SPWSTAC 2006 Arsenic Treatment and Monitoring for Small Water Systems 2006 NGWA Ground Water Summit J. Mitchell Spear, Charles A. Cole, Yuefeng Xie and Alison Shuler Penn State Harrisburg

Objectives Assist small public water systems better achieving arsenic compliance  Evaluate several arsenic field test kits used for operational monitoring  Perform a demonstration case study on a POU treatment device for removal of arsenic in a small public water system SPWSTAC 2006

Overview  Arsenic field test kit evaluation  POU Case Study  Community Background  POU Installations  Arsenic Removal Results  POU Costs  Summary SPWSTAC 2006

 Evaluate several commercially available field test kits and determine reliability and applicability to water utilities currently conducting noncompliance arsenic analyses. Arsenic Test Kits Evaluation SPWSTAC 2006

 Laboratory performance  Accuracy  Precision  Linearity  Operator performance  “ease of use” Methods SPWSTAC 2006

Field test kits SPWSTAC 2006

General Characteristics Test KitConcentration Intervals Number of Reagents Test Time (min) BVC , 25, 50, 100, ECO-W100 25, 50, 100, 150, 200, 300, 500, Hach 10, 30, 50, 70, 300, LaMotte 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 100, 140, Merck 10, 25, 50, 100, Quick II 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12, 14, 20, 30, >30, >40, >60, >80, > Trace Detect Continuous 310 SPWSTAC 2006

General Characteristics Test Kit Sample size (ml) Unit Price ($ US dollars) Samples per kit$ Cost / test BVC ECO-W Hach LaMotte Merck Quick II Trace Detect 5012, SPWSTAC 2006

US EPA approved US EPA approved EPA Method 7060A Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorbance (GFAA)EPA Method 7060A Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorbance (GFAA) SPWSTAC 2006 Reference Method

Laboratory Performance SPWSTAC 2006 Accuracy and Precision Traditionally (Method Detection Limit)Traditionally (Method Detection Limit) Accuracy (percent recovery) Accuracy (percent recovery) % Recovery = ConcTestKit / ConcGFAA * 100 % Recovery = ConcTestKit / ConcGFAA * 100 Precision (standard deviation) Precision (standard deviation) Arsenic III, V, III + V Arsenic III, V, III + V Concentration Concentration Replicates Replicates

SPWTAC 2006 Percent Recoveries

SPWSTAC 2006 Linearity 5, 10, 25, 50, 75 ug/L Test KitSlopeY-intercept BVC ECO HACH LaMotte Merck Quick II Trace Detect

Operator “Ease of Use” SPWSTAC 2006

Applications  Routine monitoring  Pilot testing  Monitoring raw water  Monitoring removal efficiencies  Testing reliability of surrogate analyses  i.e. conductivity on RO devices  Offset required compliance monitoring? SPWSTAC 2006

 Perform POU evaluation to determine arsenic removal efficiency and applicability to small water utilities for centralized management as a potential cost savings technology for achieving compliance. POU Demonstration SPWSTAC 2006

Background System selection  Mohrsville, PA Population size375 Service Connections125 Production (GPD)17000 Storage Capacity (Gallons) Well1 Disinfectant12.5% sodium hypochlorite SPWSTAC 2006

Treatment Design POU Treatment Design SPWTAC 2006

Installations SPWSTAC 2006

Installations  Licensed Plumber  9 POU units installed TimeMinutes Average102 Mode60 Minimum35 Maximum225 SPWSTAC 2006

Initial Results on Arsenic Removal POU I.D.Raw water (µg/L)Treated water (µg/L) GFAAField TestGFAAField Test <1.5< <1.5< <1.5< <1.5< <1.5< <1.5< <1.5< <1.5< <1.5< 4 Avg <1.5< 4 SPWSTAC 2006

Monitoring Results on all POUs by GFAA SPWSTAC 2006

POU Piloting Costs (1 st year) ItemsDollar amount Installation POU system T-valve 6.50 Housing Pre filter (2X/year) Carbon Filter (2X/year) Isolux™ Flow Meter Field testing (2X) 6.00 Compliance testing Operation & Maintenance* Total

POU Annual Cost Capital Costs $ 2004 Installation90.00 T-Valve6.50 Housing95.00 Flow meter42.00 Total % for 10 years Total (yearly)31.73 Total (monthly)2.64 SPWSTAC 2006 Operating Costs $ 2004 Pre-filter18.00 Carbon filter36.00 Isolux™70.00 Field testing6.00 Compliance15.00 O & M Total (yearly) Total (monthly)28.75 Total - $31 / unit / month

Management Plan Template  Find Technical Assistance  Community Outreach and Education  POU Vendor Selection  Establishing Control of POU  Determining Service Charges SPWSTAC 2006

Management Plan Template  Securing Funding  Educate Technicians (install, O&M, etc.)  Ensuring Access  Managing Files and Records SPWTAC 2006

Conclusions Performance varies on arsenic field test kits Test Kits can be used for operational monitoring POU effective for removing arsenic POU may be more economical solution in very small water systems POU and field test kits can represent cost saving when appropriately applied SPWSTAC 2006

Acknowledgements US EPA Small Public Water Systems Technology Assistance Center Grant Magnesium Elektron, Inc. and Jim Knoll for their technical guidance The PA DEP District Office, Alice Renshaw (President of Mohrsville Water Association) and participating homeowners for their cooperation Mark Zhou, Ralaene Gabriel, Peng Chen, Mukesh Pratap, Brian Montalbano, Paul Deardorff, and Julia Stiles Trace Detect for loan of their instrumentation SPWSTAC 2006