Company ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ * Address ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ * City/State/Province/Zip/Postal code ______________________________________________ * Country _____________________________ Phone ____________________________________________________ Fax __________________________________________________ E-mail ____________________________________________________ Web __________________________________________________
* Signature ________________________________________________ * Date ________________________________________________ * Must be completed for fulfillment of free subscription. Please allow four to six weeks to process your application. Due to the volume of requests we receive, we cannot reply individually to every denied request. www.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
Public Groundwater Systems Journal Fall 2013 31/
INDEX OF
ADVERTISERS Page
Alloy Screen Works (800) 577-5068 www.alloyscreenworks.com Baker Manufacturing, Water Systems Division (800) 523-0224 www.bakermfg.com Bismarck State College National Energy Center (701) 224-5651 www.bismarckstate.edu/energy ChemGrout (708) 354-7112 www.chemgrout.com Cotey Chemical (806) 747-2096 www.coteychemical.com Ground Water Science www.groundwaterscience.com NGWA/Asset Management (800) 551-7379 www.ngwa.org NGWA/Awards (800) 551-7379 www.ngwa.org NGWA/ConsensusDocs (800) 551-7379 www.ngwa.org
Congratulations to the 2013 NGWA award winners!
OBC
12
29
19
29
16 3
32
Page
NGWA/Groundwater Expo (800) 551-7379 www.ngwa.org PAX Water Technologies www.paxwater.com Pittsburg Tank & Tower Maintenance www.watertank.com Regal Chlorinators (800) 327-9761 www.regalchlorinators.com Robbco Pumps (806) 749-7475 www.robbcopumps.com Solinst Canada (800) 661-2023 www.solinst.com U.S. Saws www.ussaws.com
9
15 29 25
30
IFC
IBC
Welcome New Advertisers! ChemGrout
13
PAX Water Technologies
NGWA Awards of Excellence t Ross L. Oliver — Ronald B. Peterson t M. King Hubbert — Chunmiao Zheng, Ph.D. t Robert Storm — Arthur E. Becker, MGWC, CPG t Life Members — Gregory D. Buffington, PE, Leonard Konikow, Ph.D., and Evan Nyer t Individual Safety Advocate — Steve Maslansky t Technology — Michael Gefell t Special Recognition — Wes McCall t Groundwater Protector — U.S. Senator Bernard Sanders (I-Vermont) t Standard Bearer — Carl Lee
Outstanding Groundwater Project Awards t Groundwater Supply — City of Phoenix t Groundwater Protection — ARCADIS t Groundwater Remediation — ARCADIS
NGWA Divisional Awards
NGWA awards honor the best of the best and cover all sectors of the groundwater industry. ®
32/ Fall 2013 Public Groundwater Systems Journal
t John Hem Award for Excellence in Science & Engineering — John Selker, Ph.D., and Scott Tyler, Ph.D. t Keith E. Anderson Award (scientists/engineers division) — Brent Murray, PG t Manufacturers Division Special Recognition Award — Mike Benet t Supplier of the Year Award — Jim Paulhus
Visit www.NGWA.org/Awards for more information on the NGWA awards program and winners.
www.publicgroundwatersystemsjournal.com
Your Cutting Safety is Our Concern Call For A Free Demonstration TODAY! We Will Come To You!
1-866-987-7297 Model ACH-GB16 Cuts Ductile, Cast, PVC, HDPE Also Available in Gas & Hydraulic Power Grit diamond Go online for a video grit chain safely grinds through pipe without demonstration sharp edges! www.airchainsaw.com The “Pipe Clamp” anchors chainsaws to the pipe for bottom up cuts and no kickback. Visit us on the web at www.ussaws.com
Three Locations Available To Service You Distribution Network Nation Wide 3317 West Warner Avenue Santa Ana, CA 92074
11 High Street Suffield, CT 06078
8004B East Broadway Avenue Tampa, FL 33619
We’re a leading independent manufacturer of wedge-wire screens for the water well and environmental markets. Our technical staff has over 150 years of combined industry experience, and the majority of our manufacturing personnel have spent their entire careers in this industry. We have one of the most modern manufacturing plants in the business, and the capacity to produce your screens on time every time. We work 24/7. If you need water well screens, don’t wait. Call us. Our products include: Water Well ; Stainless Steel Rod Base Screens ; Pipe Base Screens ; Pre-Pack Screens ; Accessories
Phone: +1 281.233.0214 Toll-free: +1 800.577.5068 Fax: +1 281.233.0487 Houston, Texas USA info@alloyscreenworks.com ISO 9001:2008 Registered QMS
Environmental ; Screens ; Risers ; Accessories
www.alloyscreenworks.com