1. Area Wide Optimization
Status Component

2. AWOP Components
Status
Targeted
Performance
Improvement
Maintenance

3. 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

4. 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.

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

6. 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.

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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.

10. 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

11. 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.)

12. Recommended Model Criteria Microbial Status Component

13. 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.

14. 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

15. 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

16. 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

17. 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

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

19. 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)

20. 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?

21. 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)

22. 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

23. 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

24. Example Documentation of AWOP Impacts and Success

25. 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)

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