Florida Water Resources Journal - April 2021 by Florida Water Resources Journal

Editor’s Office and Advertiser Information: Florida Water Resources Journal 1402 Emerald Lakes Drive Clermont, FL 34711 Phone: 352-241-6006 • Fax: 352-241-6007 Email: Editorial, editor@fwrj.com Display and Classified Advertising, ads@fwrj.com

Business Office:

P.O. Box 653, Venice, FL 34284-0653 Web: http://www.fwrj.com General Manager: Editor: Graphic Design Manager: Mailing Coordinator:

Michael Delaney Rick Harmon Patrick Delaney Buena Vista Publishing

Published by BUENA VISTA PUBLISHING for Florida Water Resources Journal, Inc. President: Richard Anderson (FSAWWA) Peace River/Manasota Regional Water Supply Authority Vice President: Jamey Wallace (FWEA) Jacobs Treasurer: Rim Bishop (FWPCOA) Seacoast Utility Authority Secretary: Holly Hanson (At Large) ILEX Services Inc., Orlando

Moving? The Post Office will not forward your magazine. Do not count on getting the Journal unless you notify us directly of address changes by the 15th of the month preceding the month of issue. Please do not telephone address changes. Email changes to changes@fwrj.com, fax to 352-241-6007, or mail to Florida Water Resources Journal, 1402 Emerald Lakes Drive, Clermont, FL 34711

Membership Questions FSAWWA: Casey Cumiskey – 407-979-4806 or fsawwa.casey@gmail.com FWEA: Karen Wallace, Executive Manager – 407-574-3318 FWPCOA: Darin Bishop – 561-840-0340

Training Questions FSAWWA: Donna Metherall – 407-979-4805 or fsawwa.donna@gmail.com FWPCOA: Shirley Reaves – 321-383-9690

For Other Information DEP Operator Certification: Ron McCulley – 850-245-7500 FSAWWA: Peggy Guingona – 407-979-4820 Florida Water Resources Conference: 407-363-7751 FWPCOA Operators Helping Operators: John Lang – 772-559-0722, e-mail – oho@fwpcoa.org FWEA: Karen Wallace, Executive Manager – 407-574-3318

Websites Florida Water Resources Journal: www.fwrj.com FWPCOA: www.fwpcoa.org FSAWWA: www.fsawwa.org FWEA: www.fwea.org and www.fweauc.org Florida Water Resources Conference: www.fwrc.org Throughout this issue trademark names are used. Rather than place a trademark symbol in every occurrence of a trademarked name, we state we are using the names only in an editorial fashion, and to the benefit of the trademark owner, with no intention of infringement of the trademark. None of the material in this publication necessarily reflects the opinions of the sponsoring organizations. All correspondence received is the property of the Florida Water Resources Journal and is subject to editing. Names are withheld in published letters only for extraordinary reasons. Authors agree to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Florida Water Resources Journal Inc. (FWRJ), its officers, affiliates, directors, advisors, members, representatives, and agents from any and all losses, expenses, third-party claims, liability, damages and costs (including, but not limited to, attorneys’ fees) arising from authors’ infringement of any intellectual property, copyright or trademark, or other right of any person, as applicable under the laws of the State of Florida.

News and Features 4 Congress Introduces Water Quality Protection and Job Creation Act of 2021 6 Case Study: Minimizing Water Downtime During COVID-19—Demian Kreuger 24 Recovering Stronger: Transforming Water Management in America—U.S. Water Alliance 26 Aging Infrastructure: It’s Not Just Pipes and Pumps—Kevin Shropshire 30 Water Systems in U.S. Vulnerable to Cyberattacks 44 Water Conservation in Florida: Much to Celebrate, Much More to Do 56 ASCE Infrastructure Report Card Gives U.S. ‘C-’ Grade, Says Investment Gap up to $2.59 Trillion, Bold Action Needed 58 Best Practices for Water Loss Protection, Mediation, and Asset Management—Barry Hales and Howard Hodder

Technical Articles 16 Natural Contaminant Attenuation During Reclaimed Water Aquifer Recharge in Destin— Robert G. Maliva, Monica Autrey, and Scott Manahan

32 Adaptation in the Face of Adversity: The Persistent Trend of Membranes in Water Reuse— Jennifer Ribotti and James Christopher

Education and Training 15 FWPCOA Online Training Institute 31 CEU Challenge 41 TREEO Center Training 50 FSAWWA 2021 Fall Conference Call for Papers 51 FSAWWA 2021 Fall Conference Exhibitor Registration 52 FSAWWA Roy Likins Scholarship Fund 53 AWWA Operator Scholarships 54 FSAWWA 2020 Awards 55 FWPCOA Training Calendar

Columns 10 C Factor—Kenneth Enlow 22 FSAWWA Speaking Out—Fred Bloetscher 23 Reader Profile— Jamison Tondreault 28 Let’s Talk Safety: Safe Fuel Handling Practices 47 Test Yourself—Donna Kaluzniak 48 FWEA Focus—James J. Wallace

Departments 59 Classifieds 62 Display Advertiser Index

Volume 72

ON THE COVER: Water conservation and reuse practiced by water utilities and their customers, agriculture, business and manufacturing, and the leisure and tourism industries will ensure adequate supply now—and into the future. (photo: Google Images)

April 2021

Number 4

Florida Water Resources Journal, USPS 069-770, ISSN 0896-1794, is published monthly by Florida Water Resources Journal, Inc., 1402 Emerald Lakes Drive, Clermont, FL 34711, on behalf of the Florida Water & Pollution Control Operator’s Association, Inc.; Florida Section, American Water Works Association; and the Florida Water Environment Association. Members of all three associations receive the publication as a service of their association; $6 of membership dues support the Journal. Subscriptions are otherwise available within the U.S. for $24 per year. Periodicals postage paid at Clermont, FL and additional offices.

POSTMASTER: send address changes to Florida Water Resources Journal, 1402 Emerald Lakes Drive, Clermont, FL 34711

Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

Congress Introduces Water Quality Protection and Job Creation Act of 2021 Legislation provides $200 million annually for water recycling infrastructure Reps. Peter DeFazio (D-OR), Grace Napolitano (D-CA), and Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA) recently introduced the Water Quality Protection and Job Creation Act of 2021, which will make major investments in water recycling programs and resources, and help communities across the United States adopt water reuse as a resource management tool. The legislation contains the reauthorization of the Alternative Water Source Grants Pilot Program, which authorizes the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to grant up to $200 million per year to state, interstate, and intrastate water resource development agencies to engineer, design, construct, and test water reuse projects throughout the U.S. Communities across the country are incorporating water reuse into their water management strategies as a proven method for ensuring a safe, reliable, locally controlled water supply—essential for livable communities with healthy environments, robust economies, and a high quality of life. Some important examples of how communities and businesses are increasingly turning to water reuse to stabilize their water management systems and ensure stronger and more resilient supplies include: S By 2035, the City of Los Angeles expects to recycle 100 percent of its water supplies and reduce its reliance on costly imported water from the Colorado River. S Truckee Meadows Water Authority in Reno is planning a 13-mile pipeline to provide 1.3 billion gallons of recycled water annually to the Tahoe-Reno Industrial Center—where corporations such as Tesla, Switch, and Google have offices and other facilities—and ensure that 20,000 jobs remain in Nevada. S Th e Hampton Roads region of Virginia, home to the largest concentration of military and naval installations in the U.S., plans to recycle 100 percent of its effluent through an aquifer recovery system to prevent rising sea levels from inundating the entire region. S

4 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Settled Solids Management

WWTP Tank Cleaning Florida’s Original On-Line Tank Cleaning Service Since 1982

Inventors of Sand Dragon Technology

State Funding Available to Pay for Cleaning - Contact us for Details!

WE REMOVE GRIT WHILE YOUR PLANT REMAINS IN SERVICE & FULL OF WATER Eliminate Your Grit: visit SSM.Hydro-int.com or call 407.322.0330 or email SSM@Hydro-int.com

Case Study: Minimizing Water Downtime During COVID-19 A water utility in California sought to repair aging pipe infrastructure with limited disruption of service during the coronavirus pandemic Demian Kreuger

The Client John Sanchez is the assistant superintendent for water construction in the city of Santa Clara, Calif., in the heart of Silicon Valley. With a population of nearly 130,000, the city’s water system is made up of a variety of materials, including cast iron, ductile steel, polyvinyl chloride (PVC), and asbestos cement.

The Situation Sanchez’s crew was replacing a deteriorating water line with new piping that would include a right-angle connection to a new line for later installation (Figure 1). The old extending pipe would be disconnected from the old pipe, but would stay active until the new connecting line could be installed later. The plan was to place an end cap at the end of the old pipe, which would usually involve placing a thrust block to restrain the

Figure 1. Right-angle connection for a new line.

cap. Making a thrust block would involve shutting down water service for multiple days as the cement was poured, cured, and then attached with tie rods. With California’s shelter-in-place order implemented due to COVID-19, Sanchez wanted to ensure that the water shutdown was minimized as much as possible, given that people were spending most of their time at home.

The Challenge The challenge for the utility was how to add the end cap to the pipe, while also maintaining water service to residents without disruption.

The Solution Sanchez decided to use an end cap on the end of the line that would avoid the use of a thrust block. The universal gripping system on this end cap could restrain the cap onto the pipe and be installed in approximately two

Figure 2. Water flowing through the end cap.

6 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

hours. He could save on labor and material costs that would be spent creating a thrust block, while water service to customers could be maintained throughout the process. There were four distinct advantages to installing this end cap. Ease of Installation The special chain provided a circular restraint around the pipe. As the pipe applied axial pressure on the end cap, the chain increasingly tightened around the pipe to prevent pullout. The radial closing mechanism also held the pipe tightly in place during installation, making it easier to install and allowing water to flow through the end cap (Figure 2). The endcap has a universal gripping system designed to restrain metal and plastic pipes and has a transition capability of up to 1.1 inches. It can work with a wide range of pipe diameters, meaning that Sanchez had extra flexibility to use it for a variety of other pipe sizes he might find in the ground. Continued on page 8

Figure 3. Coupling connection.

FLEXIBILITY IS ONLY ONE ADVANTAGE OF OUR CLOSED LOOP REACTOR PROCESS. We have more than 55 years of experience in oxidation ditch technology and more than 2000 installations. Lakeside’s CLR process offers a variety of wastewater treatment options, including several operational modes, nitrogen and phosphorus removal, and an adaptable configuration, providing maximum flexibility with consistently high quality effluent. The CLR process is simple to operate and can be configured in several shapes, including the conventional racetrack, folded U-shape or concentric multichannel designs. Lakeside’s staff delivers full service from initial concept through construction to plant operation. The result: reliable results with minimal operator attention and maintenance. When performance counts, count on the industry leader for more than 90 years!

REPRESENTED LOCALLY BY: Trippensee Shaw, Inc. Eustis and Sebring, FL www.TrippenseeShaw.com T. 863.382.2101 Florida Panhandle Only T: 205.424.7570 www.eshelmancompany.com

Cleaner Water for a Brighter Future® Speak to one of our experts at 630.837.5640, email us at sales@lakeside-equipment.com or visit www.lakeside-equipment.com for more product information.

CLR Process Components Magna Rotors Velocity Control Baffles Rotor Covers Level Control Weirs E.A. Aerotor Process Monitoring and Control Systems

Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

Continued from page 6

Cost Savings Using this end cap meant that the pipe could be capped quickly and easily without disrupting water service. Normally, a thrust block would need to be created, a process that could take three days to design. You would then pour the concrete, cure it, and restrain it to the pipe with tie rods, using more workers on the job. With this end cap, the installation could be easily made in a matter of two hours with

just two workers. With reduced labor hours, significant savings were achieved. “Making the repair with the end cap meant a lot less time was needed to seal the end of the pipe,” said Sanchez. “Instead of the days involved with placing a thrust block, we could do the job by just installing the end cap to complete the installation.” Durability The end cap also offers a high level of durability. Made of exceptionally longlasting ductile iron, the end cap can

withstand working temperatures of up to 125°F and meets or exceeds American Water Works Association (AWWA) Standard C219, and National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) Standards 61 and 372. The new pipes were also connected with a coupling (Figure 3), lowering the risk of damage and cracking due to ground shifts with the coupling’s dynamic deflection. A patented gasket effectively transforms the pipe joint into a flexible connection and allows dynamic deflection of up to 4 degrees per side. The product can adapt to an out-ofround pipe shape (up to 0.16 inches) for an optimum fit on pipe ends with its innovative radial closing design and sealing system that can eliminate installation errors. Even if pipes are just a bit out of alignment, the dynamic deflection can still allow for the connection, meaning there’s a smaller chance of mistakes during installation. Overall, these features offered Sanchez a durable solution that would likely reduce future repairs and maintenance. Advanced Antigalling Antigalling reduces wear caused by adhesion between sliding surfaces. It uses a unique dry treatment process with molecular antigalling (MAG) based on embedded zinc to prevent galling and enables repeated bolt tightening. It also eliminates the need for grease, preventing dust and dirt buildup. The fusion-bonded epoxy coating also helps insulate against corrosion.

Conclusion The end cap enabled Sanchez to avoid a repair that would normally take days to implement and shut down water service to many people as they sheltered in place during the COVID-19 pandemic. With this end cap, the repair was made in just a couple of hours and no customers lost water service at all. “We were able to make the repair, and people in the affected area might have not even realized that we were working there,” said Sanchez. “The end cap allowed us to get the job done easily with a durable solution that will last a long time.” Demian Kreuger is territory sales manager for HYMAX, a Mueller brand, in Napa, Calif. S

8 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

PATENTED

The P6 Difference Zero Maintenance 10-Year Wear Warranty Reduce Polymer Consumption Increase Cake Solids Gentle Mixing Optimize System

CONTACT: Stephen Gerber

PHONE: 407 834 9104

EMAIL: sales@gerberpumps.com Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

C FACTOR

Spring Cleaning: Time for Water Storage Tank Maintenance and Repair

reetings everyone. Spring has sprung and we are getting geared up for many of our annual maintenance activities. One of these, for many of our utilities, is water storage tank cleaning and maintenance, and I thought this would be a good time to review the subject.

1. P reventive Maintenance Th e repair or maintenance done before deterioration takes place, such as painting. 2. P redictive Maintenance A ttempts to predict when a failure might occur so corrective action can be performed. These are life cycle considerations, like the age of the tank. 3. C orrective Maintenance Th e repairs that are necessary when a problem already exists. 4. E mergency Maintenance R epairs necessary due to emergencies, such as vandalism, localized corrosion, splits due to metal loss, cracks in concrete, excessive sedimentation, or contamination.

Potable Water Storage Tank Maintenance

Some maintenance is mandated under the Florida Administrative Code (FAC). The FAC 62555.350 (2) states:

When we talk about maintenance, there are four types that can be performed.

“Accumulated sludge and biogrowths shall be cleaned routinely (i.e., at least annually) from all treatment facilities that

Kenneth Enlow

President, FWPCOA

are in contact with raw, partially treated, or finished drinking water and that are not specifically designed to collect sludge or support a biogrowth; and blistering, chipped, or cracked coatings and linings on treatment or storage facilities in contact with raw, partially treated, or finished drinking water shall be rehabilitated or repaired. Finisheddrinking-water storage tanks, including conventional hydropneumatic tanks with an access manhole, but excluding bladderor diaphragm-type hydropneumatic tanks without an access manhole, shall be checked at least annually to ensure that hatches are closed and screens are in place, shall be cleaned at least once every five years to remove biogrowths, calcium or iron/manganese deposits, and sludge from inside the tanks, and shall be inspected for structural and coating integrity at least once every five years by personnel under the responsible charge of a professional engineer licensed in Florida.” I might note here that FAC 62-555.350 (2) says that tanks must be cleaned routinely, suggesting at least annually, but they must be cleaned and inspected every five years by a professional engineer licensed in Florida.

Tank Inspections There are three basic types of inspections. 1. R outine Inspections Normal daily checks for security items, possible leaks, or evidence of corrosion conducted daily or weekly. Note that FAC 62-555.350(10)(a) requires a facility to report any suspicion or evidence of sabotage or vandalism to the state warning point (SWP) within two hours of discover of an event as follows: S (10) Suppliers of water shall notify the SWP, the appropriate Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) district office or approved county health department (ACHD), and water customers in accordance with the following Continued on page 12

10 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Reiss Engineering, Inc. is now a CHA Company, and together we’re confronting some of the biggest challenges in water and wastewater. Let’s talk about One Water Solutions.

Responsibly Improving the World We Live In www.reisseng.com www.chacompanies.com Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

Continued from page 10 procedures in the event of the following circumstances: • (a) Suppliers of water shall telephone the SWP at 1(800)320-0519 immediately (i.e., within two hours) after discovery of any actual or suspected sabotage or security breach, or any suspicious incident involving a public water system 2. Periodic Inspections These are more detailed than routine inspections, conducted monthly or quarterly, and include climbing the tank and looking inside. Look or check for: S Damage vents, screens, and hatches S Dead animals S Sediment level S Coatings,structure,andcathodicprotection 3. C omprehensive Inspections Interior inspection by staff or a professional contractor completed every three to five years. This can be done for a tank online by a commercial diver. Tanks should be cleaned before inspection to help expose possible damage that would otherwise not be detected. Storage tanks can be cleaned while they are out of service or in service. Out-of-service cleaning is the draining, washing, and disinfecting of a tank before placing it back in service. In-service cleaning is cleaning done by a professional commercial diver. With proper disinfection of the divers and their equipment, disinfection and biological clearance of the storage tank may not be required. By conducting in-service cleaning, you can usually shorten the amount of time the tank is out of service.

The American Water Works Association (AWWA) C652-11, Section 4.4, covers the methods for commercial divers for conducting in-service cleaning. It addresses the following procedures: S T anks should be in isolation prior to inspection and follow proper lockout/tagout procedures. S C onfined space entry requirements should be followed at all times. S U se specified equipment designated for potable water tank cleaning. ( Note: Equipment used for potable water tank cleaning cannot be used for any other purpose.) The following equipment specifications are required: • Self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) or supplied-air systems are to be employed. • Suits must be the dry suit type. • There can be no exposed skin. • There must be an open line of communication between the diver and the tender. S Y ou must use certified divers that have met all the training and requirements for commercial diving. S D ivers and all equipment entering the storge tank are to be disinfected with a 200 mg/L solution of chlorine bleach. S A n affidavit of compliance may be required from the diving contractor attesting to compliance with this standard. It’s beneficial to have the divers take video and/or still photos of the condition of the tank before cleaning, and then again after cleaning.

12 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

This is helpful in cataloging historical tank conditions to use in future maintenance planning and to help assess upstream process efficiency. Divers can also perform some repairs underwater that were discovered during the inspection.

Protective Coatings Painting the tanks serves as a protective coating against corrosion, and for aesthetic purposes, such as for appearance and eye appeal. It’s usually recommended to paint the outside surfaces of a tank every five years and interior surfaces every three to five years, although some coatings can last much longer. Spot-paint surfaces as needed for areas detected through periodic inspections. New tanks or newly painted tanks should be inspected after one year of service. Perform a visual or detailed inspection. A visual inspection is made from the roof hatch with the water level lowered to about half or less. A detailed inspection requires draining the tank, washing it, and inspecting the interior paint and structure. As mentioned previously, a detailed inspection can be conducted by divers in lieu of draining the tanks. One of the most important considerations when applying protective coatings is proper surface preparation; the type of surface preparation is determined by the condition of the surface to be painted and the type of coatings being applied. A water blast can be used if the existing coating or surface is not pitted or peeling excessively. A water blast is a high-pressure wash using a pressure washer; its purpose is to remover dirt and grim and loosen foreign material. A brush-off blast is applied where the coatings are peeling off, but there is not excessive pitting. This blast will remover chipped and peeling paint, but does not necessarily remove all existing paint. The blast is usually performed by using a bead blaster or some other type of abrasive media. A near-white blast is a profile used to remove all existing coatings and rust to prepare the surface for a new primer coat and paint. Coatings are considered “indirect additives” to water quality. What this means is that they can contribute contaminants to the water through leaching and corrosion. Because of this, all protective coatings used in potable water systems must be approved under National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) Standards 60 or 61 and must meet AWWA/American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standards. There are many considerations when determining the appropriate coating for your tank. Coatings are complex and are often

combined with primers, intermediate coats, and finished coats of specific thickness, which are referred to as “mills.” Because of their complexity they are often referred to as coating systems. Some of the primary conditions to monitor when applying protective coatings are: S Temperature – Most coatings have specific temperature ranges for their application. S Humidity – This can be a huge factor in Florida when applying coatings, especially when profiling a near-white blast. Surface rust can begin within hours in a high-humid environment. S Drying/Cure Time – Drying times between layers are specific for coatings and cure times can take up to several days or more. S Testing Millage and Holidays – Millage is the paint thickness overall and between different layers. It’s important to maintain a consistent and uniform thickness throughout the tank. Holidays are areas that have been missed during the coating application or areas of significant irregularities in coating millage. Spray painting is a preferred method for applying coatings by many painting contractors because it’s quicker that rolling. When choosing the application method, keep in mind the importance of uniform millage. Just one caution when spray painting exterior surfaces: protect surrounding areas from overspray if you want to avoid costly cleanups. There are some paints designed for exterior spray painting that have a limited overspray radius.

Corrosion Control Corrosion can be caused by chemical reactions or as a result of dissimilar metals. Chemical corrosion can be influenced by the following constituents: S pH – Low pH below 7 standard units becomes corrosive. S Dissolve Oxygen (DO) – Contributes to oxidation. S C arbon Dioxide (CO2) – Reacts with water to form carbonic acid. S Soft Water – Lacks the buffering capabilities to protect from corrosion. S D issolved Mineral Salts (Electrolytes) – Like sodium, will draw electrons from the anode metals accelerating corrosion. Dissimilar metals can be corrosive: S G alvanic Series – The galvanic series describes corrosion potential for metals. Metals that are more likely to corrode are anodic and metals that are less likely to

corrode are cathodic. The further apart metals are on the galvanic series, the more likely they are to corrode when connected together. One method of corrosion control for water storage tanks is protective coatings. Different coating materials can control and retard corrosion. Corrosion can be controlled through chemical treatment to stabilization water by maintaining proper corrosion indices, such as the Langelier Saturation Index (LSI) or the Calcium Carbonate Precipitation Potential (CCPP). Maintaining these indices as slightly positive will create a protective coating that will prevent or retard corrosion. Other chemical additives, like polyphosphates, zinc orthophosphates, etc., can coat the surfaces with a protective layer as well. Another common method of corrosion control is through the use of electrical/ionic control, such as cathodic protection. Cathodic protection can be applied in two basic methods: S Galvanic Protection – A sacrificial anode (usually zinc) installed in the tank will give up electrons (e-) and corrode. The tank surface acts as the cathode, which is protected. S Impressed Current Protection – In this method a direct current (DC) voltage is applied by a rectifier to create high potential

between the cathode and anode. The anode bed gives up electrons to protect the tank. (Note: It’s recommended to not energize cathodic protection on a recoated tank until after the first year’s inspection following recoating.)

Disinfection If the storage tank has been offline for maintenance, it must be disinfected and obtain bacteriological clearance before it can be placed back in service. Disinfection is the inactivation or destruction of disease-producing organisms. Usually, some form of chlorine is used for most disinfections. The three most common forms of chlorine are: S Liquid or gas chlorine (100 percent) S Calcium hypochlorite (65 percent) S Sodium hypochlorite (5 to 15 percent) It’s a good practice to develop a disinfection plan describing your disinfection procedure. This will often help the approving regulators feel comfortable that the disinfection method meets regulatory standards. Your disinfection plan should address the following: S Which method of disinfection will be used? S Which disinfectant is going to be used? S How is the high-residual water going to be removed and what dechlorination method is being used? Continued on page 14

Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

Continued from page 13 S Define the bacteriological sampling/clearance procedures you’re following. Applying Disinfectants Beware of the following when applying disinfectants: S When adding sodium hypochlorite to a tank it must not have more than 3 feet of water or less than 1 foot of water before adding the chemical. S Granular calcium hypochlorite or crushed tablets can be spread on the bottom of the tank where it will be mixed well during filling. S Crushed calcium hypochlorite tablets must be crushed to a size no large than ¼ inch. S Chlorine gas injection can be used to apply liquid chlorine in combination with an appropriate gas-flow chlorinator and ejector to provide a controlled high concentration of chlorine solution feed. S When applying chlorine gas, the application must be under the direct supervision of a person who is familiar with the use and properties of chlorine and trained and equipped to handle chlorine emergencies. S When using a sodium hypochlorite injection method, the pump must be able to exceed the line pressure S Sodium hypochlorite injection requires an injection quill with a check valve. You can connect to a nipple with a shutoff valve and check valve if no other option is available. S All chlorine chemicals used for disinfection must be NSF 60-certified. Disinfection Methods The AWWA Standard C652-11, Disinfection

of Water-Storage Facilities, describes three methods of chlorination: S Method 1 – The tank is filled to overflow while adding chlorine and must have a residual of 10 mg/L throughout the tank after six hours using a uniform gas feed or chemical pump, or after 24 hours if chlorine was added in the tank. Purge the high chlorine and fill the tank to overflow. S Method 2 – Spray or paint surfaces with 200 mg/L of chlorine solution, which shall remain on the surface for a minimum of 30 minutes. The tank is filled to overflow and must have a uniform residual of 10 mg/L when filled. Flush with potable water refill to overflow. S Method 3 – This two-step process adds chlorine to 50 mg/L to 5 percent volume of the tank and holds it for six hours. Fill to overflow and hold for 24 hours. Residual must not be less than 2 mg/L after 24 hours. Purge high chlorine and fill to overflow again. The following formula is used to calculate the chlorine dose: • Calculating chlorine dose • Basic Chemical Dosing Equation Chlorine lbs = (Volume MG)(Chlonne Dose, mg/L) (8.34 lbs/gal)(100%) Available chlorine,% • What is my dose? • Demand + Residual = Dose Bacteriological Sampling Once the disinfection is complete, you will need to collect bacteriological samples (Bac-T) for clearance. The FAC 62-555, (2), (a), (b), (c)

14 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

describes the requirements for collecting Bac-T samples on a storage tank as follows: S The chlorine residual must be below 4 mg/L (free or total). S Collect two consecutive daily samples (must be at least six hours apart). S Use a proper/approved sample bottle (125 ml). S Bottle must have a chlorine neutralizer (sodium thiosulfate). S Run the sample tap for at least three minutes. S You can swab/spray with alcohol. S You must test the chlorine residual at the time of the sample. S Fill the sample bottle to line on the bottle (100 ml); there should be an air bubble at the top of the bottle. S Keep the sample on ice at 40ºC. S Use a proper chain of custody form for sample transport/turnover. S Samples must be analyzed within 30 hours from sampling. S Samples are analyzed by an approved laboratory. S Sample results must be provided to your regulator agency (FDEP or ACHD) for clearance to place the tank back in service. Good luck with your storage tank maintenance activities. I hope this information will be of some use to you.

FWPCOA Training Update

The training office is in need of proctors for online courses in all regions. If you are available to be a proctor, please contact the training office at 321-383-9690. In the meantime, and as always, our Online Training Institute is up and running. You can access our online training by going to the FWPCOA website at www.fwpcoa.org and selecting the “Online Institute” button at the upper right-hand area of the home page to open the login page. You then scroll down to the bottom of this screen and click on “View Catalog” to open the catalog for the many training programs offered. Select your preferred training program and register online to take the course. This is a good way to get those needed continuing education units (CEUs) for your license renewal coming up on April 30, 2021. Time is getting short. For more information, contact the Online Institute program manager at OnlineTraining@ fwpcoa.org or the FWPCOA training office at training@fwpcoa.org. That’s all I have for this C Factor. Everyone take care and, as usual, keep up the good work! S

The Florida Water & Pollution Control Operators Association’s

ONLINE TRAINING INSTITUTE

Licensed Florida Treatment Plant & Water Distribution Operators! Get Continuing Education Credits for License Renewal Online! Featu r the F ing CEU C EPT hallen (0.1 ge

Fast—Convenient—Economical

CEU p er co urse

with an average cost of $15 per 0.1 CEU

manual m anual

FW&PCOA Voluntary Certification Courses

Stormwater C Course ..............$260/$290* * Members/Non-Members Includes the course manual and proctored exam.

Wastewater Collection B Course (New!).............$275

Wastewater Collection C Course.........................$275

Includes the course manual and proctored exam.

Training Courses for the Florida Licensing Examination Water Distribution Level 2 System Operator Course.....................$225 (Fee includes a proctored exam)

Water Distribution Level 3 System Operator Course ....................$225 (Fee includes a proctored exam)

Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator Class B Course ....................$300

Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator Class C Course ....................$300 Water Treatment Plant Operator Class B Course.....................$300 Water Treatment Plant Operator Class C Course.....................$300

Enroll Today at http://go.flextraining.com/FLC8518/

For more information on enrollment, contact Program Manager Tim McVeigh at OnlineTraining@fwpcoa.org Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

F W R J

Natural Contaminant Attenuation During Reclaimed Water Aquifer Recharge in Destin Robert G. Maliva, Monica Autrey, and Scott Manahan

ptimization of the reuse of reclaimed water often requires storage to balance variations in supply and demand. Aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) systems are increasingly being used for the seasonal underground storage of reclaimed water, as well as potable water and surface waters. Natural contaminant attenuation processes that occur in aquifers are being taken advantage of to provide additional treatment (polishing) of reclaimed water prior to potable and nonpotable uses. Key technical issues for the direct subsurface recharge of reclaimed water are the fates of pathogens and disinfection byproducts (DBPs), such as trihalomethanes (THMs). Reclaimed water needs to be disinfected to meet applicable microbiological water quality standards for injection, while at the same time not exceeding applicable groundwater standards for DBPs. The leaching of arsenic into recharged water in concentrations exceeding groundwater standards has also occurred in numerous ASR systems. The Destin Water Users Inc. (DWU) reclaimed water ASR system stores tertiarytreated reclaimed water in a sand-and-gravel aquifer located on a barrier island off the coast of northwest Florida. The storage zone contains anoxic freshwater that is restricted by local ordinance to nonpotable use. Chemical differences between the reclaimed water and native groundwater (e.g., chlorine [Cl] and fluorine [F] concentrations) provide accurate tracers for the presence of recharged reclaimed water in wells. An exhaustive monitoring program (including in excess of 1,000 monitoring well samples since inception) provides an extensive database on the fate of THMs in the groundwater environment. The average measured total THM concentration of the injected water over the full-system operational period (starting in June 2012) was approximately 61 μg/L (n = 68), yet the concentration of THMs were below the detection limit (< 0.5 μg/L or less) in over 99 percent of the water samples from the storage-zone monitoring wells (SZMWs). The THMs were effectively removed by natural attenuation processes by the time the reclaimed water reached the SZMWs. Arsenic leaching has occurred in the DWU ASR system, and other ASR systems globally, at concentrations exceeding the applicable

groundwater standard of 10 μg/L. The source of the arsenic appears to be the oxidative dissolution of trace arsenic-bearing sulfide minerals. The concentrations of arsenic in recovered water have decreased over time as the amount of leachable arsenic near the ASR wells is progressively exhausted. Further from the injection and recovery wells, leached arsenic is being sequestered in the formation, as evidenced by low concentrations (generally below 10 μg/L) in most monitoring well samples. Chlorination can be beneficial for reclaimed water recharge systems by providing pathogen inactivation, and a chlorine residual in injected water is desirable for minimization of biological clogging in recharge wells. The DWU ASR experience indicates that chlorination should not be avoided due to concerns over THMs, where anoxic aquifers are used as storage zones, as the THMs will be naturally attenuated. The DWU operational data demonstrate that natural contaminant attenuation processes can be highly effective in improving the quality of recharged reclaimed water and minimizing any residual risk to public health and the environment associated with its underground storage.

Florida: A Water-Rich State Florida is blessed with abundant water resources, with a statewide annual average rainfall of about 53.6 in. (NOAA, 2019). The fundamental water management challenge in Florida is not that the state doesn’t have enough water, but rather that there is a large seasonal disconnect in supply and demand: There is usually an overabundance of water during the summer wet season and inadequate water during the winter and spring dry season, which also coincides with a peak in tourism and seasonal resident populations. The flat topography of Florida is suboptimal for large surface reservoirs, with only several notable exceptions (e.g., the Peace River Manasota Regional Water Supply Authority system in De Soto County, and the Tampa Bay Water C.W. Bill Young Regional Reservoir in Hillsborough County). It has been recognized in Florida for the past four decades that part of the solution to its water management challenge is to store water underground in ASR systems. Stormwater

16 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Robert G. Maliva, Ph.D., P.G., is principal hydrogeologist with WSP USA Inc. in Fort Myers and is with the U.A. Whitaker College of Engineering at Florida Gulf Coast University. Monica Autrey, P.E., is operations manager at Destin Water Users Inc. Scott Manahan, P.E., is senior engineering manager with WSP USA Inc. in Fort Myers.

drainage wells have a much longer history in central Florida, where wells that have a primary water disposal function are also recognized to provide important aquifer recharge. Originally, ASR was defined by Pyne (1995) as “the storage of water in a suitable aquifer through a well during times when water is available, and the recovery of the water from the same well during times when it is needed.” The ASR is a subset of managed aquifer recharge (MAR), which is broadly defined as the “intentional banking and treatment of waters in aquifers” (Dillon, 2005) and includes other technologies in which water is recharged using either wells or surface spreading systems. The advantages of ASR, and MAR in general, in Florida are compelling. Very large volumes of excess water can be stored underground during wet periods and later recovered during dry and high-demand periods. Indeed, ASR is being investigated as a key part of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP) for south Florida (USACOE and SFWMD, 2010). Underground injection, including ASR, is regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) of 1974 (and subsequent amendments) resulted in the establishment of the EPA underground injection control (UIC) program. Florida, and some other states, have obtained primary enforcement authority (primacy) for all or some types of injection wells. Individual states and Native American tribes that obtain primacy must still meet EPA UIC regulations, although they can establish more restrictive regulations. The overriding objective of the EPA UIC program is to prevent endangerment of underground sources of drinking water (USDW), which are defined as nonexempt aquifers that contain less than 10,000 mg/l of total dissolved

solids. Endangerment is defined in the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (40 CFR 144.3) as any “injection activity in a manner that allows the movement of fluid containing any contaminant into underground sources of drinking water if the presence of that contaminant may cause a violation of any primary drinking water regulation under 40 CFR part 142 or may otherwise adversely affect the health of persons.” The operation of ASR systems can endanger USDW if either the recharged water contains one or more contaminants at concentrations exceeding primary drinking water standards or if the concentration of a parameter increases to above a drinking water standard after recharge as the result of fluid-rock interactions. In a number of ASR systems in Florida, endangerment of USDW occurred when recharged water containing dissolved oxygen (DO) caused the oxidative dissolution of arsenicbearing iron sulfide minerals in the aquifer. The recharged water met the applicable arsenic maximum contaminant level (MCL) of 10 μg/L at the time of injection, but the released arsenic caused the MCL to be exceeded. Avoiding endangerment of USDW is a fundamental operational and regulatory requirement for ASR systems in Florida and elsewhere in the United States. Endangerment can be avoided by treating the recharge water to drinking water standards and, in some cases, additionally pretreating the recharged water to avoid adverse-fluid rock interaction. The DO is being stripped from recharged water prior to injection in some ASR systems in Florida to prevent arsenic leaching. Where the recharge water will not be recovered for potable use (or otherwise enter the potable water supply), treating the recharge water to potable quality represents a large additional expense that could render ASR economically unviable. The concentrations of pathogens and many chemical contaminants are naturally reduced in the groundwater environment. Natural contaminant attenuation processes can be taken advantage of as a less expensive alternative to (or also used in conjunction with) engineered treatment systems to improve the quality of water stored in ASR systems, or recharged in other types of MAR systems so as to meet the nonendangerment requirement. The compliance point for meeting applicable groundwater quality standards would be at the boundary of a zone of discharge (ZOD), rather than at the wellhead, which allows for an aquifer treatment zone around the ASR or recharge well. There are considerable laboratory and field data on the natural contaminant attenuation processes active in the groundwater environment in general and associated with different types of MAR systems, which was recently reviewed

Figure 1. Site plan of Destin Water Users Water Reclamation Facility showing aquifer storage and recovery well locations.

by Maliva (2019). Two of the key issues facing ASR systems storing nonpotable water (e.g., reclaimed, storm, and surface waters) in Florida are simultaneously meeting bacteriological and disinfection products (particularly trihalomethanes) standards and managing arsenic leaching. This article summarizes natural contaminant attenuation processes in groundwater and reports on the experiences of the DWU reclaimed water ASR system. Field data on water quality improvements during groundwater storage and transport are critical for guiding future incorporation of natural contamination attenuation processes in the design, operation, and regulation of ASR and MAR systems.

Natural Contaminant Attenuation Processes in Groundwater The greatest health risk associated with the recharge and reuse of reclaimed and other impaired (nonpotable) waters is associated with pathogens. A one-time exposure to water containing even low concentrations of Cryptosporidium oocysts and some viral pathogens may be sufficient to cause serious illness, whereas drinking water standards for chemical contaminants are based on chronic, lifelong consumption of water. The EPA MCLs are based on lifetime ingestion of 2L of water per

day for a 155-lb adult. The actual risk for longduration potable consumption of water containing chemicals at concentrations of concern from an MAR system in Florida is insignificant due to the rigorous Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) permitting process and monitoring requirements. Injection of impaired water would not be allowed where it could enter a known well used for potable supply. Because of their much greater heath risk, there has been considerable investigation of the fate of pathogens after groundwater recharge. Pathogen removal rates are commonly expressed as the log10 removal time (or just “log removal time; τ) defined as: τ = t/Log10(C0/Ct) • w here C0 = initial number of organisms (at time t = 0) and Ct = number of organisms at time “t” (days). • A 1-log10 removal is equal to a 90 percent reduction in concentration; a 2-log10 removal corresponds to a 99 percent reduction in concentration. John et al. (2004) investigated the fate of microorganisms in aquifers for the Southwest Florida Water Management District and South Florida Water Management District. Benchtop testing was performed using two groundwater Continued on page 18

Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

Continued from page 17 samples and two surface water samples from central Florida at temperatures of 72°F and 86°F. The protozoan parasites Cryptosporidium parvum and Giardia lamblia, and PRD-1 bacteriophage, were found to be more resistant than fecal coliform bacteria and enterococci with an estimated 10 to over 200 days required for the 99 percent (2-log) inactivation of Cryptosporidium and 24 to over 200 days required for the 99 percent removal of Giardia. The study did not consider the effects of filtration on the concentrations of the relatively large oocysts. Subsequent review studies (Toze, 2005; Jones and Rose, 2005), and laboratory and in situ inactivation studies (Sidhu et al., 2006, 2012, 2015; Lisle, 2016), show variable removal rates between microorganisms and biogeochemical conditions. Most microorganisms had 2-log removal times of two months or less, although some viruses are more persistent (bacteria tend to have rapid removal rates). The available data strongly indicate that the health risks associated with pathogens in MAR systems can be naturally managed by ensuring sufficient aquifer residence time to achieve target removal rates based on the types and concentrations of organisms that might be present in recharged water. The state of California recognizes natural attenuation of pathogens in groundwater replenishment reuse projects (GRRPs), with reduction credits granted per month of storage,

depending on the method used to determine the travel time to the nearest downgradient drinking water well (California Code of Regulations 22 CCR § 60320.108). The greatest reduction credit (1 log per month) is granted for tracer tests using an introduced tracer, which are deemed to have the greatest accuracy. In MAR systems in which the recharged water is treated by chlorination or chloramination, the challenge is optimizing the disinfectant dose so that bacterial (coliform) standards are met while not exceeding the drinking water standard for THMs, which is 80 μg/L for total THMs in Florida. Earlier studies on the fate of THMs in ASR systems focused on potable water storage systems, where the concern was that the THM standard would be exceeded upon recovery and redisinfection of the water (Miller et al., 1993; Singer et al., 1993; Pyne et al.,1996). The results of these earlier studies and subsequent investigations indicate that THM formation may continue after injection through the interaction of residual chlorine, with organic compounds present in the recharge water and storage zone, and that THM removal occurs more rapidly under chemically reducing conditions. Haloacetic acids (another group of disinfection byproducts) and the more brominated THMs are more rapidly removed, and chloroform is the most refractory THM. The fate of THMs was investigated in the intensely studied Bolivar (South Australia)

reclaimed water ASR system in which treated wastewater was stored in an anoxic brackishwater aquifer. Operational data show both the initial formation of THMs and their subsequent biodegradation (Nicholson et al., 2002; Pavelic et al., 2005). Total THM concentration in the ASR well decreased from 145 µg/L at the end of recharge to <4 µg/L after 109 days of storage. The THMs were not detected at an observation well located 164 ft from the ASR well, even though the injected water had reached the well (Pavelic et al. 2005). The causes of arsenic leaching in ASR systems have received considerable study because it’s a violation of a regulatory standard and thus potentially impacts the ability of the affected systems to legally operate. Arsenic leaching has also cast a cloud over the technology, which has slowed its implementation in Florida. The amount of leachable arsenic in most formations is quite limited, and over time, will be exhausted. Two main strategies have been employed to manage arsenic leaching: pretreatment and source removal. Recharge water can be treated by different physical and chemical processes so that it reaches chemical equilibrium with arsenic-bearing minerals in the storage zone. Pretreatment can potentially result in immediate compliance with the arsenic standard, but it has the disadvantages of additional costs and that it will be continually required over the operational life of the system. The alternative is to allow for the supply of labile arsenic in the formation to be exhausted over multiple injection and recovery cycles. The advantage of the arsenic source removal process is low cost and finality, but it has the disadvantage of a long and uncertain time requirement, and requires regulatory approval. The fate of leached arsenic is less uncertain. Released arsenic either remains in solution or is subsequently removed from solution by mineral precipitation and/or sorption processes. Two main arsenic removal models have been proposed: under oxic conditions, arsenic may be sorbed onto newly formed iron (oxy) hydroxides (Mirecki, 2006); and under anoxic conditions, such as may be established after recharge of organic-rich reclaimed and surface waters, released arsenic may be sequestered by coprecipitation with iron sulfides (Mirecki et al., 2013).

Destin Water Users Reclaimed Water Aquifer Storage and Recovery System

Figure 2. Plot of salinity parameter concentration data for Storage-Zone Monitoring Well 6.

18 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

The DWU reclaimed water ASR system, located at the George F. French Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) in northwestern Continued on page 20

Continued from page 18 Florida, stores tertiary-treated reclaimed water in the main-producing zone of the sand-andgravel aquifer. The main-producing zone is located between approximately 115 and 165 ft below land surface (ft bls) at the WRF site. The storage zone is hydraulically well-separated from the Upper Floridan aquifer, which is used on the barrier island for potable water supply and the surficial zone of the sand-and-gravel aquifer, which is very widely used in Destin for domestic irrigation wells. The ASR system consists of seven ASR wells (ASR-1 through ASR-7), six SZMWs (SZMW-1 through SZMW-6), and two shallow monitoring wells (SMW-1 and SWM-2), as shown in Figure 1. The DWU ASR system has a design capacity of 2.125 mil gal per day (mgd) or 210 gal per minute (gpm) per well. The DWU ASR system was constructed in two phases. The initial system, constructed in early 2009, consisted of a single ASR well (ASR1), two SZMWs (SZMW-1 and SZMW-2), and one shallow monitoring well. After completion of the initial operational testing of well ASR-1, the remaining wells were constructed in late 2011. The main-producing zone contains anoxic freshwater that is restricted by local ordinance to nonpotable use. Chemical differences between the reclaimed water and native groundwater (e.g., salinity parameters and fluoride concentrations)

provide accurate tracers for the presence of recharged reclaimed water in wells. Recharged reclaimed water has a higher salinity than the native groundwater and its breakthrough in a monitoring well can be detected by an increase in the concentration of the salinity-related parameters. For example, the arrival of the recharged reclaimed water in SZMW-6 in middle 2016 is evident by increases in the concentrations of total dissolved solids (TDS), chloride, sodium, and sulfate (Figure 2). An exhaustive monitoring program (including in excess of 1,000 monitoring well samples since inception) provides an extensive database on the fate of THMs in the groundwater environment at the DWU WRF site. The average measured total THM concentration of the injected water over the full-system (seven wells) operational period (starting in June 2012) was approximately 61 μg/L (n = 68). The concentration of THMs were below detection limit (< 0.5 μg/L or less) in (remarkably) over 99 percent of the water samples from the SZMWs, including samples consisting of recharged reclaimed water, as indicated by salinity parameters. The THMs were effectively removed by natural attenuation processes by the time the reclaimed water reached the SZMWs. The main-producing zone consists mainly of quartz sand and gravel and no potential arsenicbearing minerals were observed in samples

Figure 3. Recovered water arsenic concentrations.

20 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

collected during well drilling. Nevertheless, arsenic leaching did unexpectedly occur. A source attenuation strategy was employed in the DWU ASR system. The arsenic concentrations in the recovered water from each well have progressively decreased over time and, with the exception of one well (ASR-6), now meet the 10 μg/L MCL (Figure 3). After early 2016, arsenic concentrations in the four SZMWs have consistently met the 10 μg/L MCL (Figure 4). The low concentrations of arsenic in the moredistal monitoring wells (SZMW-5 and SZMW6), in which recharged reclaimed water has broken through, indicate that leached arsenic is either being removed via recovery or is being sequestered in the storage zone in a stable form. Arsenic is not staying in the solution and is being pushed away from the ASR well.

Conclusions The operational data from the DWU ASR system provide valuable insights into the behavior of THMs and arsenic during reclaimed water ASR and demonstrate the viability of relying on natural contaminant attenuation processes to protect public health and the environment. Pathogens inherently pose a greater health risk than THMs because of the potential for illness from a one-time exposure to some pathogens. Chlorination can be beneficial for reclaimed water recharge systems by providing pathogen inactivation, and a chlorine residual in injected water is desirable for minimization of biological clogging in recharge wells. Hence, when recharging reclaimed or other nonpotable waters, chlorination should be considered to provide an additional barrier against pathogens, in addition to the natural inactivation of pathogens that occurs in groundwater environments. The DWU ASR experience indicates that chlorination should not be avoided over concerns about THM formation, where anoxic aquifers are used as storage zones, as the THMs will be naturally attenuated. The DWU ASR system also demonstrates how arsenic leaching can be successfully managed by source attenuation. Over operational time (injection and recovery), the amount of leachable arsenic in the DWU ASR storage zone has been progressively depleted, and arsenic concentrations in the recovered water and SZMWs have either reached or are approaching concentrations below the 10 μg/L MCL. Natural contaminant attenuation processes are one element of a multiple-barrier approach to ensuring that the MAR does not endanger USDW and impair public health. The DWU operational data demonstrate that natural contaminant attenuation processes can be highly effective in

improving the quality of recharged reclaimed water and minimizing any residual risk to public health and the environment associated with its underground storage. The reduced need for often cost-prohibitive engineered treatment would make more ASR and MAR systems economically viable, allowing society to capture their water management benefits. Key elements for successful utilization of natural contaminant attenuation are a sound technical understanding of the biogeochemical processes involved, regulatory policies that allow for a ZOD (in essence, a geographically delineated aquifer treatment zone), and a right-sized monitoring program to ensure that contaminants are not approaching potable supply wells (and other sensitive receptors) and that anticipated water quality improvements are indeed occurring.

References • D illon, P., 2005. “Future Management of Aquifer Recharge.” Hydrogeology Journal, 13, 313-316. • John, D.E., and Rose, J.B., 2005. “Review of Factors Affecting Microbial Survival on Groundwater.” Environmental Science & Technology, 39, 7345-7356. • John, D.E., Rose, J.B., and Karmarainen, A., 2004. Survival of Fecal Indicator Bacteria: Bacteriophage and Protozoa in Florida’s Surface and Groundwater. Final Report of the Fate of Microorganisms in Aquifer Study. Brooksville: Southwest Florida Water Management District, and West Palm Beach: South Florida Water Management District. • Lisle, J.T., 2016. “Natural Inactivation of Escherichia coli in Anaerobic and Reduced Groundwater.” Journal of Applied Microbiology, 120, 1739-1750μ • Maliva, R.G., 2019. Anthropogenic Aquifer Recharge. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature. • Miller, C.J., Wilson, L.G., Amy, G.L., and Brothers, K. (1993). “Fate of Organochlorine Compounds During Aquifer Storage and Recovery: The Las Vegas Experience.” Groundwater, 31, 410-416. • Mirecki, J.E., 2006. Geochemical Models of Water Quality Changes During Aquifer Storage Recovery (ASR) Cycle Tests. Phase 1: Geochemical Models Using Existing Data, Final Report ERDC/EL TR-06-8. Jacksonville: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. • Mirecki, J.E., Bennett, M.W., and López-Baláez, M.C., 2013. “Arsenic Control During Aquifer Storage Recovery Cycle Tests in the Floridan Aquifer.” Groundwater, 51(4), 539-549. • Nicholson, B.C., Dillion, P.J., and Pavelic, P., 2002. “Fate of Disinfection Byproducts During Aquifer Storage and Recovery.” In P. J. Dillon

Figure 4. Storage-zone monitoring well arsenic concentrations.

•

• • •

•

(Ed.) Management of Aquifer Recharge for Sustainability (pp. 155-160). Lisse: A.A. Balkema. NOAA, 2019. National Centers for Environmental Information, Climate at a Glance: Statewide Time Series, https://www. ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/ (retrieved Aug. 27, 2019). Pavelic, P., Nicholson, B.C., Dillon, P.J., and Barry, K.E., 2005. “Fate of Disinfection Byproducts in Groundwater Aquifer Storage and Recovery With Reclaimed Water.” Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 77, 351-373. Pyne, R.D.G., 1995. Groundwater Recharge and Wells. Boca Raton: Lewis. Pyne, R.D.G., Singer, P.C., & Miller, C.T., 1996. Aquifer Storage Recovery of Treated Drinking Water: Denver. AWWA Research Foundation. Sidhu, J., Hanna, J., and Toze, S., 2006. Influence of Groundwater Redox Conditions on Decay of Enteric Viruses and Cryptosporidium in Recharge Systems for Protecting and Enhancing Groundwater Resources. Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium in Management of Aquifer Recharge, ISMAR5, Berlin, Germany, 11-16 June 2005 (pp. 511-517). Paris: UNESCO. Sidhu, J.P.S., and Toze, S., 2012. “Assessment of Pathogen Survival Potential During Managed Aquifer Recharge With Diffusion Chambers.”

•

Journal of Applied Microbiology, 113(3), 693700. Sidhu, J.P.S., Toze, S., Hodgers, L., Barry, K., Page, D., Li, Y., and Dillon, P., 2015. “Pathogen Decay During Managed Aquifer Recharge at Four Sites With Different Geochemical Characteristics and Recharge Water Sources.” Journal of Environmental Quality, 44, 14021412. Singer, P.C., Pyne, R.D.G., Mallikarjum, A.V.S., Miller, C.T., and Majonnier, C., 1993. “Examining the Impact of Aquifer Storage and Recovery on DBPs.” Journal American Water Works Association, 85(11), 85-94. Toze, S., 2005. Pathogen Survival in Groundwater: A Review of the Literature. In P. Dillon & S. Toze (Eds.), Water Quality Improvements During Aquifer Storage and Recovery. Volume 1: Water Quality Improvement Processes, Report 91056F (pp. 123-140). Denver: AWWA Research Foundation. USACOE and SFWMD (2010). Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan. Central and Southern Florida Project. 2009-2010 Update. Jacksonville: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and West Palm Beach: South Florida Water Management District. S

Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

FSAWWA SPEAKING OUT

Water Utility Hacking: How Vulnerable is Your System? Fred Bloetscher, P.E., Ph.D. Chair, FSAWWA

mong the big events of the past month is an issue that affects water and sewer utilities: the hack of the Oldsmar water plant in early February. The hacker accessed the plant’s controls and adjusted a chemical feed system, which created a potential health risk to the community. The good news is that an operator noticed that something had changed and called authorities. The FBI confirmed the hack. So how did this happen and can it happen again?

Technology: A Help and a Hinderance

Technology is great, but it has both

benefits and challenges. It allows us to gain data on our systems and to use that information to improve operations. As time has marched on, operators and others have sought more and more data, and more people have wanted to access and use that data. Administrators, public safety personnel, regulatory agencies, and others all have asked for access as they saw the opportunities to use the internet of things (IoT) to answer the unknowable, although most barely scratch the surface of the actual data. As more data can be gathered, the systems have become more complex, which means more access is needed. There is more need for access for information technology (IT) personnel and others to maintain the system through backdoor access points. That means wired and telephonic access, which opens the doors for unauthorized people to access the system.

System Vulnerabilities

Most water and sewer personnel do

22 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

not readily think that their job includes managing risks (risk managers aside, as they are focused on liability risks from incidents caused by or incurred by the utility, such as workplace accidents—not water supply risks). Instead, we spend a lot of effort on the engineering, operation, and business aspects, but less on planning or risk/vulnerability assessments. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has required vulnerability assessments in the past, but having done some of those exercises, most are put on a shelf and forgotten. I have had clients ask me if I still had copies because they did not. We need to keep in mind that there is vulnerability across the entire utility. Vulnerability starts with water supplies, and groundwater is particularly tricky since it’s normally not on the plant site. Aside from the significant decreases reported by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) with regard to water levels in many aquifers across the U.S., especially confined aquifers in the western part of the country, their remoteness creates opportunities to hack the system. Technology to monitor water quality to address the ongoing potential for aquifer contamination in your wellfield is another opening for a hacker. The water plant is an obvious target, as happened in Oldsmar, but wastewater and power plants have similar concerns. For years the federal government has been concerned about foreign and domestic hackers interfering with the power grid. Hackers have been able to penetrate the grid on a number of occasions. That means your highservice pumps, meters, and tanks are all entry points to the system. Wastewater telemetry is vulnerable as well. It’s why we need backup power, but that could be hacked as well if connected to the internet. Cities have been held hostage by ransomware from hackers. Entry via the billing system is one access point. Ransomware is big business, and lucrative, otherwise no one would bother. The more we spend, the more they spend, just like the drug war. Our 24/7 data is great, until it’s not.

FWRJ READER PROFILE All Grids Are at Risk The energy grid gets a lot of attention; the water sector is less considered but just as critical, and both are more fragile than we think. As a result, if either crashes, it creates significant potential for economic and social challenges. We need look only at the aftermath of hurricanes or the recent snowfall and freeze in Texas to understand the challenges with a grid shutdown. The grid in Texas could not produce enough power for heating homes. Natural gas heads froze, and so plants shut down. The system was advised to winterize 10 years ago, but it didn’t. So, like 2003, the grid crashed, sending millions into a power outage. Water utilities, which for some reason did not have backup power, crashed as well. Hackers can do the same. One operator’s solution is to pull the wires out of the wall, and remove the Bluetooth access at the plant site—therefore, no electronic access. He has argued that administrators do not need access as the plant is staffed around the clock. The site has cameras and alarms both inside and outside; these are patched into police computers, but are not connected to the water plant’s operation computers. He has a point. Access to real-time data is great, but carries a risk. He is not willing to take the risk or put his customers in danger. What is the value of 24/7 real-time access to people not at the plant site? It’s not like they are making operating decisions from home, nor are they needing data for analysis and reports at midnight or over the weekend. We can get that data directly from the plant when we need it during the day, but do we really need all that access? We need to think about this. S

What do you like best about your job? Having the opportunity to pursue my passions, serve clients, mentor staff, and solve challenges. What professional organizations do you belong to? I’ve belonged to Florida Water Environment Association since 2013. I became chair of its Collection System Committee in 2019.

Jamison Tondreault, P.E.

Kimley-Horn and Associates Inc. Lakeland Work title and years of service. I’m a project manager with nine years of service.

How has the organization helped your career? The organization has opened the door to new relationships, opportunities, and growth. It has also helped me develop leadership and management skills. Lastly, it’s increased my technical knowledge on specific topics of interest (i.e., collection systems, process, etc.)

What does your job entail? My job includes managing projects; serving clients; developing and mentoring staff; grant writing and administration; and design, modeling, and permitting.

What do you like best about the industry? I love that there are so many topics to learn within the industry and that the industry is always changing. This makes the industry very fun, but challenging at the same time.

What education and training have you had? I have a B.S. degree in civil and environmental engineering from the University of South Florida. I have been a professional engineer in Florida since 2017. I have also been trained in Revit, Boreaid, Infowater, Sewer/WaterCAD, and AutoCAD Civil 3D.

What do you do when you’re not working? I am typically hanging out with my amazing wife and energetic 18-monthold son! We enjoy traveling, staying active, and hanging out with our families. I enjoy soccer, cooking and eating a great steak, and drinking a fine bourbon. I’m looking forward to coaching my son in multiple sports. S

Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

Recovering Stronger: Transforming Water Management in America U.S. Water Alliance Water is the lifeblood of communities, the environment, and the United States economy. While always essential, water has taken an elevated role in public health and well-being since the COVID-19 crisis and it must be a central part of the recovery.

Economic Impact Like so many other parts of the economy, the water sector has felt the effects from compounding crises of the pandemic and a nationwide

recession, including utilities’ increased costs and declining revenue. On the cost side, in addition to ongoing operations, maintenance, and regulatory compliance costs, utilities have increased expenditures associated with emergency operations during the pandemic. On the revenue side, large customers, such as convention centers, industry and manufacturing facilities, sports arenas, hotels, schools, restaurants, and office buildings are all operating at drastically reduced capacity, which translates to reductions in water consumption and rate revenues. Devastating economic repercussions have also made it more difficult for people to pay their

utility bills, further restricting cash flow. To make matters worse, rising unemployment and personal income loss have exacerbated already difficult challenges for many low-income consumers. Widespread water bill debts have resulted in very real consequences on families who, in some cases, may have their water shut off for nonpayment. The American Water Works Association (AWWA) and the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies (AMWA) estimate that drinking water utilities will experience a negative aggregate financial cost of $13.9 billion, or 16.9 percent, by 2021, due to revenue losses and increased operational expenses during the pandemic. The National Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA) estimates that the resulting financial cost on wastewater utilities will be even higher, around $16.8 billion, including a 20 percent drop in sewer revenues. This unprecedented disruption to utility operations will delay needed infrastructure investments that are necessary to drive economic growth, safeguard public health, and protect the environment. Without federal assistance, utilities will likely need to reduce staff and raise customer rates to make up for their financial losses.

Protecting Public Health Clean, affordable, and accessible water and wastewater services and flood protection are essential to public health and thriving communities. Water and wastewater systems are two of the greatest achievements in public health in he U.S. and they cannot be taken for granted. While COVID-19 emergency federal assistance has flowed to other affected sectors— transit and air travel, to name two—Congress has provided very little direct, targeted relief for the water sector. This is a serious oversight, with costly implications for all. Dozens of industries, like food production, mining, manufacturing, and healthcare depend on water and wastewater services to function. If these and other sectors lost access to water and wastewater services, the economic and public-health effects would be devastating. This pandemic has shown that the publichealth benefits from safe drinking water and wastewater treatment are immeasurable. And even before the crisis, over 2 million people in the U.S. still lacked reliable access to water.

24 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

A Plan for Recovery These inequitable realities only underscore what the nation already knows: there can be no equitable recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic without a focus on water. To recover stronger from this crisis, and achieve safe, reliable, and affordable water, there must be an approach that coordinates among local, state, and federal governments. The U.S. Water Alliance believes that any recovery plan must include water investments as a central component to achieve success. The coronavirus has upended life across America, disrupting business as usual in every sector and shifting the way we relate to, and work with, one another. In many ways, and across many sectors, the pandemic exposes and reinforces structural challenges and social inequities. In the water sector, this plays out through access to water, the cost of water services, governance structures, and even how we fund and deliver those water services.

Recovering Stronger Initiative The U.S. Water Alliance is proud to announce the launch of its Recovering Stronger initiative, which stems from our belief that we have a unique opportunity in how we respond and recover from COVID-19. We can take this moment of deep disruption and turn it into a source of lasting transformation in how we view, value, and manage our nation’s water systems. As part of the launch of the Recovering Stronger initiative, we're proud to announce the publication of a federal policy blueprint for federal policymakers to help the water sector recover stronger from the pandemic. The blueprint showcases the water sector’s best legislative, regulatory, and administrative policy ideas to inform and shape early policy conversations and help policymakers understand where they specifically might be able to affect change. The federal policy blueprint is organized around the following themes: Make the Water Sector More Stable Address the structural and funding issues facing the water sector, so that federal recovery efforts can address both the short-term financial shortfalls and the long-term financial sustainability challenges. Make the Water Sector Safer Address the problem of emerging and legacy contaminants in the water sector, including suggestions to locate and map lead service lines, and fund a coordinated federal approach to remove all lead sources.

Make the Water Sector More Affordable and Accessible Tackle the policy barriers that limit solutions to make water affordable and to ensure that everyone has access to safe, reliable water services. Make the Water Sector Smarter Outline ways that the federal government can incentivize utility modernization and research in the water sector through a comprehensive utility modernization assistance program. Make the Water Sector More Resilient Address how water can be a force for combating the climate crisis by equitably planning for disasters, and improving postdisaster recovery efforts, mitigation, and investment in resilient water systems. Take a Whole-Government Approach to Federal Water Management Discuss a cross-agency water management

strategy to coordinate the more than 20 federal agencies responsible for some component of water management.

A Better Future We hope Congress and relevant agencies in the Biden administration will take note of these recommendations and appreciate the broad, bipartisan appeal that they have. There is tremendous consensus behind these ideas, but we need leaders to step up and commit to acting with urgency. We cannot fix the intersecting crises in the U.S. without addressing these water issues that have plagued the country for decades. Read the full federal policy blueprint, watch the recording of our launch event, and join the conversation online about Recovering Stronger at @USWaterAlliance. S

Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

Aging Infrastructure: It’s Not Just Pipes and Pumps all told our stories to each other many times. You show up, tell your stories, and share your experiences. Our meetings do have laughter, and we enjoy networking and socializing. Plus, in some regions, you can earn CEUs. I understand that “The training is already written. I get my CEUs online.” Who do you think writes and teaches that material? It’s the “aging infrastructure” within the board of directors and the association. What happens when these directors and educators decide to retire from their voluntary teaching, writing, and traveling around the state to meetings? They do this for their own reasons, such as educating members for the future.

Kevin Shropshire Nearly every month I attend our Florida Water and Pollution Control Operators Association (FWPCOA) Region 3 general meeting. Our regional membership is around 200, but for the past couple of years, it’s been mostly the same 10 to 15 faces at the meetings, with the same stories, the same issues, etc. They’re all there to conduct business for the 200 members, as well as socialize, network, learn, and obtain their continuing education units (CEUs). Every three months, I attend the FWPCOA board of directors meetings around the state, to represent our region as its director. For the past five years, with rare exception, I’ve been the youngest director in the room, by far. I’m 45 years old, soon to be 46. My hair is starting to gray, and there is nary a nongray-haired individual in the room. The association has over 5,000 members, statewide, whose career education depends on a room full of parents, grandparents, and even a few great-grandparents.

Stepping Up to the Plate Who’s going to take the reins of the organization? Who’s going to be the next generation of teachers and leaders? Who’s going to be the keeper of the Online Institute, where the online CEUs come from? Who’s going to travel around the state to board meetings (reimbursed by the organization), to decide our future? It all starts at the regional meetings. Consider giving an hour or two of your life, one night per month. Show up, socialize, network,

Everything (and Everyone) is Aging We’ve all seen the news stories—we know that our industry is in a time of aging infrastructure. We’ve seen the problems that can come with infrastructure getting older, but this doesn’t just apply to pipes and pumps. I understand that “We’re all busy.” I’m on several local governmental boards, the school board, and coach both my sons’ soccer teams as well. I understand that “The meetings are boring.” And why? It’s the same faces every month. We’ve

26 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

FWPCOA BY REGION

and learn. Help to make decisions for all those in your respective regions. Get involved in your future and the future of FWPCOA. Better yet, bring a colleague. There’s a saying that the best day to plant a tree is yesterday—the second best day is today. All FWPCOA regions have their meetings posted on the association’s website at www. fwpcoa.org. It’s time to step forward and get involved; the second best time is today. I’ve been involved with FWPCOA since 2004. I’ve been on regional boards and state boards since then. I’m grateful for every hour of time that the directors and teachers have given to the group. Some of them have been at the board meetings since before I started. It’s easy to say “thank you” to those doing the work; it’s not as easy to show our thanks by doing our part and carrying the torch. But it can be fun. Let’s all do our part and keep the organization moving forward—for our colleagues, future members, and the industry we all love. Kevin Shropshire is pretreatment coordinator with City of Rockledge, and is FWPCOA Region 3 director, Industrial Pretreatment Committee chair, and Legislative Committee chair. S

SINCE

Maintenance & Repair Service Available

Water & Wastewater Process Treatment & Pumping Equipment

3524 Craftsman Blvd. Lakeland, FL 33803

www.hudsonpump.com

Ph: (863) 665-7867 Fax: (863) 667-2951 TM.FL.FWRA.MU.12.18.2020

Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

L ET’ S TA LK S A FE TY This column addresses safety issues of interest to water and wastewater personnel, and will appear monthly in the magazine. The Journal is also interested in receiving any articles on the subject of safety that it can share with readers in the “Spotlight on Safety” column.

Safe Fuel Handling Practices

mproper safety precautions and lack of education on proper safety procedures in the workplace relating to fuel handling and management can lead to negligence from employees. The price of this negligence can reverberate throughout the whole company. The incorrect handling of fuel can result in

FUELING

serious injury or death caused by fire, explosion, or asphyxiation. This is why safety precautions should constantly be reviewed and updated to ensure the highest grades of safety. Employees aren’t always to blame, however; it’s known that some fuel-related hazards can spontaneously

STORAGE

occur due to natural events like climate and earthquakes. The safe handling of gasoline and diesel fuels is everyone’s responsibility. You can take steps to ensure that your own safety and health, as well as that of those around you, are protected.

Environmental Safety Fuel released into the environment contaminates soil and groundwater. As a water utility worker, you know that contaminated groundwater supplies can sicken people and animals. Gasoline vapors are also harmful to human health—even at low concentrations— and are especially dangerous at high concentrations. Here are some safety tips for what you can, and should, do to ensure safe fuel handling. Safe Fueling S T urn off the engine before fueling. S N ever smoke or light matches or lighters while fueling. S S tand upwind of the nozzle while refueling and try to not breathe the fumes.

SPILLS AND CLEAN UP

The 2020 Let’s Talk Safety is available from AWWA; visit www.awwa.org or call 800.926.7337. Get 40 percent off the list price or 10 percent off the member price by using promo code SAFETY20. The code is good for the 2020 Let’s Talk Safety book, dual disc set, and book + CD set.

28 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

S D o not top off the tank. Even the little drips that fall onto the pavement can contaminate soil, groundwater, or surface water. S Do not leave your vehicle unattended while the pump is running. Use the Proper Container S Use only containers approved by a reputable testing laboratory, such as Underwriters Laboratories (UL). S Keep the containers tightly sealed. S Containers should be fitted with a spout to allow pouring without spilling and to minimize the generation of vapors. S Keep gas containers out of direct sunlight. S Always open and use gasoline containers in a well-ventilated area. Safe Storage S Gasoline moves quickly through soil and into groundwater; store and use gasoline and fuel equipment as far away from water wells as possible. S Store no more than 10 gallons. S Keep a closed cap on the gasoline container.

S S tore the gasoline in a cool, dry place. S Store containers at ground level, not on a shelf. Ground-level storage minimizes the danger of the container falling and spilling. S Do not store gasoline in a vehicle’s trunk, where it could explode from heat or impact. S Fill cautiously. S Always use a funnel and/or spout to prevent spilling or splashing when fueling portable and mobile equipment. S Always fuel outdoors where there is good ventilation to disperse the vapors. S Fuel equipment on a hard surface, such as concrete or asphalt, rather than on soil or water. S Portable cans and fuel tanks should be removed from the vehicle and filled while on the ground. A secondary containment device under the tank ensures even better spill protection.

Avoid Spills Spilled motor fuel impacts the environment through evaporation into the

air, diffusion into the soil, and release into groundwater. Each year, Americans spill more than 9 million gallons of gasoline— the equivalent of an oil supertanker. The environmental impacts of improper handling, storage, and disposal of gasoline largely stem from sloppy filling of small engines, using inappropriate containers, overfilling motor equipment engines, storing gasoline in open containers, and disposing of excess gasoline improperly. If a spill occurs, use kitty litter, sawdust, or an absorbent towel to soak up the spill, then dispose of it properly.

Safe Disposal Do not dispose of gasoline down the drain, into surface water, onto the ground, or in the trash. Use the local hazardous waste collection and disposal location for safe and convenient disposal of excess or old gasoline. For more information go to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency website on gasoline standards and programs at www.epa. S gov/otaq/fuels/gasolinefuels/.

800–826-7699 watertc@watertc.com

watertc.com Serving the Southeast since 1976

Gas Feed Systems Dry Chemical Feed Systems Peristaltic Pumps Fiberglass Enclosures

Metering Pump Skids Tablet Feeders Analyzers Scale Systems

Factory Trained Technicians - Emergency Repair Services - PM Service/Plans Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

Water Systems in U.S. Vulnerable to Cyberattacks Hack in Florida shines spotlight on the issue The City of Oldsmar, whose water system was recently hacked, has said that it completed a federally mandated security-risk assessment three months ago, but hadn’t yet integrated the findings into its emergency plans. The hacking incident shows the vulnerability of the more than 50,000 community water systems in the United States that supply most Americans with their drinking water. This is in contrast to U.S. electric utilities, which have had to meet increasingly stringent rules since 2008 for the physical and cybersecurity of key assets and, more recently, for parts of their supply chains. Rules for the electric industry are reinforced by monetary penalties for violations.

Hacker Tries to Increase Chemicals in Water In early February, an engineer at a water treatment plant in Oldsmar, which is in Pinellas County, detected that a hacker had accessed the facility’s control system and attempted to increase the amount of lye used to treat the water to a potentially dangerous level. The control engineer witnessed the tampering as a silhouette of a hand moved a cursor over his screen, and he reversed it immediately, officials said. The episode highlighted how few protections are mandated to defend the U.S. water supply. Bob Gualtieri, sheriff of Pinellas County, which provides police protection to Oldsmar, said in an interview that the water department installed a tool called TeamViewer, a free, remoteaccess software program that lets people share their screens with other devices so that employees can work remotely. “This gave the intruder a door to enter the system,” said the sheriff. “The hacker had full access to the water treatment system and could do everything that the operator sitting in the control room could do.” The incident comes as officials warn about the growing sophistication and brazenness of attacks on critical infrastructure. Many attacks are never publicly revealed, but a Russian campaign was identified in 2017 to compromise electric-utility defenses by penetrating trusted suppliers, and another incident in 2019 was committed by unidentified hackers who targeted electric utilities in at least 18 states. More recently, the government has said that the hack of SolarWinds, a Texas-based

information technology firm, which was disclosed last December, added malicious code into the company’s software system and compromised more than half a dozen federal agencies, including the State, Commerce, and Treasury departments, and critical infrastructure organizations, whose names haven’t been revealed.

Federal Regulations Address the Issue The federal government took a step forward to address the problem of insufficient cyber defenses in the water industry in 2018 with passage of the America’s Water Infrastructure Act. The act requires community water systems serving more than 3,300 people to develop or update risk assessments and emergency response plans (ERPs). The law specifies the components that the risk assessments and ERPs must address, and also establishes deadlines by which water systems must certify to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) completion of their assessments and plans. According to EPA, the largest water providers were required to complete that work last year, and all but 10 of 542 organizations complied. Nearly 9,000 smaller suppliers, however, including the water system in Oldsmar, have until the end of this year to complete their reviews and implement findings. The smallest of suppliers—the 40,000 providers with fewer than 3,300 customers each—are exempt. Even though water systems must certify completion of their work to EPA, they aren’t required to share copies of their work product with the agency; as a result, EPA doesn’t actually assess the quality of their actions. Because the agency doesn’t possess the documents, they are effectively beyond the reach of federal publicrecords law. An EPA official said the agency estimates that $750 billion is needed to replace pipes,

30 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

upgrade water treatment facilities, and improve cyber preparedness at water utilities of all sizes. Federal officials have advised water utilities to take a hard look at remote-access tools, which have been especially popular during the COVID-19 pandemic. Industry experts said many improvements can be made at little or no expense, such as enforcing password protection and utilizing encryption and firewalls, but that small utilities struggle with things as simple as cyber training. The FBI, which is investigating the hacking, said it has probed other incidents in which desktop-sharing software was used as an attack vector against critical infrastructure providers.

Security and Water Professionals Weigh In Cybersecurity experts said preliminary information about the Oldsmar water department, including that employees shared a single password on TeamViewer, suggests broader security problems. The Water Information Sharing and Analysis Center, a nonprofit clearinghouse for threat information geared to water suppliers, said the incident appeared to be “more opportunistic than sophisticated,” partly because the intruder didn’t attempt to hide the fact that the chemical delivery system was being manipulated. Christopher Krebs, former director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, said in recent congressional testimony that it’s possible the intruder was a disgruntled employee, or from another country. “That’s why we do investigations. The municipal utility’s defenses were not where anybody, certainly any operational security professional, would like that security posture to be. Oldsmar is probably the rule rather than the exception.” During his testimony, he urged Congress to consider offering the industry more financial assistance to make cyber upgrades. Kevin Morley, manager of federal relations for the American Water Works Association, a nonprofit industry group, said that $10 million was authorized in 2018 to help small utilities pay for security upgrades, but Congress never appropriated the money. He noted that there are other federal programs that provide grants and low-interest loans that water utilities could S access.

Operators: Take the CEU Challenge! Members of the Florida Water and Pollution Control Operators Association (FWPCOA) may earn continuing education units through the CEU Challenge! Answer the questions published on this page, based on the technical articles in this month’s issue. Circle the letter of each correct answer. There is only one correct answer to each question! Answer 80 percent of the questions on any article correctly to earn 0.1 CEU for your license. Retests are available. This month’s editorial theme is Conservation and Reuse. Look above each set of questions to see if it is for water operators (DW), distribution system operators ( DS), or wastewater operators (WW). Mail the completed page (or a photocopy) to: Florida Environmental Professionals Training, P.O. Box 33119, Palm Beach Gardens, Fla. 334203119. Enclose $15 for each set of questions you choose to answer (make checks payable to FWPCOA). You MUST be an FWPCOA member before you can submit your answers!

EARN CEUS BY ANSWERING QUESTIONS FROM PREVIOUS JOURNAL ISSUES! Contact FWPCOA at membership@fwpcoa.org or at 561-840-0340. Articles from past issues can be viewed on the Journal website, www.fwrj.com.

___________________________________ SUBSCRIBER NAME (please print)

Article 1 ____________________________________ LICENSE NUMBER for Which CEUs Should Be Awarded

Article 2 ____________________________________ LICENSE NUMBER for Which CEUs Should Be Awarded

If paying by credit card, fax to (561) 625-4858 providing the following information: ___________________________________ (Credit Card Number)

___________________________________ (Expiration Date)

Adaptation in the Face of Adversity: The Persistent Trend of Membranes in Water Reuse

Natural Contaminant Attenuation During Reclaimed Water Aquifer Recharge in Destin

Jennifer Ribotti and James Christopher

Robert Maliva, Monica Autrey, and Scott Manahan

(Article 1: CEU = 0.1 DS/DW/WW 02015384) 1. W hich of the following is not a listed advantage of ceramic membranes? a. High-suspended solids tolerance b. Low production cost c. L onger life cycle d. Higher flux rate 2. O f the 26 potable water reuse test sites using reverse osmosis/ nanofiltration (RO/NF) membranes, the greatest number used ___inch membranes. a. 2.5 b. 4 c. 6 d. 8 3. M icrofiltration and ultrafiltration are used as a first-barrier treatment because they provide higher removal of all except which the following? a. Heavy metals b. M icrobial pathogens c. Organic colloids d. S uspended solids 4. A ___________ test is a useful operations tool to determine whether an ultrafiltration membrane has broken fibers. a. specific performance b. normalization c. specific capacity d. pressure decay 5. Th e California Division of Drinking Water requires ___-log reduction in enteric virus for reclaimed water groundwater replenishment systems. a. 4 b. 5 c. 10 d. 1 2

(Article 2: CEU = 0.1 DS/DW/WW 02015385)

1. I n a 2004 Southwest Florida Water Management District study, which of the following was found to be the least resistant to aquifer storage attenuation? a. Giardia lamblia b. Cryptosporidium parvum c. P RD-1 bacteriophage d. F ecal coliform 2. I n a number of Florida aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) systems, recharge water containing _________ caused arsenic to be released from the native formation. a. d issolved organics b. low pH c. d issolved oxygen d. h igh-carbon dioxide 3. E arlier studies showed that ____________ is/are the disinfection byproduct(s) most resistant to aquifer attenuation. a. h aloacetic acids b. brominated compounds c. c hlorine dioxide d. chloroform 4. A monitoring program at the Destin Water Users Inc. Water Reclamation Facility (DWU WRF) site revealed that, during the program’s operational period, the average measured total trihalomethane (THM) concentration a. e xceeded drinking water standards. b. was below detection limits. c. w as 61 micrograms per liter. d. w as reduced by the presence of saline water. 5. Th e DWU reclaimed water ASR system stores water in the ____________ aquifer. a. s and-and-gravel b. U pper Floridan c. Lower Floridan d. b oulder zone

Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

F W R J

Adaptation in the Face of Adversity: The Persistent Trend of Membranes in Water Reuse Jennifer Ribotti and James Christopher

he process of desalination with membrane technology was first used to make potable drinking water from seawater in the 1960s. Since then, membrane treatment has benefited from several technological advances in membrane process design. These advances have made membrane treatment a more affordable technology for many water utilities. This is of great importance, as diminishing water supply resources and increased regulatory limitations are leaving water utilities with a limited number of alternatives. As alternative technologies are pilot-tested for potable reuse, which focuses on the treatment of wastewater and reclaimed water to drinking water quality standards, one technology that has continuously proven to produce highquality purified water is membranes. Although their cost, from both a capital and operational standpoint, has steered utilities to investigate other alternative technologies, their persistent trend in water reuse, in not only one, but in two technologies in the multiple-barrier treatment approach, proves that their resiliency for treatment of adverse water sources will continue to provide solutions for water utilities seeking alternative water supplies. This will only continue to increase the economic viability for membrane treatment as the demand for robust treatment increases. In the state of Florida, aquifer storage and recovery (ASR), a viable water storage solution of choice for many communities, has encountered challenges due to the discovery of elevated arsenic levels, a naturally occurring element in Florida’s aquifer mineralogy, during the recovery cycle testing of ASR facilities. Recently, the application of membrane technology has been demonstrated as a fourth treatmentbarrier process in the multibarrier approach for mitigating the potential of arsenic mobilization in groundwater replenishment applications.

This article will provide a review of membrane technologies in water reuse, both in use at the pilot/demonstration and fullscale level, and how they are being applied for treatment of wastewater to purified drinking water across the United States. It will also discuss three representative case studies displaying a variety of membrane technologies that have been applied in potable reuse demonstration studies in Florida and their performance against constantly varying reclaimed water quality. These membrane technologies include ultrafiltration (UF), reverse osmosis (RO), and nanofiltration (NF) membranes in a variety of different application types (submerged, pressurized, gaseous hollow-fiber, low pressure, and high pressure).

Membrane Technologies in Water Reuse Technological advances in membrane treatment have allowed membranes to be universally applied to treatment of a variety of water sources, including, but not limited to, seawater, surface water, groundwater, wastewater, and reclaimed water. The main driving factors for continuous development and innovation in membrane technologies include the discovery of new and rarer contaminants, the promulgation of new water quality standards, and cost1. It’s an immutable natural law: if the demand is there, cost tends to fall due to a combination of economies of scale and improvements in manufacturing methods (Judd, 2017)2. Although costs associated with membrane technology are typically higher than alternative technologies, they are becoming more economically feasible with the growth of potable reuse implementation due to increasing demand in a technology proven to produce a high-quality, reliable water supply source.

Figure 1. Typical Full Advanced Treatment Train After Secondary/Tertiary Wastewater Treatment

32 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Jennifer Ribotti, P.E., is project manager and James Christopher, P.E., is a vice president with Tetra Tech in Orlando.

One aspect of treating wastewater and reclaimed water for potable reuse is that it encompasses three main driving factors, which, when applied to the implementation of potable reuse, has led to its growth in an exponential fashion. 1) Public perception of potable reuse has driven technologies to be able to treat for contaminants down to levels undetectable by outpaced laboratory methods; however, as new and rarer contaminants are discovered, membrane technology has already demonstrated its ability to have removed many of these contaminants (i.e., perfluoroalkyl substances). 2) Diminishing water supplies and drought have driven utilities to implement technologies that have been proven in an effort to expedite the production of a safe, reliable drinking water supply source. This has led to a baseline expectation of the water quality anticipated from a potable reuse treatment train (i.e., equal to or exceeding potable drinking water standards). For example, in California, the state division of drinking water controls pathogens and requires a multibarrier design in groundwater replenishment reuse systems by requiring that the recycled municipal wastewater treatment achieves at least 12-log reduction of enteric viruses, 10-log Cryptosporidium oocyst reduction, and 10-log Giardia cyst reduction (see Cal. Code Reg. tit. 22 § 60320.108, 60320.208), which equates to a minimum of 99.99999999 percent removal. 3) The race for applying proven membrane technologies for potable reuse in the U.S. (and new ones, such as ceramic membranes) has led manufacturers to think innovatively and cost-effectively. Advancements in membrane technology include membrane materials, coatings, and manufacturing methods. Many potable reuse demonstration systems in the U.S. have applied UF, RO, or NF Continued on page 34

MANUFACTURING THE MOST COMPLETE LINE OF GATE VALVES IN THE INDUSTRY.

METAL SEATED SOLID WEDGE AWWA C500

ROLLING DOUBLE DISC AWWA C500

RESILIENT SEATED SOLID WEDGE AWWA C509 & C515

AVAILABLE IN SIZES 2” TO 120”

DESIGNED FOR LONG SERVICE LIFE! LEARN MORE ABOUT OUR GATE VALVES AT JANDSVALVE.COM OR CALL 281.324.3990 Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

Continued from page 32 membrane treatment in a variety of process configurations. The UF is commonly utilized as the first-treatment barrier in the full advanced treatment (FAT) train, generally followed by RO or NF membrane treatment (Figure 1). In one groundwater replenishment application in Florida, UF membrane technology was utilized for post-treatment of purified water for mitigation of dissolved oxygen (DO). Most potable reuse demonstration plant capacities are greater than or equal to about 0.1 mil gal per day (mgd), or equivalently, ~70 gal per minute (gpm). The largest potable reuse

demonstration facility (8 mgd) is run by the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) and is known as the Silicon Valley Advanced Water Purification Center (SVAWPC), which uses the FAT train for nonpotable purposes. Its microfiltration process is shown in Figure 2. The flow of 0.1 mgd (~70 gpm) is a significant threshold value for demonstration of RO/NF-based treatment trains, since 70 gpm is the approximate flow produced by a full-scale (8-in.-diameter element) two-stage RO/NF membrane system. Both Miami-Dade County and City of El Paso (Texas) had pilot systems with multiple parallel 4-in.-diameter RO/NF

Figure 2. Silicon Valley Advanced Water Purification Center Microfiltration Process (courtesy of Santa Clara Valley Water District, 2015)

Figure 3. Potable Reuse Pilot and Demonstration Systems in the United States (2018)3

34 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

skids; however, both systems had large, deep bed denitrifying filters at the front of the train, which led to the system capacities being above 0.1 mgd. Among the 26 potable reuse tests conducted using RO/NF membranes that were evaluated when this article was written, most systems (19, or 73 percent) used 4-in.-diameter membranes, three (12 percent) used 2.5-in.-diameter membranes, and four (15 percent) used 8-in.diameter membranes. Use of smaller-diameter RO/NF membranes is usually preferred in pilot/ demonstration programs to reduce program costs, reduce system footprint, and simplify operations; however, some demonstration systems that have implemented full-scale membranes have helped provide operations staff (with little to no membrane experience) the opportunity to operate and maintain a fullsize RO/NF skid. Since the water quality performance of 4-in.-diameter membranes are well-established in a variety of applications, as comparable to full-size 8-in. membranes, many utilities choose to use 4-in. membranes and invest the cost savings in enhanced water quality sampling, online instrumentation and monitoring, and other program priorities. Pilot/Demonstration Applications Florida has been a hot spot for testing of potable reuse, with more than a dozen utilities having conducted pilots or demonstrations at the time this article was written. While many of these projects focused on indirect potable reuse (IPR), utilities are increasingly viewing direct potable reuse (DPR) as a potentially viable alternative water supply. Florida utilities actively evaluating potable reuse (at the time of this article’s writing) include Hillsborough County, City of Daytona Beach, City of Altamonte Springs, City of Clearwater, Jacksonville Electric Authority (JEA), and others. Previous pilot studies focusing on IPR applications may have limited applicability for the more stringent requirements of DPR, since DPR facilities do not have the margin for process upsets that a large environmental buffer provides to IPR facilities; therefore, it has become a priority for DPR testing programs to accumulate an extensive body of monitoring data that can be used as a basis of discussion with regulators for setting performance and treatment redundancy requirements for the implementation of future full-scale DPR systems. For brevity, Figure 3 shows the capacity of 28 potable reuse test systems across the U.S. (at the time of this article’s writing) from the past 30 years (log-scale). The shading of the capacity bars indicates whether the pilot/ demonstration system tested RO or NF as part

of the multibarrier treatment process. If the system did not, it’s a good indicator that the FAT process was not tested. It’s noted that 21 of the 28 systems utilized RO or NF as a treatment barrier. Full-Scale Applications Each full-scale potable reuse program involved the selection of an advanced water treatment train to achieve specific water quality goals set by regulations or other operational requirements. Table 1 includes a summary of potable reuse treatment trains, capacities, and major process selection factors. In general, project treatment process selection in California was largely governed by Title 22 Groundwater Replenishment Subsurface Application rules, which went into effect in 2014, though prior projects were permitted to a similar level of quality. These regulations require the use of RO and a ultraviolet (UV)/advanced oxidation process (AOP) for subsurface injection. Most California projects dispose of their RO concentrate by discharge to a wastewater treatment plant ocean outfall. Processes in Texas for DPR employed

microfiltration (MF) and RO, and either UV or UV/AOP3. Both projects also had a brackish river available for RO concentrate disposal.

Select Membrane Technology Case Studies in Florida The City of Clearwater, Hillsborough County, and City of Daytona Beach have all investigated, implemented, and operated either a pilot or demonstration facility, with advanced treatment technologies, in an effort to address their own unique water supply challenges. S Th e City of Clearwater recently completed the design of a full-scale advanced water purification treatment facility, which included three different membrane technologies at the full-scale level, including UF, RO, and UF membrane contactors for IPR. All membrane technologies were pilottested for one year in 2013. S Th e City of Daytona Beach is investigating UF, as well as both RO and NF technologies, at the demonstration level. S H illsborough County investigated UF using submerged membrane technology, as

well as RO, for a unique, small-scale DPR application, the first in Florida. First-Treatment Barrier (and Post-Treatment) Performance: Ultrafiltration/Microfiltration Both MF and UF are typically used as the first-treatment barrier due to their ability to produce waters extremely low in suspended solids and turbidity. This low-pressure filtration process is used in the potable reuse treatment train as a pretreatment step to the second barrier in the process. They are attributed with high-removal efficiencies of microbial pathogens, suspended solids, or particles, and to a lesser extent, organic colloids. Membranes for UF are typically provided as a flat-sheet or hollow-fiber configuration. Common materials include polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) and, less commonly, polyethersulfone (PES). As mentioned earlier, ceramic membranes are becoming increasingly relevant in the potable reuse market. The integrity of a UF/MF system can be confirmed daily via a pressure decay test (PDT), allowing cyst removal disinfection credits to be Continued on page 36

Table 1. Full-Scale Potable Reuse Facilities With Advanced Water Treatment (2018)3 Sponsor Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County

Orange County Water District

State CA

Facility/Project Name Seawater Intrusion Barriers (West Coast Basin, Dominguez Gap, Alamitos Gap)

Type IPR Groundwater Augmentation (Injection Wells)

Treatment By Others (West Basin, WRD, LASAN)

Year Started West Coast (1951), Dominguez Gap (1971), Alamitos Gap (1966)

Montebello Forebay Spreading Grounds

IPR Groundwater Augmentation (Spreading Basin) IPR Groundwater Augmentation (Spreading and Injection)

GMF+Cl2 from WRPs

1962

Lime + NH3 Strip + Recarb + Filt + Train 1: GAC+Cl2 Train 2: RO MF+RO+UV/AOP +Decarb+Lime

1976-2006 (Replaced by GWRS)

MF+RO +UV/AOP +CaCl2+NaOH Lime+CO2 +O3+BAC +Cl2 Lime+CO2 +MMF+GAC +Cl2+SBS GMF or UF+ O3+BAC+O3

1978

100 (70 Spreading/30 Injection) 54

1985

1993, 1995

17.5

1999

O3+MF +RO+UV +Decarb+Lime MF+RO+UV/AOP(Cl2) +CaCl2+NaOH

1999

2000 Original 2007 Expansion

2.5 12

O3+MF +RO+UV/AOP +CaCl2+NaOH MF+RO +UV/AOP(Cl2) +Lime RBF+SAT+Lime +UVAOP+GMF+GAC MF+RO+ UV/AOP

2005/2006

2018/2019

11.6

2010

2013

1.78

MF+RO+UV

2014-2015

Water Factory 21 (WF 21)

Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS)

IPR Groundwater Augmentation (Spreading and Injection)

Upper Occoquan Service Authority

Millard H. Robbins, Jr. Regional Water Reclamation Facility (WRF)

IPR Surface Water Augmentation

El Paso

Fred Hervey WRF (Hueco Bolson)

IPR Groundwater Augmentation (Spreading Basins and Injection)

West Basin Municipal Water District (WBMWD) Gwinnett County

Edward C. Little Water Recycling Facility (ECLWRF)

IPR Groundwater Augmentation (Injection) (West Coast Barrier)

IPR Surface Water Augmentation

Scottsdale Water (City of Scottsdale)

F. Wayne Hill Water Resources Center (Gwinnett County Department of Water Resources) Scottsdale Water Campus, Arizona, USA

City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works, Bureau of Sanitation Water Replenishment District of Southern California

Terminal Island Water Treatment Facility (WTF)

IPR Groundwater Augmentation to Dominguez Gap Barrier

Leo Vander Lans WTF

IPR Groundwater Augmentation to Alamitos Barrier

Groundwater Reliability Improvement Project (GRIP)

Aurora Water (City of Aurora) Colorado River Municipal Water District

Prairie Waters

IPR Groundwater Augmentation to Montebello Forebay Spreading Basins and Injection Wells IPR Groundwater Augmentation

Big Spring

DPR Source Water Augmentation

Wichita Falls

Wichita Falls (Inactive)

DPR Source Water Augmentation

IPR Groundwater Augmentation

2008

Capacity (mgd) 28.8 (81% recycled water, 19% imported) 44 (Recharge) 15

Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

Continued from page 35 verified (e.g., 4-log credit for Giardia cysts and Cryptosporidium oocysts in the California regulatory framework).

Figure 4. City of Clearwater Post-Treatment Steps

Figure 5. City of Daytona Beach Turbidity Results Consistently Less Than 0.1 Nephelometric Turbidity Units for Skid #1

Figure 6. City of Daytona Beach Turbidity Results Consistently Less Than 0.1 Nephelometric Turbidity Units for Skid #2

36 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Hollow-Fiber Ultrafiltration Membranes Hollow-fiber membranes filter water from the outside-in (O/I). They have a proven track record in potable reuse systems over a variety of reclaimed water qualities. The fibers are strong due to a combination of PVDF polymer (an asymmetric membrane with smaller pores in the active filtration area), and a high-porosity substructure. The PVDF membranes offer high chemical resistance (e.g., resistance to chlorine) and are tolerant to temperatures of 40°C. Both the City of Clearwater and City of Daytona Beach have tested hollow-fiber UF membranes. S The City of Clearwater tested a single vertical DuPont (formerly DOW) SFD-2880 UF membrane in the first barrier of the FAT process. S The City of Clearwater also tested a hollowfiber polypropylene membrane in a posttreatment step (after the FAT process) for DO removal (to help control the potential for metals mobilization from the aquifer formation). Figure 4 illustrates the posttreatment process that was tested in the pilot phase and designed at the full-scale level for the advanced water purification facility. S The City of Daytona Beach has tested a vertical Toray HFU-2020 membrane (UF Skid #1) and vertical DuPont (formerly Dow) SFD-2880XP membrane (UF Skid #2) to date. Utilizing the UF process at City of Clearwater resulted in significant reductions in turbidity in the reclaimed water prior to delivery to the subsequent RO unit process. Overall, UF filtered-water turbidity was typically less than 0.2 nephelometric turbidity units (NTU), with a 78 percent average removal. The City of Daytona Beach has experienced filtrate turbidities consistently less than 0.1 NTU; however, ongoing filter construction at the time on the upstream water reclamation facility impeded performance for a short period of time (April - June 2019). This was observed in both UF membranes, which operated in parallel for approximately one year (Figures 5 and 6). The UF Skid #1 had not required a clean-in-place (CIP) step as of August 2019 due to consistent performance. The City of Clearwater’s UF membrane accumulated moderate fouling, as shown by an increase in transmembrane pressure (TMP) in Figure 7. The pilot ran for approximately five Continued on page 38

On Demand Webinars Now Available! • SCADA System Security & New Trends • Concentrate Disposal 0.1 CEUs/1.0 PHDs

0.1 CEUs/1.0 PHDs

• Membrane Autopsy Case Studies

• The 5 Questions of Membrane Autopsy

• Well Maintenance

• Understanding Membrane Rejection

•

• RO Principals & Theory

0.1 CEUs/1.0 PHDs 0.1 CEUs/1.0 PHDs

2020 Spring Symposium 0.7 CEUs/7.0 PHDs

• Chemical Feed Pump 0.1 CEUs/1.0 PHDs

0.1 CEUs/1.0 PHDs 0.1 CEUs/1.0 PHDs

0.1 CEUs/1.0 PHDs

• Scaling & Fouling

0.1 CEUs/1.0 PHDs

• RO Membrane Cleaning and Chemical Selection 0.1 CEUs/1.0 PHDs

Get Your CEUs Today! Current CEU renewal ends April 28th, 2021

Call for presenters for 2021 SEDA Spring Symposium SEDA Spring Symposium May 30th - June 2nd, 2021 The Westin Cape Coral Resort at Marina Village Cape Coral, FL

Interested presenters should send the speaker bio/abstract form to Michele Miller at admin@southeastdesalting.com by November 12th, 2020 354 NW Alice Ave Stuart, FL 34994 P: 772-781-7698 F: 772-781-4240 Web: www.southeastdesalting.com Email: admin@southeastdesalting.com

Continued from page 36 months before requiring its first CIP step (the CIPs are shown as vertical green lines in Figure 7). The UF TMP was controllable through cleaning, which dislodged foulants, such as iron, manganese, and organics. The City of Daytona’s UF Skid #2 accumulated fouling, as shown by several spikes in TMP in Figure 8. The CIPs were able to reduce the TMP by dislodging foulants assumed to be iron and organics. The UF Skid #1 had relatively stable TMP, ranging from 4 to 6 pounds per sq in. (psi) throughout its first year of operation.

Figure 7. City of Clearwater Transmembrane Pressure Controllable Through Clean-in-Place

A PDT is a useful operational tool for monitoring the state of UF membrane fibers. The PDT levels and membrane fiber pinning repairs can be tracked at full scale as an operational tool for timing pinning maintenance, as needed, for specific UF modules. Broken UF fibers can

Figure 8. City of Daytona Beach Transmembrane Pressure Controllable Through Clean-in-Place

Figure 9. Pressure Decay Remained Relatively Steady Throughout One-Year Pilot Study

38 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Figure 10. Four Membrane Contactors in Series to Provide up to 4-Log (99.99 Percent) Removal of Dissolved Oxygen (courtesy of City of Clearwater, 2014)

result in compromised filtration and reduced removal of protozoan pathogens. For City of Clearwater, a time series of PDT results are shown in Figure 9. Beginning in late October 2013, the results of the PDT began to decrease rapidly from about -0.10 psi/minute to -0.20 psi/minute; through mid-January 2014, the PDT results held relatively steady. In January 2014, the UF vessel was opened, and broken fibers were identified and pinned. After that time, the PDT remained above -0.05 psi/ minute, higher than the initially recorded PDT results in June 2013 of about -0.10 psi/minute. For purposes specific to the groundwater replenishment program at City of Clearwater, a fourth treatment step was included for the conditioning of the water for aquifer recharge. This included a membrane contactor system (hollow-fiber ultrafiltration membranes), as shown in Figure 10, for the reduction of DO from the purified water before post-treatment. The same technology has been used previously in Florida for DO removal for ASR projects. The hollow-fiber membranes are permeable to gas, but not permeable to water. Unlike the standard application of a UF membrane for water treatment, water passes around the outside surface of the hollow fibers, never entering the fiber itself (Figure 11). A vacuum pump is then used to draw high-purity nitrogen through the inside of the hollow fibers, creating a low-pressure area inside, with very little oxygen present in the sweep gas. The lack of DO inside the fiber creates a driving force

for oxygen to diffuse out of the water, through the fiber wall, and into the hollow core, to be carried away by the nitrogen sweep gas mixture. The pilot was originally designed to utilize either nitrogen and/or carbon dioxide as a sweep gas. In the City of Clearwater’s pilot study, the DO concentration in the reclaimed water was around an atmospheric concentration of 8 mg/L. The membrane contactor system removed around 4 log of DO (down to 1 part per bil [ppb]), but the trace DO sensor experienced difficulties in detecting the low concentration of DO, partly due to location. The sensor was relocated upstream of any potential interferences (lime turbidity from post-treatment chemical addition) and DO was consistently read for the remainder of the pilot study. In summary, the DO of the purified water ranged from 7 to 9 mg/L, depending on temperature, and was consistently reduced to less than 10 μg/L, as shown in Figure 12. Flat-Sheet Ultrafiltration Membranes An alternative to a pressurized hollowfiber UF membrane is a submerged hollowfiber UF membrane. This configuration is not

commonly seen in potable reuse applications, but is commonly used for media filter retrofits and at large drinking water treatment plants. The membranes are installed cassette-style, very much resembling books in a bookcase4, which can be observed in Figure 13. Feed water enters the membrane tank and surrounds the hollow fibers contained within. A vacuum is drawn on the inside of the membrane to suck the feed water to the inside of the membrane through many microscopic pores, resulting in clean filtered water. The suction can be created by a pump, or simply by siphon alone. Particulates and bacteria are too large to pass, and so remain in the membrane tank outside of the membrane fibers4. Similar to a pressurized UF membrane system, the submerged configuration periodically requires cleaning through waterflow reversal. S Hillsborough County tested a standard ZeeWeed 1000 UF flat-sheet membrane module, which is composed of PVDF and has an O/I flow path. Membrane integrity is tested using a PDT. Because of the limited runtime of the Hillsborough County pilot (three days), Continued on page 40

Figure 12. City of Clearwater 4-Log Removal of Dissolved Oxygen Achievable With Membrane Contactors

Figure 11. Basic Operation of a Hollow-Fiber Membrane Contactor

Figure 13. Building Block Design of an Immersed Ultrafiltration Membrane System (courtesy of Suez [Formerly GE], 2016)

Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

Continued from page 39 performance monitoring was critical to assess the integrity of the treatment barriers. The pilot UF process was assessed by PDTs, turbidity monitoring, and particle counts. The performance monitoring method, anticipated result, and frequency of testing have been summarized in Table 2. The UF pilot achieved a pathogen log reduction of 3.4, verified through an MS-2 coliphage challenge study. In combination with

the other treatment barriers, the pilot achieved over 15, 16, and 17-log removal of viruses, Cryptosporidium, and Giardia, respectively. Ceramic Ultrafiltration Membranes A ceramic membrane can be used in lieu of a traditional polymeric UF membrane in water and/or wastewater application. It can be formed from a variety of metal oxides, such as aluminum and titanium oxides. Ceramic membranes are essentially chemically inert and can be operated

Table 2. Performance Monitoring Methods by Process Process MF/UF

Method Pressure Decay Test (Critical Control Point)

Anticipated Result <0.27 psi/minute at 14 gfd flux for >4-log Cryptosporidium, According to Suez Effluent Turbidity <0.3 NTU 95% of the Time Influent and Effluent >1.5 LRV Bacteria Range (<5 µm) Particle Counts >2.0 LRV Protozoa Range (4-15 µm) MS2 Seeding and Sampling >4 LRV Bacteriophage

When Tested Test Daily, Before and After Batch Production Continuously Grab Samples Before and After Batch Production Seeding Study After Batch Production

at high temperatures, unlike typical polymeric membranes. Instead of utilizing hollow-fiber membranes, ceramic membranes use pores, made by pouring a dispersion of coarse ceramic material and a binder into a mold. An example of a ceramic membrane is shown in Figure 14. Currently, reproducibility of the membrane formation process on a large commercial scale is rather poor and costs are much higher compared to PVDF membranes. Ceramic membranes also have an insideout (I/O) configuration and require a much higher backwash flux rate than a typical polymeric membrane. Table 3 illustrates the differences in characteristics as compared to commonly used PVDF UF membranes. Advantages of using a ceramic membrane versus a polymeric membrane include: S Three to five times higher flux rate S Less membrane area S High-suspended solids tolerance S High chemical resistance S Ease of maintenance S Longer life cycles S Ability to recover permeability Disadvantages may include: S Production cost S Use not widely established in the U.S. (small market) S Typically requires pretreatment (coagulant aid) S More efficient with higher solids loading (potable reuse is relatively lower in solids)

Figure 14. Ceramic Membrane Design (courtesy of Nanostone) Table 3. General Comparison of Ceramic Membrane (Nanostone CM-151) to Commonly Used Polyvinylidene Fluoride Ultrafiltration Membranes

40 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

The City of Daytona Beach acquired four Nanostone CM-151 ceramic membranes for testing in one of its ultrafiltration skids; however, due to the high influent turbidity of the reclaimed water (and effects on the reclaimed water from the upstream construction at the time), the ceramic membrane required the addition of a coagulant. The city decided not to test the ceramic membrane during the two-year testing period. Second-Treatment Barrier Performance: Reverse Osmosis The RO is the second barrier in the FAT process and consists of a pressure-driven treatment process that utilizes semipermeable membranes to separate dissolved constituents from water. Contaminants removed by RO typically include organics, pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs), inorganics, heavy metals, and viruses. Thin-film composite membranes are commonly used in water treatment, as they provide high-salt rejection rates at low-operating pressures. Both NF and RO are two very similar Continued on page 42

ONLINE COURSES

Water Treatment Plant Operations Class C & B Training Course Online (C-DW) Approved C Water Course | CEUs: 14.4 Water Distribution Systems Level 2 & 3 Online State of Florida Approved Course | CEUs: 4.0 NEW!!! Wastewater Treatment Plant Operations Class C Training Course Approved C Wastewater Course | CEUs: 15.0

Wastewater Collection Systems Online CEUs: 4.0

BACKFLOW PREVENTION COURSES

WATER & WASTEWATER COURSES Water Distribution Systems Operator Level 2 & 3

Apr. 20-24, 2020 | Gainesville, FL | CEUs: 3.2

Unidirectional Flushing Workshop June 9, 2020 | Gainesville, FL | CEUs: 0.8

Introduction to Lift Station Maintenance Jun. 10, 2020 | Gainesville, FL | CEUs: 0.8

Water Distribution System Pipes and Valves Jun. 11, 2020 | Gainesville, FL | CEUs: 0.5

Wastewater Collection System Cleaning & Maintenance Jun. 12, 2020 | Gainesville, FL | CEUs: 0.8

Introduction to Electrical Maintenance Jun. 16-18, 2020 | Gainesville, FL | CEUs: 2.0

Asbestos: Cement Piping (Class II) Aug. 11, 2020 | Naples, FL | CEUs: 0.8

EXAM PREP COURSES

Cross Connection Control Program Manager Certification Series Introduction to Backflow Prevention May 11, 2020 | Gainesville, FL | CEUs: 0.7 Cross Connection Control: Survey & Inspection May 12-13, 2020 | Gainesville, FL | CEUs: 1.10 Cross Connection Control: Ordinance & Organization May 14-15, 2020 | Gainesville, FL | CEUs: 1.0

Backflow Prevention Assembly Repair and Maintenance Training & Certification

May 18-22, 2020 | Gainesville, FL

May 6-8, 2020 | Davie, FL Jun. 3-5, 2020 | Orlando, FL Jun. 15-17, 2020 | Gainesville, FL

Wastewater Class B Certification Review

Backflow Prevention Recertification

Wastewater Class A Certification Review

Oct. 26-30, 2020 | Gainesville, FL

Wastewater Class C Certification Review Jun. 22-26, 2020 | Gainesville, FL

Water Class A Certification Review May 11-15, 2020 | Gainesville, FL

Water Class B Certification Review Apr. 13-17, 2020 | Gainesville, FL

Water Class C Certification Review July 27-31, 2020 | Gainesville, FL

VISIT WWW.UFTREEO.ORG FOR ADDITIONAL COURSES AND COURSE DATES Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

Continued from page 40 technologies; the NF is a looser membrane and has a higher salt passage than RO membranes. Although they still reject most of the same

constituents, they may allow more minerals (salts) to pass through. Because of this, they may require less energy than an RO system. The NF systems are ideal for potable reuse applications

Figure 15. City of Clearwater Normalized Salt Passage is Normal

Figure 16. City of Clearwater Normalized Permeate Flow was Steady

42 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

since reclaimed water tends to have a lower concentration of total dissolved solids (TDS). The integrity and performance of an RO/ NF system are key performance indicators, such as normalized permeate flow, differential pressure, silt density index (SDI), salt rejection, and normalized specific flux. The City of Clearwater, Hillsborough County, and City of Daytona Beach have all tested RO membranes. S The City of Clearwater tested 4-in. and 2-in. DuPont (formerly DOW) XFRLE-4040/2540 RO membranes in the second barrier of the FAT process. S The City of Daytona Beach tested a full-scale 8-in. DuPont (formerly DOW) BW30XFRLE membrane (RO Skid #1) and LG NanoH2O membrane (RO Skid #2). Both membranes are low-energy brackish RO membranes. It intends to test an ultralow-pressure brackish water RO membrane (Toray TMG20D-400) and energy-saving low-fouling NF membrane (Hydranautics ESNA1-LF-LD). S Hillsborough County tested a 4-in. Suez (formerly GE) AG4040FM RO membrane. The City of Clearwater tested two RO configurations (three-stage at 84 percent recovery and two-stage at 82.5 percent recovery). The average flux during both periods was 11.6 gal per sq ft per day (gfd). S The three-stage system showed signs of scaling in the third stage only. S The two-stage system did not show any signs of scaling during operations. The City of Daytona Beach will test an NF membrane in its second year of operation. The membranes consistently produced water with low TDS and low total organic carbon (TOC), while maintaining a highsalt rejection. Membrane CIPs appeared to be beneficial in removing fouling from the third stage. The first and second stages did not require cleaning during the one-year period because they did not show any signs of fouling through net declines in permeate flow. No major effects from the increase in normalized permeate flow were seen on water quality performance and contaminant removal in the pilot. Normalized salt passage and permeate flow are summarized in Figures 15 and 16. The City of Daytona Beach has experienced relatively stable normalized permeate flow in both RO skids throughout the first six months of operation of its first year (Figures 17 and 18). Declines in permeate flow were observed from April to June 2019 (coinciding with spikes in turbidity from the water reclamation facility), particularly in the

second stage. Several CIPs were initiated in an effort to restore permeate flow. A cleaning study performed on a secondstage tail-end membrane element indicated that scaling was not a concern and that a free chlorine breach may have caused some membrane degradation. Fouling seems to have been a concern for both membrane systems; however, after cleaning with a proprietary manufacturer cleaning chemical solution, permeate flow was restored to even higherthan-starting permeate-flow conditions. Despite highly variable water quality due to seasonal/tourist influences, the membrane systems have proven to be robust and have not shown any indication of irreversible fouling. Because of the limited runtime of the Hillsborough County pilot (three days), performance monitoring was critical to assess the integrity of the treatment barriers. The pilot RO process was assessed by specific conductance, TOC, and the MS-2 coliphage testing. The performance monitoring method, anticipated result, and frequency of testing have been summarized in Table 4. The RO pilot achieved a pathogen log reduction of 2.3, verified through an MS-2 coliphage challenge study. In combination with the other treatment barriers, the pilot achieved over 15, 16, and 17-log removal of viruses, Cryptosporidium, and Giardia, respectively.

Figure 17. City of Daytona Beach Normalized Permeate Flow for Reverse Osmosis Skid #1

Summary It’s evident that membrane technology has been able to adapt in the face of adversity with advances in technology. In this article, the application of membrane technologies was summarized for potable reuse applications on both the pilot/demonstration and full-scale level. While RO has always been considered a staple technology for desalination, it’s now an integral part of the multibarrier full advanced treatment process. The multibarrier advanced treatment process using membrane technology has proven its efficacy relative to regulatory water quality requirements, even as new and rarer contaminants are discovered. With time, these technologies, including advancements being investigated today (ceramic membranes), will continue to become more cost-effective as their implementation becomes a reality for many utilities experiencing (or beginning to experience) limited potable water supply conditions. New scientific breakthroughs will lead to enhanced understanding of the significance of criteria found in both water and wastewater and their significance to human health. New regulations will be needed to reflect this enhanced biological and chemical understanding. To meet

Figure 18. City of Daytona Beach Normalized Permeate Flow for Reverse Osmosis Skid #2

Table 4. Performance Monitoring Methods by Process Process RO

Method Specific Conductance (Critical Control Point) Total Organic Carbon

MS2 Seeding and Sampling

Anticipated Result

When Tested

>90% Reduction (>1.0 LRV)

Grab Samples Before, During, and After Production

>90% Reduction (>1.0 LRV)

Grab Samples Before and After Batch Production Seeding Study After Batch Production

>4 LRV Bacteriophage

future water resource management and water reuse challenges effectively, cities must embrace the “one water” concept5.

References 1

J udd, Simon. 2017. “The Cost of Ceramic Membranes for MBRs.”

illsborough County AWTDF Literature H Review, 2018. Suez Water Technologies and Solutions. Front. Environ. Sci., 2018. “Water Reuse: From Ancient to Modern Times and the Future.” S

ational Research Council. 1999. Identifying N Future Drinking Water Contaminants. https:// doi.org/10.17226/9595.

Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

Water Conservation in Florida: Much to Celebrate, Much More to Do Florida is surrounded by water and is home to Lake Okeechobee, the second largest freshwater lake wholly contained within the United States. Natural beauty and warm temperatures attract a large population; Florida is now the nation’s third most populous state, with the number of residents continuing to rise. By 2030, Florida’s demand for fresh water is estimated to increase by about 28 percent,

and traditional sources of groundwater will be unable to meet this new demand. To address this issue, Florida water management districts have developed plans to handle this new demand—and more. Floridians can also help reduce the burden on community water infrastructure and treatment costs by using water more efficiently, because using water more efficiently and effectively can be cheaper than finding new sources of water.

Water conservation is the most important action we can take to sustain our water supplies, meet future needs, and reduce demands on Florida’s water-dependent ecosystems, such as springs, rivers, lakes and wetlands. Water conservation activities can be implemented by utilities, sometimes utilizing cost-sharing programs of the water management districts, and through regulation, such as landscape irrigation restrictions. Most importantly, however, water conservation can be implemented by all of Florida’s citizens.

Reducing the Burden on Aquifers Groundwater has traditionally been the primary water supply source in many areas of the state, making Florida the largest user of groundwater east of the Mississippi River. For example, the Floridian aquifer system supplies more than half of the total public water supply withdrawals for the state and serves an estimated 10 million people. The Floridan aquifer is one of the highest-producing aquifers in the world. It’s found throughout Florida and extends into the southern portions of Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina. This aquifer system is comprised of a sequence of limestone and dolomite, which thickens from about 250 feet in Georgia to about 3000 feet in south Florida. The Floridan aquifer system has been divided into an upper and lower aquifer separated by a unit of lower permeability. The Upper Floridan aquifer is the principal source of water supply in most of north and central Florida. In the southern portion of the state, where it’s deeper and contains brackish water, the aquifer has been used for the injection of sewage and industrial waste. Groundwater flow is generally from highs near the center of the state towards the coast. The Floridan aquifer is the source of many of the state’s springs. Withdrawing water from aquifers can be problematic, however, depending upon how much is removed. With explosive population growth, the state has significantly increased its dependence on the Floridian aquifer and is reaching the limit of sustainable withdrawals. The development of alternative water supplies, as well as water efficiency efforts, will therefore be essential in meeting future demands.

44 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Watching the Weather for Water System Impacts Climate change impacts are also expected to challenge Florida’s future water supply. Variations in either annual rainfall or temperatures could pose risks to the state’s water resources. Extended droughts and heat waves, for example, could further limit the amount of water that reaches Florida’s aquifers, and rising sea levels and coastal storms could increase the threat of saltwater intrusion into freshwater aquifers. Municipalities are adopting water-saving measures, such as irrigation restrictions designed to help reduce the impacts of droughts. The famous Everglades has also been affected by recent droughts. The water level in Lake Okeechobee, considered the heart of the Everglades, dropped so low during the 2011 drought that gravity couldn’t pull the water south to the Everglades or through the canal that provides West Palm Beach and other cities with their drinking water. Given the potential for such extreme water shortages, using water wisely has become especially important.

Reducing Water Use Demand for public water supplies in Florida is projected to increase nearly 50 percent by 2030. Water management districts and utilities throughout Florida are helping their commercial and residential customers make changes to help save water, starting with outdoor use. On average, Americans use about 30 percent of their water outdoors. Residential water use per person in Florida has declined since 2000, as a result of water conservation efforts, water restrictions, the increased use of reclaimed water, and “Florida-Friendly” landscaping techniques. Florida-Friendly landscapes include waterefficient irrigation, low-water-using plants, and reduced stormwater runoff, which can transport harmful chemicals. By watering lawns, gardens, highway medians, and public landscaping more efficiently, Florida residents could save 46 million gallons of water each day—equal to the amount needed to supply every household in Tampa. Utilities and water management districts across Florida are promoting water efficiency inside businesses, offices, and homes as well, providing technical assistance and offering rebates on products labeled by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as part of the WaterSense® program. WaterSense is designed to encourage

water efficiency in the U.S. through the use of a special label on consumer products. The program maintains partnerships with key utility, manufacturer, and retail partners across the country and is a voluntary, rather than a regulatory, program. The EPA develops specifications for water-efficient products through a public process. If a manufacturer makes a product that meets those specifications, the product is eligible for third-party testing to ensure that the stated efficiency and performance criteria have been met. If the product passes the test, the manufacturer is rewarded with the right to put the WaterSense label on that product. If just half of Florida’s businesses and households replaced their older, inefficient

toilets, sinks, and other water-using appliances with these labeled models, the state could save nearly 38 billion gallons of water annually— enough to supply every household in Orlando for four years. Some builders are taking this approach to heart and installing WaterSenselabeled fixtures throughout community developments. For example, it’s estimated that homes featuring WaterSense-labeled fixtures in the Brownsville Transit Village in Miami have saved more than 5 million gallons of water per year and about $50,000 annually in utility savings, compared to using standard plumbing fixtures.

Continued on page 46

Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

Continued from page 45

Local—and Global— Reasons to Conserve Water The following are some of the main reasons that it’s important to conserve water: It Minimizes the Effects of Drought and Water Shortages Even though our need for fresh water sources is always increasing because of population and industry growth, the supply

we have stays constant. Even though water eventually returns to Earth through the water cycle, it’s not always returned to the same spot, or in the same quantity and quality. By reducing the amount of water we use, we can better protect against future droughts. It Guards Against Rising Costs and Political Conflict Failing to conserve water can eventually lead to a lack of an adequate water supply, which can have drastic consequences. These include rising costs; reduced food supplies, which can affect migration around the globe;

health hazards, including dehydration and malnutrition; and political conflict over the rights to water resources. It Helps to Preserve the Environment and Infrastructure Reducing our water usages reduces the energy required to process and deliver it to homes, businesses, farms, and communities, which, in turn, helps to reduce pollution and conserve fuel resources. Conserving water also reduces wear and tear on major facilities and infrastructure, such as water and wastewater treatment plants and their distribution systems, that deliver water to the public. It Makes Water Available for Recreational Purposes It’s not just swimming pools, spas, and golf courses that we have to think about. Much of our freshwater resources are also used for beautifying our surroundings— watering lawns, trees, flowers, and vegetable gardens, as well as washing cars and filling public fountains at parks. Failing to conserve water now can mean losing out on such uses later on. It Builds Safe and Beautiful Communities Firefighters, hospitals, gas stations, street cleaners, health clubs, gyms, and restaurants all require large amounts of water to provide services to the community. Reducing our usage of water now means that these services can continue to be provided.

Water Conservation: Now and for the Future Water conservation requires forethought and effort, but every little bit helps. Don’t think that what you and your customers do doesn’t matter. We can all make changes in our lifestyles to reduce our water usage. Using less water can also enable us to become more flexible during times when there is a water shortage. Water conservation isn’t just something we think about once in a while; it should be a way of life—forever. S

46 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Test Yourself Risk Assessment, Emergency Preparation and Response Mixed Bag

Donna Kaluzniak

1. P er the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Water Resilience web page, America’s Water Infrastructure Act (AWIA) requires community water systems serving populations between 3,301 and 49,999 to develop or update their risk and resilience assessment and submit certification of such by June 30, 2021. They must then prepare or update their emergency response plan and submit certification no later than a. Sept. 30, 2021. b. Dec. 31, 2021. c. March 30, 2022. d. June 30, 2022. 2. Per EPA’s Flood Resilience – A Basic Guide for Water and Wastewater Utilities (Flood Resilience Guide), there are four basic steps to increase a utility’s resilience to flooding. Step 1 is Understand the Threat of Flooding. What is Step 2? a. D evelop Plan to Implement Mitigation Measures b. I dentify and Evaluate Mitigation Measures c. Identify Vulnerable Assets and Determine Consequences d. Review Budget Documents to Determine Financial Resources 3. F lorida’s Water/Wastewater Agency Response Network, (FlaWARN) is a system of “utilities helping utilities” to address mutual aid during emergency situations. Per FlaWARN Emergency Response and Preparedness Best Management Practices for Water and Wastewater Systems (FlaWARN Best Management Practices), development of a communication plan is essential for emergency response. Disaster-event communication can be categorized according to the three types of informational needs. These are internal communication, external communication, and a. comprehensive communication. b. interagency communication. c. private communication. d. regulatory communication. 4. P er Florida Administrative Code (FAC) 62-604, Collection Systems and Transmission Facilities, inplace emergency generators are required for pump stations that receive flow from one or more pump stations through a force main or pump stations that discharge through a pipe of what diameter?

a. 4 inches c. 8 inches

b. 6 inches d. 12 inches or larger

5. T he Florida Rural Water Association (FRWA) document, Stand-By Generator Sizing for Emergency Operations, recommends how many mobile generators for smaller lift stations? a. One mobile generator for every two lift stations. b. One mobile generator for every three to five lift stations. c. One mobile generator for every six to 10 lift stations. d. One mobile generator for every 15 lift stations. 6. Per FAC 62-555, Permitting, Construction, Operation and Maintenance of Public Water Systems, community water systems must be designed and constructed so that all structures and equipment are protected from damage by what flood level? a. 10-year flood b. 25-year flood c. 50-year flood d. 100-year flood 7. Per EPA’s Water Utility Response Protocol Toolbox (RPTB) when there is a threat of water contamination, the threat management process consists of three stages: possible, credible, and a. confirmed. b. determined. c. evaluated. d. uncertain. 8. Per EPA’s Planning for Emergency Drinking Water Supply, options for supplying water during an emergency longer than three days include providing bottled water, providing bulk-packaged pretreated water, using mobile treatment units to inject water into the existing distribution system. and a. advising the public to keep at least 20 days of water supply. b. contacting the Federal Emergency Management Agency. c. interconnection with a neighboring utility. d. pumping water from a local lake. 9. Per EPA’s How to Develop a Multi-Year Training and Exercise (T&E) Plan – A Tool for the Water Sector (How to Develop a T&E Plan), there are seven types of emergency preparedness exercises that are either discussion-based or operations-based. Which type of exercise involves key personnel discussing simulated scenarios in an informal setting to assess plans, policies, and procedures? a. Game b. Seminar c. Tabletop Exercise d. Workshop 10. Per EPA’s Water Laboratory Alliance – A Utility Perspective, which benefit of the Water Laboratory

Alliance (WLA) establishes a comprehensive, national-response approach to water contamination incidents requiring analytical support? a. EPA Compendium of Environmental Support Laboratories b. EPA Disposal Guide c. W ater Contamination Information Tool (WCIT) d. WLA Response Plan Answers on page 62

References used for this quiz: • U.S. EPA Water Resilience website: https://www.epa. gov/waterresilience • U.S. EPA Flood Resilience – A Basic Guide for Water and Wastewater Utilities: https://www.epa. gov/sites/production/files/2015-08/documents/ flood_resilience_guide.pdf • U.S. EPA Water Utility Response Protocol Toolbox, available on EPA’s Emergency Response for Drinking Water and Wastewater Utilities website: https://www.epa.gov/waterutilityresponse • U.S. EPA Planning for Emergency Drinking Water Supply: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/ files/2015-03/documents/planning_for_an_ emergency_drinking_water_supply.pdf • U.S. EPA How to Develop a Multi-Year Training and Exercise (T&E) Plan: https://www.epa.gov/ waterresiliencetraining/develop-water-utility-trainingand-exercise-plan • U.S. EPA Water Laboratory Alliance – A Utility Perspective: https://www.epa.gov/waterlabnetwork/ water-laboratory-alliance-drinking-water-utilityperspective • FlaWARN's Emergency Response & Preparedness Best Management Practices for Water & Wastewater Systems: https://pwd.aa.ufl.edu/flawarn/wp-content/ uploads/sites/12/2020/08/BMPs.pdf • Florida Administrative Code 62-604 Collection Systems and Transmission Facilities: https:// www.flrules.org/gateway/ChapterHome. asp?Chapter=62-604 • Florida Rural Water Association Stand-By Generator Sizing for Emergency Operations: https://assets. noviams.com/novi-file-uploads/frwa/pdfs-anddocuments/frwageneratorsizing012318.pdf

Send Us Your Questions

Readers are welcome to submit questions or exercises on water or wastewater treatment plant operations for publication in Test Yourself. Send your question (with the answer) or your exercise (with the solution) by email to: donna@h2owriting.com

Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

FWEA FOCUS

Conserve, Reuse, and Celebrate! James J. Wallace, P.E. President, FWEA

he April issue of the Florida Water Resources Journal spotlights conservation and reuse. Both topics are cornerstones to the future of water and wastewater management and resource allocation in Florida, as well as the long-term health of the state’s water environment. Florida has not always been known for its conservation. With its abundance of lakes, rivers, and natural waterbodies, as well as annual rainfall totals that make other states envious, Florida is considered an abundant-resource state; however, it’s is also the third most populous state in the country, and along the way, the population growth brought pressure on natural resources like water. One of the ways Florida addresses this challenge is by developing significant reuse opportunities that effectively reduce dependence on developing new sources of water. The state has many examples of this process at work and we intend to spotlight and celebrate those communities that are leading the way.

Conservation According to Merriam-Webster, the definition of conservation is “a careful preservation and protection of something, especially [my italics] planned management of a natural resource to prevent exploitation, destruction, or neglect.” The prominent example it uses is “water conservation.” What is often lost when we discuss conservation is the fact that we can all do our part to conserve water. The headlines are usually taken

with agricultural uses or companies that want to bottle spring water, which they make for more sensational storylines regarding the consumption of water in Florida. What we don’t spend enough time discussing is the fact that, by starting small, with each of us individually, we can make a difference. If we all do our part, it will add up to a significant impact, not only in our locale, but all across the state. As an example, my company’s internal sustainability network provides monthly guidance and goals on a variety of topics. It just so happens that this month’s topic was “Save Water in Your Bathroom.” Of the many individual goals, I offer two examples of the impacts we can make individually. S If we shorten our showers by two minutes a day for an entire week, approximately 42 gallons of water can be saved (assuming showers use 3 gallons a minute). A family of four can save 168 gallons in a week. S If we turn off the water while we brush our teeth, we will reduce consumption by an average of 50 gallons a week. Again, a family can save 150 to 200 gallons every week. This same rationale can be utilized all around your house, especially outside your home, where personal water usage is often related to irrigation. The bottom line is that we can all do our part to reduce our consumption. As Florida continues to grow in population, continued development of conservation strategies, and individual adoption, will be the key to longterm sustainability.

Reuse Utilizing Merriam-Webster again, the definition of reuse is “to use again, especially in a different way or after reclaiming or reprocessing; further, different, or repeated use.” Florida is

48 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

certainly no stranger to reuse, as we have been a leader in reusing water (i.e., reclaimed water) for agricultural and industrial uses for well over 40 years. The most common uses historically have been for golf courses and residential lawns, and municipal uses throughout parks, medians, and green spaces. More recently, Florida has also been evolving to consider new concepts. Today, many utilities throughout Florida are studying and putting into practice indirect potable reuse (IPR) in the form of aquifer recharge, as well as studying the merits of direct potable reuse (DPR). Florida again is intent on leading the way to show the rest of the country how to best reuse this precious resource. The benefits are many, but a few that rise to the top include: S Reduction in the demand for potable water. S Reduction in the discharge to surface waters from wastewater treatment plants. S Reduction in the need for additional nutrients and fertilizers when utilizing reclaimed water. It’s important that we continue to embrace the development of these new alternatives. As I write this, the Florida Legislature is considering House Bill 263 and Senate Bill 64, both addressing reclaimed water, which would work to eliminate surface water discharges and encourage and support reuse and reclaimed water.

Celebrate Now that we have established good conservation and reuse practices in Florida, it’s time to celebrate the utilities and professionals that are doing this great work. On Tuesday, April 27, we will be conducting the FWEA annual business meeting and awards presentation. This is a great time to celebrate the achievements of your fellow professionals and utilities for the exceptional work they have done in the past year to promote a clean and sustainable water environment.

With that in mind, I want to share with you the depth and breadth of the awards that we’ll be presenting. The full list of awards is as follows: S A lbert B. Herndon Award – Outstanding Individual Performance in Industrial Pretreatment S B iosolids/Residuals Program Excellence Awards S D avid W. York Reuse Awards – Utilities, Organizations, and Individual OneWater Award S F lorida Select Society of Sanitary Sludge Shovelers (FSSSS) S E arle B. Phelps Award – Outstanding Wastewater Treatment Facilities Performance

S E nvironmental Stewardship Award for Odor Control (Utility) S F WEA Presidential Service Awards - Individual S Golden Manhole Award for Individual Outstanding Contributions S L.L. Hedgepeth Award – Outstanding Industrial Wastewater Operator S Leroy H. Scott Award – Exceptional Wastewater Contribution by an Operator S Norm Casey Scholarship Awards – FWEA’s Student Design Competition S Public Education Awards (Organizations) and Thomas T. Jones Award (Individual) S Ralph H. Baker Award – Individual Membership Recruitment

S S afety Awards – Utilities With Exemplary Safety Programs S Samuel R. Willis Award – Individual Safety Award (Heroism) S Utility Management Award – Utilities With Best Business Practices S Young Professional of the Year S Wastewater Collection System of the Year S William D. Hatfield Award (WEF) – Operators of Wastewater Treatment Plants for Outstanding Performance S Quarter Century Operators Club (WEF) Join me on April 27 to celebrate this year’s award recipients! S

Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

Abstract Submittal Abstracts will be accepted in WORD ONLY via email to:

Call for Papers

Abstracts must be submitted by: Wednesday, June 30, 2021 To participate in an FSAWWA conference, the first step is submitting an abstract to be considered for a presentation at the conference. There is no guarantee that the paper you submit will be chosen, but if your paper is well thought-out and pertinent to the subject matter of the conference, then your chances of being selected go up. FSAWWA wishes to invite authors and experts in the field to submit abstracts on a variety of sustainability topics, including:

Potential Session Categories 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10

Potable Reuse Alternative Water Supply Options Utility Finances in Challenging Times Strategies to Communicate Your Message in the Changed World Increasing Optimization of Utility Systems (Pipes, SCADA, Sewer Systems) Asset Management PFAS, PFOS, Lead and Copper, and Other Regulatory Strategies What’s New with Covid-19? And How Does it Affect our Workplace? The New Workplace Normal – Zoom, Remote, Home and Office Challenges for Utilities Water Conservation

E W O RM

Looking forward to seeing you at the Hyatt Regency Grand Cypress on November 28 to December 2, 2021.

50 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Frederick Bloetscher, Ph.D., P.E., Technical Program Chair at h2o_man@bellsouth.net Please attach a cover page to the abstract which includes the following information: a) Suggested Session Category b) Paper Title c) Names of Authors d) Name of Presenter(s) e) Main contact including name, title, affiliation, address, phone, fax, and email

“Best Paper” Competition Each year awards are presented to the best papers during the Fall Conference Business Luncheon.

Questions? Call 239-250-2423

A L Thank you for your interest in the FSAWWA.

Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

Scholarships valued up to $5,000 will be awarded in both undergraduate and graduate categories by the Florida Section American Water Works Association.

Eligibility:

• Must be a student enrolled (not online) in a Florida university and living in Florida Must be a full-time student or part-time student enrolled and completing a • minimum of 6 credits Must be a student within 60 credits of graduation with a bachelor’s degree. • Note: Seniors who are pursuing a graduate degree may apply and use the scholarship for their graduate studies, but must provide proof of acceptance to their graduate degree program

Maintain good standing in academic status with a GPA of 3.0 or higher based • on a 4.0 system be pursuing a career in the water/wastewater field with a plan to remain • inMust Florida to pursue their career Or enrolled in one of the CIP educational codes (for a list visit fsawwa.org/2021Likins) • and have indicated an interest in pursuing a career in the water/wastewater field

Added Value:

All applicants receive 1-year free student American Water Works Association • (AWWA) membership.

Key benefits of Student Membership:

• Jump-Start Your Career • Gain Experience • Stay Informed

WIN UP TO A

$5,000 SCHOLARSHIP Apply by June 30, 2021 For application, please visit:

fsawwa.org/2021likins 52 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

2020 FSAWWA AWARDS Outstanding and Most Improved Water Treatment Plant Awards Class A, Class B, Class C Deadline: June 30, 2021

Outstanding Water Treatment Plant Operator Award Deadline: June 30, 2021

AWWA Operator’s Meritorious Service Award Deadline: June 30, 2021

For more information please go to our website www.fsawwa.org/WTPawards or contact Paul Kavanagh at (813) 264-3835 or kavanaghp@hillsboroughcounty.org

American Ductile

FWPCOA TRAINING CALENDAR SCHEDULE YOUR CLASS TODAY! Please go to the FWPCOA website

www.fwpcoa.org

for the latest updates on classes April

5-9......... Wastewater Collection C..................... Deltona.................. $325 12-14......... Backflow Repair*................................. St. Petersburg......... $275/305 12-15......... Backflow Tester*.................................. Deltona.................. $375/405

May

3-7......... Water Distribution Level II................... Deltona.................. $325 6......... Reclaimed Water C 1-day.................... Deltona.................. $125/155 6......... Reclaimed Water B 1-day.................... Deltona.................. $125/155 10-13 ......... Backflow Tester*.................................. St. Petersburg......... $375/405 24-27......... Wastewater Collection A..................... Deltona.................. $325 24-27 ......... Water Distribution Level 1................... Deltona.................. $325

June

7-11......... Water Distribution Level III.................. Deltona.................. $325 14-16......... Backflow Repair*................................. Deltona.................. $275/305 28-30......... Backflow Repair*................................. St. Petersburg........ $275/305 Course registration forms are available at http://www.fwpcoa.org/forms.asp. For additional information on these courses or other training programs offered by the FWPCOA, pleasecontact the FW&PCOA Training Office at (321) 383-9690 or training@fwpcoa.org. *B ackflow recertification is also available the last day of Backflow Tester or Backflow Repair Classes with the exception of Deltona ** Evening classes *** any retest given also

You are required to have your own calculator at state short schools and most other courses. Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

ASCE Infrastructure Report Card Gives U.S. ‘C-’ Grade, Says Investment Gap at $2.59 Trillion, Bold Action Needed Modest progress has been made, but 11 categories still in ‘D’ range The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) has released the 2021 Report Card for America’s Infrastructure, its latest quadrennial assessment of infrastructure in the United States. The report card gives the country an overall ‘C-’ grade and finds that infrastructure spending is just over half of what is required to support the economy,

schedule construction, and make the needed repairs.

About the Report Card Using a simple A to F school report card format, ASCE’s infrastructure report card

provides a comprehensive assessment of current infrastructure conditions and needs, assigns grades, and makes recommendations to raise them. The ASCE Committee on America’s Infrastructure, made up of dedicated civil engineers from across the U.S. with decades of expertise in all categories, prepares the report card, assesses all relevant data and reports, consults with technical and industry experts, and assigns the grades using the following criteria: S C apacity S C ondition S F unding S F uture need S O peration and maintenance S P ublic safety S R esilience S I nnovation Since 1998, the grades have been near failing, averaging only Ds, due to delayed maintenance and underinvestment across most categories.

Infrastructure Categories The study evaluated 17 categories of infrastructure, with grades ranging from a ‘B’ for rail to a ‘D-’ for transit. For the first time in 20 years, the country’s infrastructure as a whole received a grade in the ‘C’ range, meaning on average, the nation’s infrastructure is in mediocre condition, has deficiencies, and needs attention. Eleven of the 17 categories in the report card received a grade in the ‘D’ range: S A viation S D ams S H azardous waste S I nland waterways S L evees S P ublic parks S R oads S S chools S S tormwater S T ransit S W astewater Over the past four years, the U.S. made incremental gains in some categories, according

56 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

to ASCE. Due to increased investment, grades improved in the following categories: S Aviation S Drinking water S Energy S Inland waterways S Ports One infrastructure category—bridges— saw a decrease in grade, in part because of the number of bridges that slipped to “fair” condition from “good.” Transit received a ‘D-’ in the report, the lowest grade. Some 45 percent of Americans lack access to transit and the existing infrastructure is aging.

Investment Needed Now Overall, the long-term infrastructure investment gap continues to grow. That gap has risen from $2.1 trillion over 10 years in the last report to $2.59 trillion in the latest study, meaning a funding gap of $259 billion per year. “This is not a report card anyone would be proud to take home. We have not made significant enough investments to maintain infrastructure that in some cases was built more than 50 years ago,” said Thomas Smith, ASCE executive director. “As this study shows, we risk significant economic losses, and higher costs to consumers, businesses, and manufacturers—threatening our quality of life—if we don’t act urgently. When we fail to invest in infrastructure, we pay the price.” To make matters worse, there were 22 weather and climate disasters in the U.S. that damaged infrastructure and cost at least $1 billion in 2020, the most in history, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. If the U.S. does not pay its overdue infrastructure bill, ASCE noted that, by 2039, the U.S. economy will lose $10 trillion in growth, exports will decline by $2.4 trillion, and more than 3 million jobs will be lost. In addition, each American household will bear $3,300 in hidden costs per year. Infrastructure investment, therefore, could play a huge roll in speeding the nation’s economic recovery. “America’s infrastructure bill is overdue, and we have been ignoring it for years. The COVID-19 pandemic only exacerbates the funding challenge because state and local governments have had to prioritize public health over everything else for the past year,” said Jean-Louis Briaud, Ph.D., P.E., ASCE president. “If we take action now, we can generate job growth and build infrastructure that is more reliable, more secure, and more resilient, while also increasing the quality of life for everyone.” The association has called on Congress and the new administration to take “big and bold action” on infrastructure. “Infrastructure is an issue that everyone

agrees needs action, and doing so will help the U.S. now and in the future. Delaying only increases the costs,” said Emily Feenstra, ASCE managing director of government relations and infrastructure initiatives.

Infrastructure Trends While ASCE grades the categories individually, the nation’s infrastructure is a series of connected systems. The report found three overarching trends impacting infrastructure: S Maintenance backlogs continue to be an issue, but asset management helps prioritize limited funding. S State and local governments have made progress, such as leveraging gas taxes to fund transportation investments, and some limited federal investment has also paid dividends. S There are still infrastructure sectors where data are scarce or unreliable.

The 2021 report card was released publicly during a virtual news conference that was followed by the ASCE Solutions Summit. This separate event included spotlights on various infrastructure topics, including energy, dams and levees, transportation, water, inland waterways, and ports. Featured speakers included Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan, Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (RWV), and Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR), among others. In addition to the national report card, ASCE’s sections and branches prepare state and regional infrastructure report cards on a rolling basis. Additional information regarding the report card, category grades, and state report cards and information, as well as infographics, videos, and other resources, can be found at www. infrastructurereportcard.org or via the report card S app in Google Play.

Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

Best Practices for Water Loss Protection, Mediation, and Asset Management Barry Hales and Howard Hodder When it comes to saving water and making better use of it, is there really anything to debate? Water is critical; it’s beyond important and we can’t survive without it. In the United States alone, over 6 billion gallons of water are lost each day due to real and apparent loss issues. That’s a shocking amount of waste, especially for a resource no one can live without. Water leaks typically occur underground and, therefore, are not always obvious; in fact, 90

Leak repair in progress on a district metered area within a large utility system.

percent of leaks are not evident without a proactive leak detection system or program. An estimated 1.7 trillion gallons of water are lost each year due to aging and leaking infrastructure. These leaks have created a $2.6 billion issue known as nonrevenue water (NRW), and it can no longer be ignored. Let’s begin with defining what NRW is and where the solution is hidden. Sixteen percent of water loss is “apparent” and occurs due to items such as metering inaccuracies, theft, or billing inaccuracies. Utilities across the U.S. address this issue by installing and implementing automatic meter reading/advanced metering infrastructure (AMR/AMI) smart systems. These metering system upgrades represent the majority of capital expenditures combating NRW. While these efforts are admirable, and there is agreement with the need to accurately measure and bill for water usage, the majority (84 percent) of water loss occurs within the transmission and distribution infrastructure. It’s water that never gets to its intended point of use. These losses are called “real losses.” Monitoring infrastructure, identifying leakage, and resolving the issues on a timely basis should be the centerpiece of an effective effort to address NRW within today’s utility networks. In other words, the goal should be “hunting, not hoping.” An effective NRW program must begin with the premise of “reducing leak runtime.” Given the fact that 90 percent of leaks never show themselves on the surface, permanent infrastructure monitoring is foundational to the solution. Robust technologies, combined with proven methodologies, are available to a utility in search of a proper stewardship program.

58 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

District Metered Areas Today’s best practices are grounded in validated, historical data collected from sensors throughout a utility’s system. The practice is referred to as district metered areas (DMAs), and the knowledge derived from these data empowers utilities to make quick and reliable decisions. What is measured is improved, and in this case, a water asset management program enables utilities to continuously monitor the day-to-day status of water networks as the first step to minimizing the risk of aging pipelines. The monitoring equipment works to highlight system anomalies and generates realtime data that analyze pipe condition and system integrity. Unfortunately, leaks are a continuous issue—they’re a daily, not a yearly, occurrence. Data-driven solutions like DMAs and continuous monitoring provide utilities with the knowledge and power to make informed decisions through data-backed deployment strategies. This, in turn, enables utilities to confirm the effects of operational characteristics and perform prioritized leak detection and mitigation efforts, which ultimately increases system integrity, reduces leak runtimes, and drives down NRW on an ongoing basis.

Investigative Leak Detection: Initial Survey and Pinpointing Phases Investigative leak detection services are essential to an operative water asset management program. Leak detection service offerings help utilities evaluate the integrity of their water networks by locating and pinpointing leakage on

an ongoing, routine basis. If a utility doesn’t know where its leaks are occurring, then it can’t fix them. When those leaks aren’t fixed, they add to the 1.7 trillion gallons of water leaked each year, and can, in many cases, lead to catastrophic pipeline failures. Effective water asset management programs use a combination of visual, acoustic, and correlating techniques, among others, to pursue leakage. A typical leak detection survey is conducted in two phases: the initial survey phase and the pinpointing phase.

Heat map from a geographic information system to help visualize problems.

Initial Survey Phase An initial survey and inspection of the service area determines the best approach and equipment to use for the most accurate and timely results. All valves, hydrants, and service connections should be inspected as needed for adequate coverage based on pipe material and the infrastructure environment. This ensures a thorough initial investigation of the suspect area for any indications of leakage. Any “areas of interest” may be investigated initially with manual sounding equipment, such as a listening stick or ground microphone technology, as well as various forms of other listening devices, like acoustic noise loggers. These devices help identify areas to further investigate and narrow down the source of any potential leakage. Pinpointing Phase Once an area is initially inspected, then comes the pinpointing phase. At this time, all suspected leak locations are subjected to further detection practices. This phase of the inspection utilizes tools, such as computerized acoustic noise correlators, to pinpoint suspected leaks to a precise location. Recurring and proactive investigative leak detection is the simplest, yet potentially most impactful, best practice in water asset management for reducing NRW.

Visualization of utility assets from a geographic information system.

Geographic Information Systems The information gleaned from the DMAs, investigative leak detection services, and pinpointing can be downloaded into a geographic information system (GIS). When these essential data are catalogued for analysis in GIS, utilities can forecast, plan, and budget for necessary infrastructure improvements that can directly impact NRW. For utilities that don’t have GIS, an efficient time to gather the data necessary to build and populate their mapping and asset database is while leak detection services are being performed. The most important component of any asset management system is the data. Of course, there are the hardware and software Continued on page 61

A 3-D image of district metered area analytics brings visibility and transparency to system networks, virtually bringing the data to life.

Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

CLASSIFIEDS CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING RATES - Classified ads are $20 per line for a 60 character line (including spaces and punctuation), $60 minimum. The price includes publication in both the magazine and our Web site. Short positions wanted ads are run one time for no charge and are subject to editing. ads@fwrj.com

POSITONS AVAILABLE

CITY OF WINTER GARDEN – POSITIONS AVAILABLE The City of Winter Garden is currently accepting applications for the following positions:

Reiss Engineering delivers highly technical water and wastewater planning, design, and construction management services for public agencies throughout Florida. Reiss Engineering is seeking top-notch talent to join our team!

Available Positions Include:

Client Services Manager Water Process Discipline Leader Senior Water/Wastewater Project Manager Wastewater Process Senior Engineer Project Engineer (Multiple Openings) To view position details and submit your resume: www.reisseng.com

Utilities Treatment Plant Operations Manager $72,250 - $101,662/yr. Laboratory Manager $68,809 - $96,822/yr. Utilities Electrician $56,038 - $78,851/yr. Utilities Compliance Coordinator $51,346 - $72,250/yr. Utilities Treatment Plant Operator or Trainee $48,408 - $68,114 or $43,907 - $61,782/yr. Apply Online At: http://pompanobeachfl.gov Open until filled.

Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator

On Top of the World residential community in Clearwater is currently recruiting for Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator. Full details at www.otowjobs.com – keyword wastewater.

60 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

EXPERIENCED & TRAINEES/LABORERS - Collection Field Tech – I, II, & III - Distribution Field Tech – I, II, & III - Public Service Worker II – Stormwater - Superintendent – Collections, Wastewater, & Stormwater - Wastewater Plant Operator – Class C Please visit our website at www.cwgdn.com for complete job descriptions and to apply. Applications may be submitted online, in person or faxed to 407-877-2795.

The Coral Springs Improvement District A GREAT place to further your career and enhance your life!

CSID offers… Salary levels are at the top of the industry Health Insurance that is unmatched when compared to like sized Districts Continuing education courses to develop your skills and further your growth Retirement plans where an employee can earn 18% of their salary by contributing toward their future Water Distribution Utility Technician • Knowledge of various equipment including driving a truck, jet truck, back hoe, loader, fire hydrant seating equipment, shoring materials, trash pumps and hand tools • Inspect water distribution mains and lines for needed repair and maintenance • Respond to public inquires • Must obtain Class C FDEP Water Distribution license withing 15 months of employment

Minimum starting salary $39,000 to commensurate relative to level of experience in this field. Benefits: Excellent benefits which include health, life, disability, dental, vison and a retirement plan which includes a 6% non-contributory defined benefit and matching 457b plan with a 100% match up to 6%. EOE. All positions require a valid Florida Drivers license, high school diploma or GED equivalent and must pass a pre-employment drug screen test Submit resume to jzilmer@csidfl.org or fax resume to 954-7536328, attention Jan Zilmer, Director of Human Resources.

Sarasota County

Certified Operator A, B, or C

The City of Cocoa is currently accepting applications for state Certified Operators. All applicants must hold at least a minimum “C” operator’s license. To view position details and apply online. https://www.cocoafl.org/1204/Employment-Opportunities EOE/m/f/v/d

Utilities Engineer

This position is responsible for the management of water and wastewater capital improvements projects, other LCU improvement projects and assignments requiring engineering assistance. Incumbent will provide guidance, supervise assigned staff and act as a liaison to other departmental staff and outside vendors. Incumbent will exercise independent decision making. • Requires a Bachelor’s Degree in Engineering, 2 years engineering or closely related experience, and possession of Florida Professional Engineer’s license (or possession of a Professional Engineer’s license in another state with the ability to obtain the Florida Professional Engineer’s license within six months of employment.) For more information, or to submit an application, please visit: https://www.governmentjobs.com/careers/leecounty Continued from page 59 components, as well as the end users’ processes and expectations, but the most important—and often most costly—element is the data. Without the data, the other components are lifeless. And without quality data the analysis results, and the decisions made upon those results, become incomplete and incorrect, potentially leading to other problems. Methodologies, such as subsurface utility engineering (SUE), can be deployed to assist with the designation of water assets for collection via survey methodologies, like a

Join this exceptional, dedicated, and high-performing team at Sarasota County Government! Enjoy great benefits including Health, Dental, Vision, and Life Insurance, Short-Term and Long-Term Disability, Flexible Spending Accounts, free gyms and classes, EAP, Florida Retirement System (FRS) and many, many more! Open Positions: Liftstation Maintenance Treatment Plant Operator C Utility Field Technician - Sanitary Sewer Cleaning & Televising Water/Wastewater Operations Manager Equipment Operator III Apply online today at www.scgov.net/jobs www.scgov.net/jobs

City of Titusville - Multiple Positions Available

Industrial Electrician, Maintenance Mechanic, Foreman, Crew Leader, Equipment Operator, Treatment Plant Operator. Apply at www.titusville.com

global positioning system/global navigation satellite system (GPS/GNSS). This compilation of spatially accurate inventoried assets, along with the population of feature attribution and condition assessment information within a GIS and asset management solution, provides the ultimate tool and work processes for a water utility. Along with providing the ability for tabular analysis and reporting, GIS provides the user the capability to visualize results through things like dynamic dashboards and heat maps. Collectively, GIS and asset management

deliver the greatest return on investment by deploying an approach that provides the information and platform necessary to successfully plan, operate, maintain, and manage assets throughout their lifecycles. This approach saves time, money, and, most importantly for a water utility, the resource itself. Barry Hales is regional manager with McKim & Creed Inc. in Wilmington, N.C. Howard Hodder, GISP, is associate vice president—geomatics, with McKim & Creed Inc. in Harrisburg, Pa. S

A custom project group interactive dashboard was created for each water asset management project. The dashboard is made available to utility personnel during each project for progress tracking and information. It displays the progress map of the survey areas covered, as well as a few key project statistics.

Florida Water Resources Journal • April 2021

SERVING FLORIDA’S WATER AND WASTEWATER INDUSTRY SINCE 1949

Test Yourself Answer Key From page 47

January 2016

Editorial Calendar

January.............. Wastewater Treatment February............ Water Supply; Alternative Sources March................. Energy Efficiency; Environmental Stewardship April................... Conservation and Reuse May .................... Operations and Utilities Management June................... Biosolids Management and Bioenergy Production July .................... Stormwater Management; Emerging Technologies August............... Disinfection; Water Quality September......... Emerging Issues; Water Resources Management October.............. New Facilities, Expansions, and Upgrades November.......... Water Treatment December.......... Distribution and Collection Technical articles are usually scheduled several months in advance and are due 60 days before the issue month (for example, January 1 for the March issue). The closing date for display ad and directory card reservations, notices, announcements, upcoming events, and everything else including classified ads, is 30 days before the issue month (for example, September 1 for the October issue). For further information on submittal requirements, guidelines for writers, advertising rates and conditions, and ad dimensions, as well as the most recent notices, announcements, and classified advertisements, go to www.fwrj.com or call 352-241-6006.

Display Advertiser Index American Ductile Iron Pipe �� 54 AWWA One AWWA Operator Scholarship �� 53 Blue Planet �� 63 CEU Challenge �� 31 Data Flow Systems �� 49 FSAWWA 2020 FSAWWA Awards �� 54 FSAWWA 2021 Fall Conference �� 51 FSAWWA 2021 Fall Conference Call for Papers �� 50 FSAWWA Roy Likins Scholarship Fund �� 52 FWPCOA Online Training Institute �� 15 FWPCOA Training Calendar �� 55 Gerber Pumps ��8-9 Heyward �� 2 Hudson Pump �� 27 Hydro International �� 5 J&S Valve �� 33 Lakeside Construction Equipment �� 7 Reiss �� 11 Smith Loveless �� 19 SEDA �� 37 UF TREEO Center �� 41 Water Treatment & Controls Technology �� 29 Xylem �� 64

62 April 2021 • Florida Water Resources Journal

1. C) Dec. 31, 2021.

Per the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Water Resilience website, “AWIA Section 2013 requires community (drinking) water systems serving more than 3,300 people to develop or update risk assessments and emergency response plans (ERPs). Per the certification deadline table on the website, for populations of 3,301 to 49,999 the deadline is Dec. 31, 2021. Emergency response plan certifications are due six months from the date of the risk assessment certification. The dates shown are certification dates based on a utility submitting a risk assessment on the final due date.”

2. C) Identify Vulnerable Assets and Determine Consequences

Per EPA’s Flood Resilience Guide, “There are four basic steps involved in increasing your utility’s resilience to flooding: Step 1 – Understand the Threat of Flooding Step 2 – Identify Vulnerable Assets and Determine Consequences Step 3 – Identify and Evaluate Mitigation Measures Step 4 – Develop Plan to Implement Mitigation Measures”

3. B) interagency communication.

Per FlaWARN Best Management Practices Chapter 2, under Communication Functions and Assignments, “In a disaster event communication can be categorized according to the three types of informational needs. These are: • Internal communication • Interagency communication • External communication.”

4. D) 12 inches or larger

Per FAC 62-604.400(2) (a)1. Design/ Performance Considerations, “Emergency pumping capability shall be provided for all pump stations. Pumping capability shall be provided as follows: 1. Pump stations that receive flow from one or more pump stations through a force main or pump stations discharging through pipes 12 inches or larger shall provide for uninterrupted pumping capabilities, including an in-place emergency generator.”

5. C) One mobile generator for every six to 10 lift stations.

Per the FRWA document, Stand-By Generator Sizing for Emergency Operations, “We recommend wastewater treatment facilities and major lift stations have dedicated stand-by generation. Plus ALL smaller lift stations should be equipped with power receptacles for connecting mobile generators and bypass piping! FRWA recommends that systems have one mobile generator for every six to 10 lift stations depending on whether a system has SCADA, bypass pumps, septic pumper trucks, refueling tanks, and available staff to work around the clock.”

6. D) 100-year flood

Per FAC 62-555.320(4), Design and Construction of Public Water Systems, “Community water systems (CWSs) shall be designed and constructed so that structures, and electrical or mechanical equipment, used to treat, pump, or store drinking water, apply drinking water treatment chemicals, or handle drinking water treatment residuals that are protected from physical damage by the 100-year flood and, in coastal areas subject to flooding by wave action, from physical damage by the 100-year wave action.”

7. A) confirmed.

Per EPA’s Water Utility RPTB, “In the RPTB, the threat management process is considered in three successive stages: ‘possible,’ ‘credible,’ and ‘confirmed.’ Thus, as the threat escalates through these three stages, the actions that might be considered due diligence expand accordingly.”

8. C) interconnection with a neighboring utility.

Per EPA’s Planning for Emergency Drinking Water Supply, under Section 2. Summary, “There are several options for supplying potable water in an emergency. These include water supplied via interconnections with neighboring water utilities, bottled water supplied locally or regionally (a common federal response), and locally produced water. Locally produced water can be obtained by packaging pretreated water, by using mobile treatment units to inject water into the existing distribution system, or by using mobile treatment in conjunction with water packaging or water tap distribution.”

9. C) Tabletop Exercise

Per EPA’s How to Develop a T&E Plan, “Tabletop Exercise (TTX): A TTX involves key personnel discussing simulated scenarios in an informal setting. TTXs can be used to assess plans, policies, and procedures (e.g., a TTX to assess a Water and Wastewater Agency Response Network’s operational plan).”

10. D) WLA Response Plan

Per EPA’s Water Laboratory Alliance – A Utility Perspective, “The WLA-RP establishes a comprehensive, national response approach to water contamination incidents requiring analytical support. The plan includes information on preparedness, response, remediation, and recovery. Specifically, the WLA-RP addresses incidents that, due to their suspected cause or size, may require more analytical support than a single laboratory can provide. The WLA-RP shares best practices with utilities and laboratories for a systematic, coordinated response to a water contamination incident.”

LET’S MIX PERFORMANCE WITH ADJUSTABILITY

AND MAXIMUM

EFFICIENCY.

The Flygt 4320 submersible mixer’s revolutionary design couples a high-efficiency mixer with an integrated variable frequency drive. The 4320 simplifies variable speed mixing and eliminates the need for an external VFD. A variety of ratings and propeller options meet a broad range of thrust requirements. And with motor efficiency comparable to the Super Premium Efficiency IE4 levels and fully adjustable speed, the Flygt 4320 delivers the lowest life cycle mixing energy costs. Superior mixing with adjustability and simplicity, for unsurpassed energy savings. For more information contact your local Xylem product sales professional. Xylem Products 2152 Sprint Boulevard Apopka, FL 32703 407-880-2900

xyleminc.com/treatment