Area Wide Optimization Status Component

AWOP Components Status Targeted Performance Improvement Maintenance

Status Component Status component is the foundation of AWOP activities Prioritizes plants relative to public health risk Allows allocation of resources to highest risk facilities Provides information to document progress/success Status components can be developed to target any water quality performance/parameter (i.e., microbial, disinfection byproducts) The focus of this presentation is on the microbial status component

Status Component Objectives Develop, utilize, and sustain a performance tracking process Develop, utilize, and sustain a prioritization process Develop, utilize, and sustain awareness building process These goals all contribute to the knowledge of the status of performance on an area-wide basis. Not only will the state be aware of the status of performance relative to the goals, but so will the affected water systems. The importance of optimized performance in public health protection becomes a focused message from the state to the public water systems.

Establishing a Status Component Adopt optimization performance goals Develop prioritization criteria Develop performance database Compile and utilize status information Establish Internal/External Support

Adopt Optimization Performance Goals (State) Identify optimization goals for state and gain Management support to adopt goals Send out letters to all or initially to selected plants (minimum 10) announcing adoption of goals. Ask plants to adopt goals. Some states use letter as opportunity to provide one year of performance data to plants. Letter builds “awareness” of goals and need to optimize.

Optimization Performance Goals (Recommended by NOLT) Minimum data monitoring requirements Daily raw water turbidity (every 4 hours) Individual basin settled water turbidity Frequency of data acquisition from continuous meters: <15 minutes Filtered water turbidity Frequency of data acquisition from continuous meters: < 1 minutes Filter backwash recovery data each backwash Sedimentation Turbidity  2 NTU 95% time when source turbidity > 10 NTU Turbidity  1 NTU 95% time when source turbidity  10 NTU

Optimization Performance Goals (Recommended by NOLT) Filtration Turbidity  0.10 NTU 95% time Maximum turbidity < 0.30 NTU Post Backwash turbidity Plants with filter-to-waste minimize spike during filter-to-waste period return to service < 0.10 NTU Plants without filter-to-waste < 0.30 NTU maximum turbidity return to < 0.10 NTU within 15 minutes

Develop Status Component Prioritization Criteria Objective: To develop and utilize office and field data to prioritize utilities relative to public health risk. These efforts should result in identifying low, medium, and high risk utilities.

Develop Prioritization Criteria Develop criteria (parameters) to “rank” systems based upon risk to public health Criteria should be performance based but can include other parameters Try to develop criteria that provides broad range of points (allows better separation of plants) Avoid complex prioritization schemes that are resource intensive to develop and sustain

Recommended Model Criteria Microbial Status Component Based on five categories (relative weighting) Performance (40%) Source Water (20%) Disinfection (15%) Compliance (10%) Miscellaneous (15%) Supported by OAS data Model criteria attached (hardcopy and elec.)

Recommended Model Criteria Microbial Status Component

Recommended Model Criteria Microbial Status Component Notes on Model Status Component: Use only IFE data if available; this is desired information relative to optimized performance goals. This data is often not readily available. Backwash Considerations: Backwash performance should be tracked, if possible, and criteria should be included in the status component If system does not have filter-to-waste capability, consider weighting accordingly Use only CFE data if IFE data is not available. The maximum CFE data for the day is the desired information. If only 4-hour turbidity readings are available, use the maximum of the 4-hour readings for the day.

Develop Prioritization Criteria NOLT Model Criteria IFE preferred over CFE if available OAS does not support backwash goals; however, states are encouraged to obtain this data Summary Matrix of AWOP State Criteria has been compiled and detailed criteria from AWOP states is available: For more information contact Rick Lieberman (lieberman.richard@epa.gov)

Develop Prioritization Criteria Point system allows method to compare performance improvements over time 19 # Plants making significant improvement (0.05 NTU decrease) 39 # Plants w/lower 95th percentile 55 50 # Plants w/ 95th percentile < 0.3 NTU 14 # Plants with higher 95th percentile 6 # Plants w/ no change in 95th percentile 17 11 # Plants w/ 95th percentile < 0.1 NTU 0.16 0.21 Average 95th percentile turbidity 163 216 Average total score 2003 2002

Develop Performance Database Utilize Optimization Assessment Software (OAS) to identify performance of plants Provides basis for performance ranking of plants Provides insight into the operation/performance of the plant for both state and plant personnel Modify Monthly Operating Reports (MORs) to support data collection

Develop Performance Database (Cont.) Establish resources for continuously tracking performance for AWOP plants Difficult initially, but can be handled in a routine manner after initial effort Some AWOP states have used part-time help Pursue utility use of OAS with electronic submittal to states

Develop Performance Database (Cont.) Update prioritization database and OAS to allow ranking on a minimum yearly basis.

Compile and Utilize Status Information Update prioritization ranking of plants on an annual basis Utilize information to allocate state resources based on public health risk Identify tools to address high, medium and low risk plants High (CPEs/CTAs) Medium (CPEs/PBT/FPPEs) Low (PSW or other self assessment tools)

Compile and Utilize Status Information (Cont.) Utilize status information to provide feedback to utility/utilities (provide OAS data during sanitary surveys or with letters adopting goals) Utilize information to measure effectiveness of optimization efforts (individual utilities and combined utilities) Utilize information to encourage continuous performance improvement attitude Utilize information to support an awards program to further motivate participants Others?

Establish Internal/External Support Gain internal support for AWOP activities Establish synergy with existing programs (sanitary surveys, capacity development, training, design review, etc.) Establish relationship with existing and future regulatory requirements Provide routine feedback to Management on program activities and impacts (after significant events and in an annual report)

Establish Internal/External Support (Cont.) Promote AWOP to water utilities Establish awards for optimization efforts Present articles/presentations to peers and utility organizations Utilize site visits to utilities to promote program and impacts (e.g., focus on optimized performance goals) Coordinate all state activities to encourage continuous performance improvement attitude with water utilities

Establish Internal/External Support (Cont.) Document improvements in individual plant performance and associated AWOP activities that led to improvements (awareness of goals, CPE, PBT, peer pressure, awards, etc.) Prepare Annual Report documenting performance trends on state-wide basis (compare yearly data to show improvement, compare yearly prioritization matrix point scores). Utilize for marketing and Management feedback

Example Documentation of AWOP Impacts and Success

Status Component Summary Status component is the foundation of AWOP activities Recommended starting point for all AWOP states and Regions Can be used to define priorities for states' Targeted Performance Improvement activities (next component in AWOP) Initiates Maintenance Component activities (i.e., incorporate OAS into sanitary surveys)

Next Steps Review model status component criteria and state status component matrix (can be obtained by contacting Rick Lieberman at lieberman.richard@epa.gov) Obtain copy and review current state MOR Consider status component parameters, weighting criteria, and methods to populate a status component ranking for your state