The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPackets - Council Packets (1557) AGENDA ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL STUDY SESSION November 22, 1999 Oro Valley Town Council Chambers 11,000 N. La Canada Drive Oro Valley, Arizona STUDY SESSION —AT OR AFTER 6:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL 1. Pygmy Owl Policy Amendments— Discussion 2. Flag & Sign Code Issues — Discussion 3. State Land Parcel (Cal-Mat) Phase I Environmental Assessment Report— Discussion 4. Options to reduce Total Coliform Detection for Oro Valley Water Utility System - Discussion ADJOURNMENT A packet of agenda materials as listed above is available for public inspection at least 24 hours prior to the Council meeting in the office of the Town Clerk between the hours of 8:30 a.m. — 5:00 p.m. The Town of Oro Valley complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If any person with a disability needs any type of accommodation, please notify Kathryn Cuvelier, Town Clerk, at 297-2591. POSTED: 11-19-99 4:30 p.m. lh TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: November 22, 1999 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & COUNCIL FROM: Bayer Vella, Senior Planner SUBJECT: STUDY SESSION, CACTUS FERRUGINOUS PYGMY OWL: RECOMMENDED POLICY TO ADDRESS ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT REQUIREMENTS BACKGROUND: The aim of the study session is to update the Council regarding Town efforts to comply with the United States Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) recovery efforts. To date, the lack of scientific information and procedural guidance has created an unpredictable atmosphere for local jurisdictions, property owners, and the development community. There has been, however, a recent flurry of activity. The picture is slowly coming together as the Corp of Engineers and Amphitheater cases unfold, individual property owners consult with USFWS, drafts of the Recovery Plan by USFWS are reviewed by the Implementation Team, and Cactus Ferruginous Pygmy-Owl (CFPO) research funded by federal agencies and Pima County progresses. Attached is a recent memo, authored by Ms. Maeveen Behan, to the Pima County Board of Supervisors. This provides a comprehensive overview of the CFPO listing, general concentration of Owls in the region, study needs, summary of current litigation involving the Corp of Engineers and Amphitheater School District. A 43- page progress report on the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan is available at Planing and Zoning. As depicted verbatim in each report, there are three major factors contributed to the listing of the pygmy-owl as endangered in 1997: (1) The original riparian habitat of the owl has been destroyed, modified or curtailed, and the Sonoran desertscrub habitat where most remaining owls live is under development pressures. (2) The existing regulatory mechanisms were deemed inadequate and no conservation planning for the pygmy-owl was in place; (3) The pygmy-owl population was extremely small and apparently declining, and information to protect the pygmy-owl was not available. In the absence of information to the contrary about life history and status, it appears that it is vulnerable to random extinction due to the interactions of environmental, demographic and genetic factors. As a Town representative on the USFWS Implementation Team and Sonoran Desert Habitat Conservation Plan, it is readily apparent that a substantial effort must be undertaken to address each. A Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) is the only nationally proven tool to ensure compliance. The alternative--laboriously addressing one project at a time--would simply continue the level of uncertainty that we are currently experiencing. The success of the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan is dependent on funding, cooperation of stakeholders, local jurisdictions & federal entities, and "good" science. Two limitations of a regional HCP are the time and TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 2 of 3 expense involved. San Diego County experienced a 7 to 10 year process and a $44 million cost to develop an HCP for one species. Pima County is very ambitiously predicting a 2-3 year process for developing an HCP for 80 to 90 species. Recently, the County was allocated $4 million by Congress to orchestrate the Plan. During the extended period anticipated for development of a regional HCP, life continues. Each jurisdiction has been challenged to develop interim measures to insure compliance. On 6/9/99, Mayor Loomis received a significant letter (attached) from David Harlow, USFWS Field Supervisor. Mr. Harlow's purpose was to "alert" Town officials that "Rezoning and other town projects could adversely affect this species and its habitat" and "Under the ESA, if a....municipality undertakes any activity (e.g., vegetation removal, construction, etc. or re- zoning that results in these activities)...the parties involved are at risk of committing a "take" which is a violation of Section 9 of the ESA..." As a result, staff developed the attached policy to serve as an interim measure. It would seem prudent to shift from the use of a policy to establishing an ordinance as soon as possible. Staff asserts that a policy is this best approach for a minimum of six (6) months. Rationale: a. It is anticipated that Pygmy-Owl survey protocol will change dramatically in January. b. The USFWS CFPO Recovery Plan should be established over the next few months. c. Staff has requested that USFWS coordinate a process whereby all Planning Departments in the region could develop a consistent approach. Marana utilizes a verbal policy and Pima County is currently formulating a written policy. Both jurisdictions have expressed interest in continuing to collaborate. Within the Policy, staff attempted to incorporate future anticipated changes. USFWS recovery approach and standards, however, are still maturing As a result, staff has placed a premium on establishing standards that can be adjusted as new information is made available. A policy provides a degree of flexibility that is difficult, if not impossible, to establish in an ordinance. TOWN POLICY SUMMARY: For a period of four(4) months, staff extensively researched CFPO issues in order to develop the Policy. Drafts were developed through discussions with other jurisdictions, federal agencies, and meetings with Town Department heads. It was refined via multiple reviews by USFWS personnel, including Mr. Harlow, Arizona Game & Fish Department biologists, and Lisa Harris of Harris Environmental. The product is the first written CFPO development services policy in the region. It is a considerable step toward clarifying development community requirements. As you are aware, the Policy has been scheduled for implementation on December 1, 1999. In order to provide advance notice to the development community, staff arranged distribution of the policy to consultants, realtors, and 700 members of the Southern Arizona Homebuilder's Association (SAHBA). Furthermore, staff recently presented the policy at a SAHBA Technical Review Committee meeting. Yesterday, it was presented at a meeting of Long Realty realtors. The following is a list of a few key Policy provisions: TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 3 of 3 1. Unless the USFWS specifically exempts the site, pygmy-owl survey documentation will be requested upon submittal of a rezoning, plat, development plan, or grading permit application. 2. All staff reports will include information on survey documentation. If the survey documentation is not provided or indicates the presence of a pygmy-owl, staff will recommend denial of the project until the issue is appropriately resolved. 3. Grading permits will be denied if valid surveys are not provided, which is a decision that may be appealed to the Board of Adjustment. Furthermore, grading permits will be conditioned to expire in relation to the term of survey validity. 4. All surveys must be conducted by a USFWS "permitted" biologist. The submittal of only a survey will be deemed insufficient. An appropriate biologist must provide a letter interpreting the survey. 5. Permits will be conditioned to expire if a CFPO appears onsite or within 1500 feet of a site during grading or construction. In this instance, Town staff will rely on USFWS to verify there is a CFPO issue prior to considering voiding a permit. REQUEST Staff requests feedback about the use of and components of the Policy. Furthermore, staff seeks direction regarding the pursuit of establishing a joint effort to develop a uniform/similar approach among various jurisdictions. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Pygmy Owl Update to the Pima County Board of Supervisors 2. Letter from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 3. Cactus Ferruginous Pygmy Owl Policy with Cover Memo IAA Pl. !Wind Zoning Administrator Co • i unity Deve op if t Director own Manag-r \\OV PZD\PZ 1\PROJECTS\PYGMYOWL\11-22-99 OWL TC.RPT.doc Date: November 9, 1999 To: The Honorable Chair and Members From: C.H. Huckelberry Pima County Board of Supervisors County Administrator Re: Pygmy-Owl Update I. Summary The pygmy-owl was listed as endangered in 1997, but notice of the potential listing dates back to 1989, when the United States Fish and Wildlife Service included the pygmy-owl as a candidate for listing throughout its range. Despite the long period of advance warning, the study effort by wildlife agencies and other interested parties prior to the listing was minimal. The attached discussion paper entitled Pygmy-Owl Update provides a report on pygmy-owl research and rulings, evaluates whether the efforts of the community are leading to the recovery, downlisting and delisting of the pygmy-owl, and concludes that with the exception of valuable in-kind services of the Arizona Game and Fish Department pygmy-owl biologist, meaningful financial support for research and conservation planning efforts has been limited to federal and County contributions. The basis for listing the pygmy-owl as endangered is essentially three-fold: a) habitat loss; b) potential vulnerability to extinction due to environmental, demographic and genetic threats; and c) the absence of effective conservation measures. Since the time of listing, it has become evident that development pressures on the northwest side exceed what the Service described in the 1997 Final Rule, the information necessary to understand the needs of the pygmy-owl was not pursued in advance of the listing, and has not received substantial funding beyond the Pima County study effort, and effective long-term conservation measures will be defined through the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan. However, until this goal is achieved for the pygmy-owl and each of the 85 imperiled plants and animals that the Plan will protect, federal guidance, federal consultations, and federal rulings will shape many interim land use decisions. The Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan, and Pima County's funding of a comprehensive pygmy- owl study series, which has included giving money to the State to conduct studies, have been the most broad based responses by government entities to deal with pygmy-owl and multi- species protection. At least five of the six elements of the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan will, when implemented, provide the proactive approach that can head off conflicts between land use plans and species protection. The following summary and the attached report describe past, present and on-going pygmy-owl research efforts and rulings. The Honorable Pima County Board of Supervisors Pygmy-Owl Update November 9, 1999 Page 2 Significant progress has been made through survey and telemetry work conducted in the past months. A lasting solution to endangered species listings will occur only when these research efforts are completed and the resulting plans are implemented. This solution will be reached must faster if efforts are focused and there is broad cooperation among all levels of government. II. Basis for the Listing The United States Fish and Wildlife Service can determine endangered status under Section 4 of the Endangered Species Act if one of five factors is met. The pygmy-owl was listed as endangered on March 10, 1997 based on three major factors including: 1 . Habitat Modification - the present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; 2. Lack of Effective Conservation Programs - the inadequacy of existing conservation and regulatory mechanisms; and 3. Other Factors - including the environmental, demographic and genetic vulnerability of the pygmy-owl to random extinction. III. Habitat Modification and Lack of Conservation Programs as a Basis for Listing 1 . Impact to Corridors and Critical Habitat - In discussing the degree of habitat loss the Service described the growth pressures on the northwest side and stated that it was "aware of five specific housing and development projects operating or in the planning stages that would affect habitat where the majority of the birds in Arizona currently exist." Aerial photos within the report show the urbanization pattern of pygmy-owl habitat around Arthur Pack Park from 1983 to 1999, and maps show the committed and vacant land within the same area. Growth pressures on the northwest side exceed levels cited by the Service at the time of listing. 2. Impact to Riparian Habitat - In addition to the impacts of urbanization in the area of a known owl population, the Final Rule describing the reasons for the listing identifies riparian losses as a major factor leading to the listing of the pygmy-owl and states that "the Federal Clean Water Act contains provisions for regulating impacts to river systems and their tributaries. These mechanisms have been insufficient to prevent major losses of riparian habitat, including habitats occupied by the pygmy-owl." Within the last two weeks, a federal district court enjoined aspects of the Army Corps Nationwide Permit program until a regionally based programmatic impact analysis is performed, and the Army Corps consults with the Service regarding the effect of the Nationwide Permit program. As these steps are taken, individual permits that require the Corps to take a closer look at the impact of proposed projects will be the course available. The Honorable Pima County Board of Supervisors Pygmy-Owl Update November 9, 1999 Page 3 3. Addressing the Habitat Modification Issues Under the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan - Five of the six elements of the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan have the potential to address the habitat modification issues that led to the listing of the pygmy-owl. • Habitat and Corridors - These elements call for protection of Critical and Sensitive Habitat and Corridors, once such biologically sensitive lands are identified through resource evaluation and actually protected under a conservation program. • Riparian Restoration - The Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan also includes a Riparian Restoration element that will provide a comprehensive assessment of the decline in water, riparian habitat and riparian dependent wildlife. Within the text of the report, preliminary benchmarks are established to gain a sense of the magnitude of riparian losses. In general, science planning for the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan has been underway since the Board ordered the Plan to be developed. Some of the early findings and understandings of the planning process to date indicate that the current resource base is not sufficient to maintain suites of species much less reverse the direction of continued listings under the Endangered Species Act. The pygmy-owl is just one of approximately 85 plants and animals in need of protection in Pima County. It is estimated that 60 to 85 percent of Sonoran Desert wildlife depend on riparian habitat for some part of their life cycle. Riparian habitat itself has been targeted by the Science Team for protection under the Plan. • Ranch Conservation plays a role in protecting the habitat of the pygmy-owl. This survey season it was discovered that the Altar Valley ranch community is home to the largest known population of pygmy-owls -- 31 individuals. The Valley provides a potential corridor and a connection to owls that might be protected and recovered on the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge. • Mountain Park expansion under the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan also promotes pygmy-owl protection. Pima County would like to see the Tortolita Mountains and the Tortolita Alluvial Fan Ironwood Forest protected, and has filed an Arizona Preserve Initiative application to try to acquire some of this land. This area is currently the home to the second largest known pygmy-owl population. 4. Addressing Federal Habitat Issues as Part of the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan - As mentioned, the District Court has recently ordered that the Corps must consult with the Service about the effect of the Section 404 Nationwide Permit program on the pygmy-owl and its habitat. What this means for Pima County is that the information gathered during the cumulative impact analysis should correspond with some of the information that is being gathered by the Science Technical Advisory Team for the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan as the biological evaluation for Pima County is undertaken. Likewise, the Section 7 consultation ordered by the Court for the federal agency should be parallel to the Section 10 negotiation that Pima County undertakes with the Service to establish The Honorable Pima County Board of Supervisors Pygmy-Owl Update November 9, 1999 Page 4 the terms of the conservation plan, since both these processes address the effects of urban development on native species and their habitats. As Pima County moves forward with the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan, and the federal entities move forward with their assessment of permitting programs on wetlands, a number of deficiencies within and between the programs can be addressed. The varying standards that exist between local and federal entities could be aligned so that the resource is effectively protected and the permit seeker gains assurances. Permitting programs for water and land protection could be streamlined and work in a coordinated fashion. And, the application of standards could be more accurately tailored to conditions within the Pima County environment. The District Court's scrutiny of federal permitting practices should result in a shared local, state and federal study effort and a more effective and coordinated permit program at the federal and local level when impacts are better understood, and advance planning allows permit seekers to know where biologically sensitive areas are so they can be avoided. IV. Vulnerability to Environmental, Demographic and Genetic Threats as a Basis for Listing 1 . Research initiatives - One of the three major factors underlying the listing is vulnerability to environmental, demographic and genetic threats. Threats include at least the following: low population numbers, isolated and fragmented populations, inbreeding, unknown habitat requirements (water, cover), unknown status of prey availability, unknown status in relation to predators and competitors, and unknown ability to resist pathogens. On March 2, 1999, the Board of Supervisors adopted the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan in concept and funded a series of studies to advance the state of knowledge about the pygmy-owl and begin to address each of these questions through: 1) a broad survey effort; 2) a genetics investigation; and 3) telemetry and habitat assessments. The timeline for these efforts follows. • March 1999: Genetics study funded by Pima County begins. • April 1999: Survey effort funded by Pima County begins. • May 1999: Telemetry and habitat assessment funded by Pima County begins. • October 1999: Survey results reported to Pima County (results within this text). • February 15, 2000: Report on telemetry and habitat assessment due to Pima County. • March 2000: Final report, genetics study due to Pima County. The Honorable Pima County Board of Supervisors Pygmy-Owl Update November 9, 1999 Page 5 2. The Need for Federal, State and Local Funding - To date, Pima County has made the largest financial commitment among all government entities in an attempt to close the information gap which led to the listing, and it is the only local entity actively funding the comprehensive pygmy-owl study series. An intergovernmental effort would move the comprehensive study series forward at a much faster pace. This has been demonstrated through advances realized in a combined survey effort during 1999. Pima County, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and Arizona Game and Fish coordinated survey efforts and in so doing, covered several times the land base of the previous year's effort, and discovered new populations of owls in the process. In summary, as information is gathered about the number of owls, their location and habitat needs, their tolerance for various land uses, their health, and their prospects for long-term viability and ultimately for recovery, one of the three major factors that led to the listing will be better addressed. 3. 1999 Study Effort - In 1999, a total of five governments funded survey work: United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management, Arizona Game and Fish, and Pima County. Pima County alone, contracting through the Harris and Duncan team, covered 226,068 acres, or 353.2 square miles, which is almost 3 times the call area covered under the 1998 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service contract, and it is 5 to 15 times the area covered by the State survey efforts conducted between 1993 and 1996. The combined intergovernmental effort resulted in the observation of 74 to 78 pygmy- owls in 1999: 41 adults and 33 to 37 offspring: • 31 owls were found in Altar Valley • 27 owls were found in Northwest Tucson • 12 owls were found in Pinal County • 8 owls were found in Organ Pipe National Monument. In 1999, Pima County also funded some of the telemetry work performed by Arizona Game and Fish through a $60,000 contract. Based on preliminary information: • 11 nest sites were located and monitored and owls at each site were banded • Nest sizes varied from 2 to 5 babies and at least 16 of 35 fledglings dispersed • At least 13 owls had transmitters placed on them (including 3 adult males) • At least 8 juvenile owls were tracked through dispersal • At least 5 owl mortalities occurred during the survey season 4. Harris/Duncan 1999 Survey Report - During the 1999 survey season (from January to July), Pima County undertook the most comprehensive study effort of the decade through a contract awarded to Harris Environmental Group through a competitive proposal process. Covering over one quarter of a million acres, this search for owls exceeded the The Honorable Pima County Board of Supervisors Pygmy-Owl Update November 9, 1999 Page 6 scope of all combined efforts during the first five years of surveys conducted by the State before the listing of the pygmy-owl. Pima County also obtained site specific results from the survey effort conducted on numerous future bond projects. After determining where surveys were already being conducted by U.S. Fish and Wildlife, Arizona Game and Fish, the Forest Service, and the Bureau of Land Management, the remaining study area was divided into 9 survey districts and 2,632 call stations were established, under the Pima County contract. To put this in perspective, in 1998, the same team staked out 768 call points. In 1996, Arizona Game and Fish worked from a total of 356 call points. The 1999 effort allowed research to take place in areas that have not been surveyed in the past. Agency Call Stations Acres 1996 Arizona Game and Fish surveys 356 14,144 1998 U.S. Fish and Wildlife surveys 768 86,000 1999 Pima County Government surveys 2,632 226,000 At 348 of the 2,632 call stations, there was a "mobbing" response from other birds to the surveyor's tape recorded pygmy-owl calling. Mobbing is a "defensive aggressive response to the broadcast call, such as scolding vocally and/or attacking physically" (i.e. swooping in on the caller). While mobbing can mean many things, it may indicate that "local birds are familiar with pygmy-owls." The report states that: mobbing "behaviors may be evidence that the birds have had experiences with pygmy-owls, either in the area surveyed, or other places (Mexico and Central America) if the birds are migratory." The report recommends that "areas where mobbing occurred be resurveyed in future efforts." Other specific sites are identified for future survey efforts. 5. Ongoing and Future Research A. Genetics Study - In March of 1999, the County entered into a contract with Mr. Glenn Proudfoot through the University of Texas A&M for studies of DNA sequence data which will address two issues regarding genetic viability of Ferruginous Pygmy-Owl populations in Arizona, and the feasibility of reintroduction, and thus serve as a framework for future management efforts: 1) are Arizona pygmy- owls lacking genetic variation relative to healthy populations, and 2) are populations genetically differentiated from each other? Work is ongoing and a final report is due to Pima County by March of 2000. B. Telemetry and Habitat Analysis - The workplan accepted by the Board includes telemetry studies. Questions that are being addressed include: Where do pygmy- owls go upon dispersal? How far do they travel? Is there exchange with other populations? Are they residents of specific areas, rather than migratory? How tolerant are they of various urban occurrences? How adaptable are they? Habitat assessments are also being conducted to better describe the habitat needs of the pygmy-owl and to move toward the ability to prescribe the habitat where pygmy-owls could breed, nest, feed and rest. Arizona Game and Fish, under a contract with Pima The Honorable Pima County Board of Supervisors Pygmy-Owl Update November 9, 1999 Page 7 County, will issue a final report to the County by February 15, 2000. C. Studies in Mexico and Pima County in Fiscal Year 2000 - The Regional Office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has funded $120,000 for pygmy-owl studies during the year 2000 survey season. Estimates are that $28,000 of this amount will fund telemetry and habitat work within Pima County and Arizona, while $92,000 will fund studies in Mexico, including surveys, habitat assessment, and assessments of dispersal potential as well as threats and constraints to cooperative management across the border. These studies will continue to build the knowledge base established during the past two survey seasons when owls were located near the international border. D. Recovery Plan - In the text of the Federal Register Rule, the Service described the compressed time frame they were working under to meet the deadline set by Court order, and explained that the recommendations from the Recovery Team process, now underway, will allow the Service to reevaluate the current designation. Publication of the Recovery Plan by the United States Fish and Wildlife Recovery Team is anticipated in the upcoming months. Recovery Plans typically have a research agenda with a specific budget. Success in funding the research needs identified within the Recovery Plan will lead to a quicker resolution of the dilemmas surrounding this listing. E. Artificial Nest Box Study - Given the low number of known pygmy-owls, protective management strategies should be invoked to conserve the existing population. Artificial nest structures have been used in Texas with success. Nest box availability for Arizona owls might reduce predation and increase the ability to gather life history data. A proposal will be submitted to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and other potential funding sources to begin nest box management strategies in Arizona. V. Recommendations for Future Action With the listing of the pygmy-owl as an endangered species in March of 1997 due to: a) habitat loss, b) vulnerability to extinction, and c) absence of conservation, a great deal of scientific study, analysis, and research has been performed, funded primarily by the federal government and Pima County, with the Arizona Game and Fish Department providing significant, in-kind personnel contributions. This increased information as it continues to be completed will form the basis of a rational, organized, and structured response to the listing and hopefully, in future years, lead to de-listing. The greatest promise for this action comes from the eventual development and adoption, by all jurisdictions, of the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan. The work of the Steering Committee Educational series, also known as "Scientific Boot Camp," will be completed on December 11, 1999, and Plan development can begin in earnest with much of the required background analysis and information gathering completed. I will be providing to the Board, within the next three weeks, a comprehensive update on the progress of formulating the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan and each of its six elements. The Honorable Pima County Board of Supervisors Pygmy-Owl Update November 9, 1999 Page 8 In the meantime, this update report on the pygmy-owl can be used to organize and structure future actions both of Pima County and other local jurisdictions, as well as federal and state agencies. Of importance will be: 1 . Recovery Plan - With release of the draft recovery plan, Pima County, as well as all other local jurisdictions, should carefully review their existing land use codes to determine what interim measures may be necessary to reduce the rate of critical habitat loss now being incurred. The analysis in this report regarding committed and zoned lands in the northwest demonstrates the continuing threat to habitat loss and fragmentation. 2. Riparian Protection - The United States District Court action on cumulative riparian losses underscores the importance of reexamining land use codes and floodplain management regulations that allow incremental impacts and losses to vital and significant riparian habitats. We must review existing codes to determine that the desired level of riparian habitat protection is occurring, and what mitigation strategies should be employed and acted upon if riparian habitat losses are unavoidable based on exercising private property or vested zoning rights of individual land owners. 3. Continue Study Funding - Additional studies related to the pygmy-owl referenced in this report should be funded. These continuing studies will help determine actual vulnerability to extinction. A private/public partnership should be formulated to continue funding of these efforts. In addition, given the vast State Trust land holdings in Pima County and, in particular, within critical and sensitive habitat, the State of Arizona should participate in funding said studies. 4. Mitigation Bank - Clearly, critical habitat losses will be unavoidable due to continuing implementation of public improvements to highways, parks, schools, etc. as well as local government inability to curtail or eliminate some habitat losses because of individuals exercising private property rights or vested zoning in accordance with the laws of various local jurisdictions. In such instances habitat losses can be mitigated through the establishment of a land trust that has as its sole purpose acquisition and protection of critical habitat. A Pima County land trust for this purpose needs to be established. 5. Cooperative Agreements - Based on information now available, as well as interest expressed in development of effective conservation measures by other local jurisdictions and federal agencies, it is now appropriate to develop cooperative agreements that contain substantial commitments of known actions to advance the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan. I will be bringing specific reports on each of these elements to the Board in the next two months that will require Board direction. CHH/jj Attachment JUN 1 u 'yy 01: P.2/3 Ott4. • nited States Department of the Interior �ri.►-� --- ow = U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service , ►�., ��, 2321 W. Royal Palm Road, Suite 103 •- Nt.' Phoenix, Arizona 85021-4951 (602)640-2720 FAX (602)640-2730 In Reply Refer To: AESO/SE June 9, 1999 Mayor Paul Loomis Town of Oro Valley 11000 N. La Canada Drive Oro Valley,Arizona 85737 Dear Mayor Loomis: We are writing to alert you to potential concerns for a federally listed endangered species, the cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl which occurs in your area. Critical habitat has also been proposed for areas within the jurisdiction of Oro Valley. Re-zoning and other town projects could adversely affect this species and its habitat. Additionally, actions such as re-zoning may preclude future planning options needed by Oro Valley for obtaining Endangered Species Act (ESA) "take"permits. My staff and I are available to assist you in determining if zoning changes might affect this species and to work with you to ensure that you are in compliance with the ESA. Under the if an agency, landowner or municipality undertakes any activity (e.g., vegetation ESA, g Y� F Y removal, construction, etc. or rezoning that results in these activities) that results in the death of a listed species such as the pygmy-owl or injures it by interfering with its breeding, feeding, or nesting habits, the parties involved are at risk of committing a"take"which is a violation of section 9 of the ESA. The term"take" is defined by the ESA(section 3(19) to mean"to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound,kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct_" The term "harm"has been further defined by Service regulations at 50 CPR 17.3, as follows: Harm means an act which actually kills or injures wildlife. Such acts my include significant habitat modification or degradation when it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns including breeding, feeding or sheltering. We have worked cooperatively with other parties in Pirna County and have been successful in suggesting ways to avoid take of listed species while landowners conduct their activities. As you know, Pima County is currently involved in developing a regional Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) that can serve as "umbrella"ESA compliance for all activities covered by the plan. We are urging all municipalities within Pirna County to strongly consider becoming involved in this regional effort, to preclude the need to address ESA issues separately, one project at a time. Obtaining individual ESA permits would be more time-consuming, cumbersome and costly for both the Service and the municipalities involved, compared to using the regional plan approach. A regional approach would also provide greater opportunities for resolving species conservation and economic development conflicts. JUN 10 '99 01:39PM P.3/3 We are available to meet with you, either in person or through a conference call,to discuss our concerns and our recommendations for ESA compliance. Please call me(602)-640-2720 (x244) or Tom Gatz at(x240) to discuss this issue in more detail. Sincerely, din;/7 2414(—.--------- David L.Harlow Field Supervisor cc: Chuck Sweet Oro Valley Town Manager 11000 N. La Canada Drive. Oro Valley,Arizona 85737 Chuck Huckleberry Pinna County Administrator 130 W. Congress, 10th Floor Tucson,Arizona 85701-1317 Sherry Ruther Arizona Game and Fish Department 555 N. Greasewood Road Tucson,Arizona 85745 ��E q °_ ° - _ 1 TOWN OF ORO VALLEY „idq �iy COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Y • Building Safety • Parks and Recreation • Planning and Zoning • Transit Services r r„ UN D ED 11/1/99 To Whom It May Concern, Our aim is to notify affected parties that Town staff will be implementing the attached Pygmy- Owl Policy on December 1, 1999. The policy was designed to help prevent the "take" of a Cactus Ferruginous Pygmy-Owl. A primary goal is to limit the Town's potential liability by insuring compliance with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) requirements. As you are aware, USFWS is charged with enforcing the Endangered Species Act(ESA). This includes preventing harassment/harm to pygmy-owls, designating habitat areas, and creating a viable recovery program. Within Oro Valley, only the area west of La Cholla Boulevard is designated as critical habitat; however, most of the property within the Town meets the elevation threshold and vegetative criterion specified within the current USFWS protocol. For all potential habitat areas, USFWS has recommended a pygmy-owl survey prior to any site disturbance. If a property owner or his agent harms/harasses an endangered species, a substantial fine and/or civil action may be levied. Furthermore, a permitting authority may be enjoined or held accountable for actions that are likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species. The attached Pygmy-Owl Policy will serve to help insure Town compliance with USFWS requirements. The following is a list of a few key provisions: 1. Unless the USFWS specifically exempts the site, pygmy-owl survey documentation must be included upon submittal of a rezoning, plat, development plan, or grading permit application. 2. All staff reports will include information on survey documentation. If the survey documentation is not provided or indicates the presence of a pygmy-owl, staff will recommend denial of the project until the issue is appropriately resolved. 3. Grading permits will be denied if valid surveys are not provided. 4. Grading permits will be conditioned to expire in relation to the term of survey validity. We understand that requirements involving the pygmy-owl are continually evolving. If you have any questions, please contact me at 520-797-9797 or at bve l l a@orova l l ey.net. Sincerely, /17 .__, -1/4_____.....„...._ Bayer Vella Senior Planner \\OV PZD\PZ1\PROJECTS\PYGMYOWL\Revised Owl Policy Public Intro.doc PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES PYGMY-OWL NOTIFICATION & SURVEY PROCEDURES SOP # 10A Copies to: Effective: December 1, 1999 All Planners Supersedes: SOP #10 Engineers Zoning Enforcement Building Codes Policy: The Town of Oro Valley is acting to help insure that each proposed development minimizes the potential take of a Cactus Ferruginous Pygmy-Owl. Proof of a valid survey may be required for general plan amendments, rezonings, preliminary and final plats, development plans, and grading permits. Building permits require acknowledgement by the applicant regarding their responsibilities under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). This SOP is not applicable to any other permit/review actions. PROCEDURES FOR DETERIMINING IF DOCUMENTATION REGARDING A VALID PYGMY-OWL SURVEY IS REQUIRED Planners & Engineers Each submittal must be evaluated in accordance with U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) protocol (see attachment). Elevation characteristics and vegetative type must be examined: Elevation: The entire Town is suitable for pygmy-owl habitat. Vegetation: At the time of formal application submittal. the applicant may submit a written determination specifying whether the onsite vegetation meets USFWS protocol for exemption. This determination is to be made by a professional who is qualified to conduct an Oro Valley Site Resource Inventory. � r 1. If the site does meet USFWS protocol for exemption, the rezoning, plat. or development plan may be submitted for formal approval without survey documentation. The planner must add a note to the file to insure that field verification occurs during the Native Plant Salvage inspection. 2. If the applicant does not provide a determination that the site meets USFWS protocol for exemption, the applicant will be informed that one of the two following items must accompany a submittal: a. Documentation regarding a valid survey (see Survey Requirements section) Pygmy-Owl SOP Paget OR b. A site specific notice from the USFWS that a survey is not required. Special Exemption: Existing features and structures such as buildings, roads, aqueducts etc. that do not include habitat elements are not considered habitat. Unless the application includes a proposal to expand an existing graded area, the aforementioned areas are exempt from survey reporting requirements. PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS, REZONINGS, PRELIMINARY & FINAL PLATS, AND DEVELOPMENT PLANS Planners All proposed developments submitted for consideration by the DRB, Planning & Zoning Commission, and Town Council will be transmitted to the USFWS Division. The following point of contact and address will be applicable: Arizona Ecological Services U.S. Fish and Wildlife Field Division 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103 Phoenix, Arizona 85021-4951 USFWS will be allotted the same amount of time to review the project as we currently provide to other agencies and departments. All development related staff reports shall contain a section dedicated to ESA issues. If valid survey documentation has not been provided or is invalid due to expiration of time etc., staff must notify the applicant in writing that valid survey documentation is needed prior to public hearing review. If sufficient documentation is not received prior to report submittal for public hearing, staff must recommend denial of the project due to insufficient information regarding ESA compliance. All reports will include a recommendation that all approvals should be conditioned to include verbiage identical to that required of grading permits (see PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING GRADING PERMITS #2). If the survey documentation establishes that a pygmy-owl utilizes the site or an area adjacent to the site, staff must recommend denial of the project at all phases of review until the applicant submits written verification from U.S. Fish & Wildlife that development may occur. Zoning Inspectors For any file flagged as exempt from survey requirements due to lack of vegetation, staff must verify the findings of the vegetative assessment during the Native Plant Salvage inspection. Pygmy-Owl SOP Page 3 PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING GRADING PERMITS Engineer Conditions of Permit Issuance: Grading permits may only be issued in accordance with the following procedures: 1. All grading permits expire on the date the survey becomes invalid. As part of the required survey documentation (see Survey Requirements section), a permitted biologist must establish the expiration date. Extensions will be granted on a case by case basis. 2. Each permit will include the following condition statement: This property may be a habitat for the Cactus Ferruginous Pygmy-owl, as determined by the United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Approval of this application/permit does not intend, nor should it be construed, to imply compliance with Federal or State regulations. If a Pygmy-Owl is detected on the site or within 1500 feet of the project prior to and/or during any stage of development, all site development related work must cease immediately. A permit will not be issued or an existing permit or approval may be invalidated or work delayed by the Town until evidence of an approved U.S. Fish and Wildlife habitat conservation plan is submitted. If you have any questions concerning your responsibilities, please contact: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Field Division 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103 Phoenix, Arizona 85021-4951 Phone (602) 640-2720 Fax (602) 620-2730 3. If it is established within the survey documentation that a pygmy-owl utilizes the site and/or an area within 1500 feet of the site, the grading permit will be denied or put on hold until the applicant submits written verification from USFWS that development may occur. PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING BUILDING PERMITS A building permit may only be issued in accordance with the following procedures: 1. The Planner and/or Building Permit review staff will provide the applicant with the attached "Notice". The applicant will be required to sign the "Notice" prior to submittal unless valid survey documentation has been submitted (see next page, "Survey Requirements"). In turn, the Planner/Permit Review Staff is required to file the "Notice" with the application. 2. The Advance Planning Division will forward a quarterly spreadsheet summary of the Pygmy-Owl SOP Page 4 Notice to the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Field Division, 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103, Phoenix, AZ 85021-4951. The original will be kept on file with the permit application. 3. All permits will conditioned by adding the same statement depicted in number #2 of the GRADING PERMIT section. SURVEY REQUIREMENTS Surveys must be conducted by a USFWS permitted pygmy-owl survey specialist. The USFWS certification list will be made available at the front counter. Submittal of only a pygmy-owl survey will be deemed insufficient. Documentation must be submitted from a USFWS permitted specialist. She/he must verify that the site has been surveyed, the date the survey results expire, and a determination whether a pygmy-owl(s) utilizes the site or any areas within 1500' of the site. Advance Planning Team Leader Date Current Planning Team Leader Date Enforcement Team Leader Date Planning and Zoning Administrator Date F:\ADMINTROCEDURES\PYGMYOWL.SOP.DOC TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: November 22, 1999 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & COUNCIL FROM: Dennis Silva, Jr., Planner I SUBJECT: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE ORO VALLEY ZONING CODE REVISED (OVZCR) RELATED TO FLAGS AND DISCUSSION OF THE SIGN CODE BACKGROUND: Staff prepared a zoning code amendment clarifying flags in Chapter 12, Signs and Chapter 13, General Provisions of the OVZCR. This item was continued on July 7, 1999 in order to have a study session. The sign code was approved by the Mayor and Council on April 21, 1999. FLAGS: Staff received participation and input from interested parties and their ideas are included in the following amendments in Chapters 12 and 13 of the OVZCR. The intent of the proposed amendments to these sections was to address national and state flags, and flags for commercial purposes and non-profit organizations. • Section 12-503A.5 is changed to prohibit National and State flags for advertising or attracting attention. • A new section has been proposed, Section 12-601K, Flags and Banners. This section will address commercial and non-profit flags with or without logos. Non-profit organizations include churches and schools. • Section 12-602A.4 is changed to prohibit National and State Flags for advertising or to attract attention to advertising (except for Model Home Sales Office, per Section 12-601.B, FLAGS.). The proposed amendments will be an addition, not an exception to the current sign code. SIGN CODE: The OVZCR establishes the sign code. It also includes provisions for applicants to submit a comprehensive sign plan or to provide for separate sign guidelines within a PAD. These options provide flexibility to create a distinctive signage within a master planned community or to match the signs to the architecture of a specific development. The two options are discussed below. Comprehensive Sign Plan Section 12-104 of the OVZCR outlines the Comprehensive Sign Plan. The purpose of this sign plan is to provide for the establishment of signage criteria that will be tailored to a specific development or location, and may vary from specific ordinance provisions. The intent is to provide for more flexible sign criteria that will promote superior design through architectural integration of the site, buildings, and signs. A comprehensive sign plan containing elements which exceed the permitted height, area, and number of signs specified in this ordinance, may be recommended by the DRB and approved by the Town Council based on the two findings listed below: The development site contains unique or distinctive, in terms of physical scale, topography, land use, architectural, or historical characteristics, which makes the development separate or represents a clear variation from conventional development. The proposed signage incorporates special design features consistent with the Town's Design Guidelines. TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 2 of 2 This approach is an incentive for developers to vary from the sign code, but still create a quality project. Pad Sign Guidelines: Currently, Rancho Vistoso, Rooney Ranch (Oro Valley Center), La Reserve and Canada Hills PADs have signage regulations. The above-referenced PADs have sign guidelines because it is the nature of master planned communities to have separate regulations from the Town. However, in many instances the PAD requirements are more restrictive than Town requirements. The intent of PADs is to ensure quality development that fits with the overall character of the Town. Rancho Vistoso Sign System Guidelines: • The image statement is similar to the OVZCR purpose statement. > The breakdown of permanent and temporary signage is similar to the format of the OVZCR. However, the permitted colors are more restrictive in the Rancho Vistoso Sign System Guidelines. • Rancho Vistoso only allows two types of fonts,whereas the OVZCR does not specify font types. r Overall,the Rancho Vistoso Sign System Guidelines are more restrictive than the OVZCR Sign Code. Rooney Ranch (Oro Valley Center)Sign Guidelines: > The Oro Valley Center has general signage guidelines covering the entire PAD and has specific sign guidelines for Parcels B and D. > The sign guidelines for Parcels B and D relate to commercial signage and are organized by the square footage of the store. La Reserve Sign Controls: > All signs within the La Reserve Plan Area must conform to the requirements of the La Reserve Design Guidelines, Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs). Canada Hills Sign Controls: All signs within the Canada Hills Plan Area must conform to the requirements of Article 12 of the OVZCR. • There are three additional provisions listed in pages 14 and 15 of the PAD document. ATTACHMENT: Amendments to the OVZCR Related to Flags6/L1 1 Plannirirrd Zoning Administrator ie I / , 4,, -cd.,, Com unity Development i irector --K? ; , • i anager F:\ZONECODE\ZCR\12\Flags\flagordtc.rpt AMENDMENTS TO THE ORO VALLEY ZONING CODE REVISED, CHAPTER 12, SIGNS,AND CHAPTER 13, GENERAL PROVISIONS RELATING TO FLAGS SIGNS SEC.12-503 Sec. 12-503 Prohibited Permanent Signs A. The following signs, or types of signs, are prohibited: 5. NATIONAL AND STATE flags for the purpose of advertising or to attract attention to advertising. SIGNS Sec. 12-601 K. FLAGS 1. DESCRIPTION: COMMERCIAL AND NON-PROFIT FLAGS WITH OR WITHOUT LOGOS. NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS INCLUDE CHURCHES AND SCHOOLS. 2. LOCATION: SUCH DEVICES SHALL BE LOCATED AT THE MAIN DRIVE OF THE PARKING LOT TO IDENTIFY THE VEHICULAR ENTRANCE TO THE COMMERCIAL SITE AND/OR NON-PROFIT OR IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING. 3. SETBACKS: ONE FLAGPOLE LENGTH FROM THE PROPERTY LINE 4. SIZE: LENGTH NO GREATER THAN 1/4 THE HEIGHT OF THE FLAGPOLE. 5. HEIGHT: NO GREATER THAN 1.25 TIMES THE HEIGHT OF THE NEAREST ADJACENT BUILDING OR THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT ALLOWED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT. 6. QUANTITY: ONE FLAG PER DEVELOPMENT. 7. FORM: TO BE FLAGS AND SHALL BE NON-ILLUMINATED, LOCATED ON FREESTANDING POLES. THE DEVICE MAY BE SOLID OR BI-COLORED AND/OR MAY CONTAIN THE CORPORATE LOGO. Sec. 12-602 Prohibited Temporary Signs A. The following types of temporary signs are prohibited: 4. NATIONAL AND STATE flags for the purpose of advertising or to attract attention to advertising (except for Model Home Sales Office, per Section 12-601.B, FLAGS.); SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS Sec. 13-304 Sec. 13-304 Flagpoles and Flags Flagpoles shall have a maximum height no greater than 1.25 times the height of the nearest adjacent building UP TO THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT ALLOWED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT. The length of a flag shall be no greater than 1/4th the height of the flagpole. National and state flags are permissible WITH ONE EACH PER OCCUPIED LOT. Flags used for the purpose of advertising or attracting attention to advertising are pfehilso4ed REGULATED in accordance with SECTIONS 12-503 AND Sec. 12 603 602 of this code. FLAGS SHALL BE LOCATED IN AN AREA OF THE LOT OR PARCEL WHERE THEY WILL NOT BE A SAFETY HAZARD TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES. 3 TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: November 22, 1999 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & TOWN COUNCIL FROM: Chuck Sweet, Town Manager SUBJ: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment - State Land Parcel SUMMARY: In April 1999, the Town contracted with Environmental Engineering Consultants, Inc. (EEC) to conduct a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment for the 170.62 acres known as the "Calmat" site. As you know, this was done in an effort to prepare the town for possibly bidding on this state land parcel in April of 2000. EEC recently delivered their report to the town and copies were recently distributed to each of you. As detailed in the Report, the results of the Environmental Site Assessment indicate there is no evidence of recognizable environmental contamination, with the exception of some existing asphalt debris and miscellaneous construction debris that was present at the time of the site visit. The report does address several violations by Cal-Mat during their operations, but mentions that those violations were resolved. The report further indicates that there are four registered water wells on the property with three of the wells listed as being for industrial use and one's use listed as "none" Additionally, Cal-Mat representatives have stated that a Closure Report (which includes an Environmental Assessment completed by an outside consultant ) for the site would be sent to the State Land Department. Staff has requested a copy of this report and will copy to Council upon receipt. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the results and recommendations of EEC, it is recommended that the Town contract with a qualified Environmental Consultant to perform a limited Phase II inventory on the property, using a magnetic survey. The purpose of this survey is to eliminate the possibility of buried tanks or other metallic objects on the property site and thus eliminate any concern regarding toxic materials remaining underground. Following the results of the magnetic survey it may be necessary to conduct soil borings of specific areas of the site to further eliminate concerns of the town. Additionally it is recommended that a sampling of the water from each of the four wells be obtained. A full comprehensive test should be done on those samples which would include testing for bacteriological content, a broad spectrum of chemical compounds and other miscellaneous water quality characteristics. COUNCIL COMMUNICATION PAGE 2 ATTACHMENTS: 1. November 15, 1999 letter to Chuck Hudson requesting a copy of the Closure Report 2. Executive Summary of Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report completed by EEC, date October 29, 1999 ( Full report distributed previously to Town Council). 3. Magnetic Survey Quote from Zonge Engineering & Research Organization, Inc., dated November 19th, 1999. FISCAL IMPACT: Estimated cost to perform Limited Phase II Magnetic Survey : $ 8,300 - $25,000 Estimated cost to perform water quality tests on 4 wells: $ 5,000 Total $13,300 - $30,000 SUGGESTED MOTION - NONE Town Manager Pkv"EY ,41,,?, 01,*'!°: ,7',41t;l'i--- 0 4‘:1:' ' ° i`` i;��."1;7 VALLEY :'' . ,. TOWN OF ORO 11000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE , ,f ORO VALLEY, ARIZONA 85737 `' ''f-�`` r h Administrative Offices(520)297-2591 Fax(520)297-0428 www.ci.oro-valley.az.us °UN D ED�g November 15, 1999 Mr. Charles F. Hudson Project Team Leader/Sales Planning & Disposition Division ARIZONA STATE LAND DEPARTMENT 1616 w. Adams Street Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Re: State Land Parcel - Oro Valley Dear Chuck: Asy ou are aware, the Town contracted with Environmental Engineering Consultants (EEC) to re are the Phase I Environmental Assessment for subject prepare property. The Phase I report was recently delivered to my office and I am forwarding a copyto you for your review. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or comments you may have regarding this report. Additionally, I would again appreciate any information you have with regard to the Additi y, 9 PP Closure Report, to be filed by Calmat, which also includes Environmental Assessment work that they had completed by an outside consultant. Thankou cooperating with the Town of Oro Valley as we prepare for the y p 9 upcoming public auction in the Spring of 2000. Sincerely, / Chuck weet Town Manager Phase I Environmental Site Assessment October 29, 1999 170.62 Acres of state owned land in the E half Sec. 2, T12S,R13E, G&SRB&M EEC Job No. 99079 Pima County Assessor's Parcel 224-03-169F, Oro Valley,AZ 85737 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Engineering and Environmental Consultants, Inc. (EEC) has performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment in general conformance with the scope and limitations of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Practice E 1527-97 for aparcel of land in the East half of Section 2, Township 12 South, Range 13 East, Gila and Salt River Base and Meridian, Oro Valley, AZ 85737 (Figure A-1, Appendix A). The subject J property, consisting of 170.62 acres (according to Assessor's records), is within the town limits of Oro Valley, Arizona, and is further identified as Pima County Assessor's Parcel No. 224-03-169F (Figure A-2). The property is owned by the state of Arizona. The site was most recently occupied by CalMat of Arizona(CalMat), a sand and gravel extraction company that also used the site for an asphalt mixing plant during some of the company's period of use. The street address for the operations was 800 West Naranja Road, although some of the permits also had addresses of 600 West Naranja Road, and 800 West Tangerine Road.. FINDINGS This assessment has revealed no evidence of recognized environmental conditions, as defined under ASTM E 1527-97, in connection with the property, with the following exceptions: • CalMat had not completely finished "restoring" the property at the time of the site visit. Furthermore, at the time of preparation of this report, CalMat had not yet completed a report on the company's closure activities. According to a representative of the Arizona State Land Department, the company has 45 days following closure to submit a final report on closure activities. • At the time of the site visit, the property contained several piles of debris, including asphalt debris and miscellaneous construction debris. The occupant was in the process of removing some of the piles; these materials are not considered hazardous. • The site operation had an air quality permit from the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality (PCDEQ). That entity is also responsible for solid-waste issues, including oversight of spills of regulated (but not necessarily hazardous) solid wastes, such as oil and diesel. In 1964, CalMat was cited for several infractions of air quality permit requirements. The issues were resolved and the case was closed. • In addition, in 1994, there was one release of petroleum product. The site was partially excavated and the petroleum-contaminated soil (PCS) was placed on plastic sheeting and covered with additional plastic sheeting. In 1996, the rest of the Privileged and Confidential Engineering and Environmental Consultants, Inc. iii Phase I Environmental Site Assessment October 29, 1999 170.62 Acres of state owned land, in the E half Sec. 2, T12S,R13E, G&SRB&M EEC Job No. 99079 Pima County Assessor's Parcel 224-03-169F, Oro Valley,AZ 85737 contaminated area, which had been beneath a tank, was excavated. The contaminated soil, under a plan approved by PCDEQ, was incorporated into asphalt and used for paving. • There are four registered water wells on the subject property, according to the Arizona Department of Water Resources; all wells are in the same 10 acres. Owners are listed as R.E. Miller Paving (two wells) and the State of Arizona (two wells). These wells were not located at the time of the site visit because of limited access. RECOMMENDATIONS Although this Phase I ESA did not find any indication of hazardous, or special waste materials that would affect the use of the property, EEC makes the following recommendations for follow-up investigation or action items: • The town of Oro Valley should obtain and review the site closure report when it . P becomes available from the Arizona State Land Department. After reviewingthat . . report, a decision should be made as to whether to implement a limited Phase II investigation to determine if any buried materials remain. Because of the large area of the site, EEC recommends that any initial limited Phase II study should be a magnetic survey to look for buried tanks or other metallic objects. The area of concern should be only those areas actually excavated during the life of the operations. • A new site visit should be made to determine if any of the asphalt and other material remains on site after "official closure." Although inert debris is not hazardous, EEC recommends that any residuals be removed and disposed of in a landfill that accepts non-hazardous construction debris. • EEC recommends that wells be either registered in the new owner's name, or abandoned following regulations of the Arizona Department of Water Resources. DOCUMENTATION The evaluation was completed on the basis of a review of aerial photographs (Appendix P A); a site visit by Kevin A Pierce of EEC, on August 12, 1999, at which time the photographs in Appendix B were made; review of the historical title report, showingthe . P history of leases (Appendix C); review of federal and state environmental databases (Appendix D), including one for water wells (Appendix E); and review of available Pima County Department of Environmental Quality records (Appendix F). Aq uestionnaire was completed on September 9, by Mr. Gary Slusher of the Arizona State Land Department (Appendix G). Privileged and Confidential Engineering and Environmental Consultants,Inc. iv Phase I Environmental Site Assessment October 29, 1999 170.62 Acres of state owned land,in the E half Sec. 2, T12S,R13E, G&SRB&M EEC Job No. 99079 Pima County Assessor's Parcel 224-03-169F, Oro Valley,AZ 85737 An environmental questionnaire was also sent to Mr. Andy Siersma of CalMat Company P Y of Arizona, the most recent occupant of the property. Mr. Siersma stated in a telephone conversation with EEC on September 7, 1999,that he was advised by his company not to return the questionnaire to EEC, and that a closure report for the site would be sent to the State Land Department within 2 to 3 weeks. As of this time, the closure report has not been made available to EEC. Following submittal of a draft copy of this report to the town of Oro Valley, September in Se tember 1999, Oro Valley provided EEC with a copy of report in the town files, concerning the initial excavation of the PCS in 1994. The report, which is missing the cover and table of contents, but is all that was available to Oro Valley, is a preliminary report, desribing the partial excavation. A later report, written after full excavation, was found in the files of the PCDEQ. Because of the lengths of the reports, they are cited, but are not included in this report. Resumes of the Engineering and Environmental Consultants, Inc. staff that completed this Phase I ESA are in Appendix G. References cited, alphabetically by author and date, are listed in Section 7.0. Privileged and Confidential Engineering and Environmental Consultants,Inc. v Zonge En & Research Organization, Inc. 3322 E. Fort Lowell Road Tucson, Arizona 85716 U.S.A. Telephone: 520-327-5501 IC I Facsimile: 520-325-1588 Email: zonge@zonge.com WWW: www.zonge.com w To: Rachael Bartels From: Cris Mayerle Fax: 297-0428 Pages: 3 Phone: 297-0428 Date: November 19, 1999 Re: Tank and Drum Location CC: 0 Urgent 0 For Review 0 Please Comment 0 Please Reply 0 Confidential The following are a few different scenarios for the survey you requested. The cost of shipping, rental and setup will be billed at cost with no mark up. The rental on the equipment is for 5 days longer than the survey will actually take because of shipping time. I have quoted the job using 3-ft line spacings. This will ensure that no single drum is missed. If drums are in larger groups then this spacing may be too small. If you want a sparser grid, the quote can be altered easily. Basically, if a line spacing of 6 feet would suffice (assumes all tanks and clusters of drums will be larger than 6 feet in lateral extent), you can basically double the number of acres covered by each scenario listed below. When looking for large USTs we usually use a 10-ft. line spacing, but since drums are much smaller a smaller spacing is necessary to find all of them. Ten acres with line spacings of three feet(-6 field days). Mobe: setup: $150.00 shipping: $400.00 rental 11 Days @ $52.00 $572.00 Production 60 Hours @ $100.00 $6,000.00 Expenses 6 Days @ $30.00 $180.00 Vehicle 6 Days @ $50.00 $300.00 Report and Processing $750.00 Total: $8,352.00 November 19, 1999 Twenty acres with line spacings of three feet(-12 field days). Mobe: setup: $150.00 shipping: $400.00 rental 17 days @ $52.00 $884.00 Production 120 hours @ $100.00 $12,000.00 Expenses 12 days @ $30.00 $360.00 Vehicle 12 days @ $50.00 $600.00 Report and Processing $1,200.00 Total: $15,594.00 Thirty acres with line spacings of three feet(-18 field days). Mobe: setup: $150.00 shipping: $400.00 rental 23 days @ $52.00 $1,196.00 Production 180 hours @ $100.00 $18,000.00 Expenses 18 days @ $30.00 $540.00 Vehicle 18 days @ $50.00 $900.00 Report and Processing $1,500.00 Total: $22,686.00 • Page 2 November 19, 1999 The EM-61 is mounted on a square cart with sides one-meter by one-meter. This quote also assumes that the EM-61 cart can be easily pulled through the site. If a lot of vegetation is present, the survey may be slower. At the rates listed above, each additional acre will add approximately $750 - $800 to the quote (assuming a 3 ft line spacing). Please call with any questions or if you want me to change the line spacing. Best Regards, Cris Mayerle • Page 3 4 TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION STUDY SESSION: November 22, 1999 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & COUNCIL FROM: Shirley Seng, Utility Administrator SUBJECT: Options to Reduce or Eliminate Total Coliform Events SUMMARY: In response to the request of the Mayor, staff has completed an evaluation of various options available to the water utility that would reduce or eliminate the potential for total coliform events. The attachments to this communication will provide detailed information on all options evaluated by staff. Staff recommendations include options that involve system protection efforts, rather than system detection efforts, that would assist the utility in fulfilling our responsibility of delivering a safe water supply to our residents and customers. FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost to implement staff recommendations is approximately $281,000 during FY 99-00 of which $90,000 has been included in the budget. The additional $191,000 could be made available by way of modifying the budget to permit the use of funds budgeted for capital expenditures that staff has subsequently realized will not be completed in this fiscal year. STAFF RECOMMINDATIONS: Staff respectfully recommends that Mayor and Council consider taking this matter to a regularly scheduled Council meeting for action as soon as possible given the water quality issues involved. SUGGESTED MOTION: None required at this time. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Memo dated 11-16-99 to Council requesting study session. 2. Memo dated 10-27-99 regarding Water Utility Director's recommendations. 3. Memo dated 10-26-99 regarding staff recommendations. 4. Memo dated 11-12-99 regarding fiscal impact of staff recommendations. 5. Summary of 1999 total coliform events. 6. Information on implementation of a flushing program. 7. Information on fire hvdrant repair and maintenance. 8. Information on valve repair and maintenance. 9. Information on disinfection system maintenance. TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION PAGE 2 OF 2 Ai.,,..J1- \. A. , U tility A dministr:tor! tilityDirector Town Manager /. .` ^, \ + ` r . ` . ~ ' . � �-- ! TTMUMLNT #1 limegimmnimm••••••••••=mi•••••••••••••00 ommilmoirri ^- ~ - ' tfz, 4 MEMORANDUM N Received NO �► Town of Oro Valley m TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS Water Utility �A, /10 -So FROM: CHUCK SWEET, TOWN MANAGER DATE: November 16th, 1999 SUBJ: Public Notice — Oro Valley Water Utility On November 8th and 9th, 1999, staff undertook routine monthly water quality tests in the former Canada Hills Water service area (Public Water System #10- 164). Staff received notification from the laboratory that 2 of the test samples returned results indicating a presence of total coliform bacteria. The 2 sampling sites were located on Stone Stable Drive and Ironwood Canyon. On 11/10/99, staff flushed the affected areas and then began mandatory repeat testing of the sampling sites in accordance with ADEQ regulations. In addition, staff began chlorinating the Stone Stable Drive area. The repeat testing consisted of taking 3 additional samples from each original sample location (up- stream, down-stream & the same location) for a total of 6 samples. The 3 repeat samples taken on Ironwood Canyon were negative for total coliform; however, the 3 samples taken on Stone Stable Drive were again positive for total coliform. Staff will continue chlorinating and flushing until repeat tests are negative. Troubleshooting by staff resulted in finding no apparent cause for the violation. ADEQ requires public notification for this type of violation in a local newspaper of general circulation within 14 days. Attached for your information is a copy of each required Public Notice that staff will have published in the legal section of the Arizona Daily Star on Wednesday, November 22nd. If you have any questions regarding this information, please do not hesitate to contact my office. Attached please find copies of memos from utility staff discussing options for REFER TO reducing total coliform violations. Due to the reoccurring nature of positive ATTACH#2&113 results for Total coliform within the water utility system during the past several months in various locations, it is requested that this matter be discussed in a Study Session in the very near future with the Town Council. 41i Chuck Sweet, Town Manager Attachments (3) A M�T #2 • - • ORO VALLEY WATER UTILITY INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: CHUCK SWEET, TOWN MANAGER FROM: DAVID G. HOOK, WATER UTILITY DIRECTOR DATE: 10-27-99 SUBJECT: OPTIONS TO REDUCE TOTAL COLIFORM DETECTION CC: SHIRLEY SENG, WATER ADMINISTRATOR MARY KOBIDA, WATER OPERATIONS SUPERINTENDENT In response to the request of the mayor, staff has completed an evaluation of various options available to the OVWU that would reduce or eliminate the incidences of total coliform detection. Attached for your reference is a 10-26-99 memo that presents the investigation and REFER TO evaluation performed by OVWU staff. Ms. Kobida, Water Operations Superintendent is kTTACHN3 the certified operator of record for the OVWU and is charged by ADEQ as such to ensure that the system is operated in accordance with regulatory requirements. It is my recommendation that Mayor and Council authorize the OVWU to implement the following in order to fulfill the OVWU's responsibility to deliver a safe public water supply to our residents and customers: ➢ Sampling stations for an approximate FY 99/00 cost of$89,000. ➢ A continuous disinfection program for an approximate FY 99/00 cost of$128,000, including the hiring and equipping of additional operations staff (1 FTE) to initiate the program. ➢ A flushing program for an approximate FY 99/00 cost of $64,000, including the hiring and equipping of additional operations staff(2 FTE) to initiate the program. ➢ A budget modification to incorporate the above into the FY 99/00 budget. My recommendation above is based on the following: ➢ Protection efforts evaluated were more in keeping with the objective of reducing or eliminating positive detection for total coliform than were detection efforts. ➢ No real-time detection science was found to exist. ➢ Increased sampling is extremely expensive and does not ensure a negative bacteriological test result, leaving the OVWU in a reactive mode. ➢ Sampling stations are a proactive way to improve the reliability of samples being representative of the water supply in the system. ➢ Continuos disinfection is the most effective and cost efficient way to maximize negative bacteriological test results. This is a proactive measure that is the standard practice of all utilities in the region. ➢ A full fledged and well designed flushing program is essential to the implementation of continuous disinfection in order to address the level of service expected by the OVWU customer regarding taste, odor and color of the water supply. I respectfully request your direction on moving this forward to Mayor and Council. #3 _ . TOWN OF ORO VALLEY WATER UTILITY INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: David Hook,Water Utility Director FROM: Mary C. Kobida,Water Operations Superintendent VIA: Shirley Seng,Utility Administrator DATE: October 26, 1999 SUBJECT: Options to Reduce Total Coliform Violations CC: George Kendrick,Utility Service Operator IV Charlie Soper,Utility Service Operator III As requested, staff has investigated different options to reduce total coliform violations. By no means can staff guarantee that additional coliform"hits" will not occur. • Real-time Coliform Detection: An exhaustive search has produced no information available on real-time detection. If it exists, real-time detection would not prevent coliform events from occurring. Further, real-time detection would not ensure a negative result at a sample point or ensure system sanitation. All current detection methods rely on an incubation period of 8 to 36 hours. This allows a CFU (Colony Forming Unit) enough time to propagate within the test media to allow detection. Costs to implement are unknown as staff has been unable to locate any information on real-time detection. • Increased Sampling: Increased sampling by taking a multitude of `special' samples would allow the Utility to take corrective action prior to routine compliance sampling if an event occurs. Corrective action would still be delayed by the incubation time of the tests. All points would have to be sampled daily in order to provide the desired results. Although the system would be closely monitored, this option would not ensure negative results during compliance sampling or ensure system sanitation and should be viewed as a detection option versus a protection option. A) The Utility does not have the facility to process these samples; therefore, testing costs would increase dramatically by using external laboratory services. The laboratory cost for a single total coliform test is $18.00. Sampling 38 sites every day would cost $249,660 per year in lab fees. In addition, it would take 1 FTE a minimum of 8 hours each day to gather the samples and deliver them to the lab. Please be advised that the logistics for timely delivery of samples on a daily basis will have to be coordinated with the lab. Costs for 1 F'1'E and the necessary equipment to complete this work are estimated to be $43,000 for implementation (wages, benefits, vehicle, uniforms, gasoline, misc.). Total costs for lab fees, staff and equipment are estimated to be $293,000 during the first year. In year 2, the costs would decrease by$15,000 (the cost of a vehicle). B) The Utility could purchase Coli-lent test kits that would allow staff to perform the `special' testing. These test kits require 36 hours for incubation and cost $9.00 each. Sampling at 38 sites every day would cost $124,830 per year just for the test kits. In addition, it would take 1 FTE more than 8 hours to gather and process the samples. Costs for 1 FTE and the necessary equipment to complete this work are estimated to be $43,000 for implementation (wages, benefits, vehicle, uniforms, gasoline, misc.). Total costs for test kits, staff and equipment are estimated to be $172,000 during the first year. In year 2, the costs would decrease by$15,000 (tile cost of a vehicle). • Installation of Sampling Stations: Presently, OVWU staff take most of the monthly water quality samples from hose bibs located at private residences. Samples taken from a customer's service tap could be affected by conditions existing on the customer's premises, such as type and condition of pipe, cross-connections or cleanliness and condition of tap. In accordance with the Uniform Plumbing Code, hose bibs are equipped with vacuum breakers that are difficult to disinfect. By obtaining samples from these sites, the Utility is at risk for inaccurate or false test results that may not accurately reflect the water quality in the distribution system. To improve the accuracy and reliability of samples, the OVWLJ could install sampling stations which would be under complete control of the utility where they can be protected and will have no unpact to the customer. Additionally, sampling stations will provide a better baseline for comparison of sample results. Sampling stations are designed for the sole purpose of sample collection. They are equipped with brass sampling bibs and are easily disinfected. The sampling stations can be installed at any location without the need for access to private property. Staff's research on sampling stations has resulted in the recommendation of a sampling station manufactured by the Kupferle Foundry Co. Model 88WC is encased in a weather-proof aluminum housing and becomes a permanent installation. The material cost for 38 stations is approximately$15,200. Staff labor to install the stations on dedicated water services is estimated at $1,800. Contract labor to excavate the existing water mains and install 38 dedicated water services is estimated at $57,000. Total costs to purchase and install 38 sampling stations is estimated at $89,000 which includes 20% engineering and contingency. • Implementation of Flushing Program: The Utility currently only flushes the water distribution system when an incident occurs because of the magnitude of a bon-a-fide flushing REFER TO program and staffing needs to accomplish it. Implementation of a flushing program would not mmHg ensure negative results during routine compliance sampling or ensure the system sanitation; however, a well designed flushing program would reduce the likelihood of contamination in distributions mains. Flushing should never be considered as the only solution to water quality problems found in the distribution system. While quality control is therim purpose of flushing, careful observation of system hydraulics during flushing may indicate the location of mains with inadequate capacity,undiscovered restrictions, or closed or partially closed valves. A fire hydrant repair and maintenance program is a key component of a flushing program because, in addition to blow-off valves, fire hydrants are used to flush distribution mains. REFER TO Proper maintenance of fire hydrants not only aids the flushing process, but it is critical to fire ATTACH A7 suppression services. It is recommended that each fire hydrant be inspected and/or tested at least once every year. Another important element of a well designed flushing program is valve exercising. Planned REFER TO exercising of valves verifies valve location, determines whether or not the valve works and ATTACH q8 extends valve life by helping to clean encrustations from the valve seats and gates. It is recommended that valves be exercised at least once every year. Implementation of this program will require 2 FTE's and the equipment required to perform the work. The annual costs to implement a flushing program are estimated at $88,000. It will take approximately 1 year to implement the program. After implementation, 1 FTE should be able to maintain the program with the 2"d FTE evolving into normal staffing requirements as a result of the projected increase in the Utility's customer base. Please refer to attached literature for in- depth information provided by the American Water Works Association (AWWA). • Implementation of Continuous Disinfection: At the present, OVWU performs "batch" chlorination as needed. Batch chlorination is not an effective means of ensuring system sanitation; however, it is an effective method of reducing bacteria in an isolated area where a coliform event has occurred. Continued batch chlorination may be construed by regulatory agencies as falsifying data if the batching occurs at or near the time that routine compliance samples are taken. Implementation of continuous disinfection requires installation of chlorine injection equipment at every well. Chlorine in a water system can control or eliminate bacterial growth. It is also the most cost-effective method for control of coliform events and system sanitation used by water utilities throughout North America. Continuous disinfection has already been investigated by the Utility's engineering consultants, WestLand Resources, in preparation for the EPA requirements that may be implemented in the near future. Funds included in the budget for FY 99-00 ($50,000) and additional funds identified in the Utility's 5-year C.I.P. ($390,000) were estimates provided by WestLand for the implementation of a MIOX system that uses common salt to generate chlorine. The MIOX system was proposed prior to the release of a report on disinfection produced by Tucson Water. After reviewing the report, the possible implementation of a MIOX system was set aside for several reasons including by-product waste disposal issues, lack of long-term, historical operations and maintenance information, and the cost and time frame to implement it. In light of the Utility's recent repeated violations for total coliform, staff is recommending implementation of a system-wide continuous disinfection program. The Utility can begin immediate disinfection by injecting liquid chlorine (sodium hypochlorite) at each well site. The material costs to install injection equipment at all well sites is estimated at $44,000. The work could be performed by staff in conjunction with a subcontractor. Staff's labor costs are estimated at $ 3,000 and subcontract labor estimated at $12,000 for total labor costs of$15,000. Based on staff's experience in batch chlorinating a large area involving only 4 wells, the initial implementation of continuous disinfection will require a minimum of 2 F'1`E's (1 existing & 1 new). After successful implementation, it is anticipated that the staffing requirement will be 1 FTE; however, staff cannot make that determination at this writing. Continued operation and maintenance of a disinfection system will entail a considerable amount of work that includes, but REFER TO is not limited to, obtaining and reporting daily end point residuals throughout the distribution ATTACH#9 system, adding chlorine to pump reservoirs daily, checking pumps for proper operations daily, compliance testing for disinfection by-products, required state record keeping and reporting. Please refer to attached literature for in-depth information provided by AWWA. In addition, a flushing program MUST be implemented if continuous disinfection becomes reality. It will be difficult,if not impossible,to maintain an adequate chlorine residual without a flushing program. If the system is not flushed after the introduction of chlorine, the Utility will experience a vast number of customer complaints regarding taste, odor and color of the water. The total costs to implement a system-wide continuous disinfection program are estimated at $71,000 which includes 20% engineering and contingency. Operations and maintenance costs are estimated at $97,000 for the first year. The 2nd year's costs would be reduced by $30,000 (cost of vehicles). The `certified operator of record' has the legal responsibility of ensuring that an adequate supply of safe drinking water is delivered to every customer's tap at an adequate pressure. Failure to operate a water system in accordance with regulatory requirements could result in revocation of certification and potential fines. As the `certified operator of record', I am recommending implementation of continuous disinfection and flushing programs as soon as possible. These programs will reduce, if not eliminate, total coliform violations while providing a comfort level that the Utility is providing safe drinking water to its customers. In addition, the flushing program will allow staff to improve the overall maintenance program with regard to fire hydrants, valves and distribution mains. The Utility cannot properly implement these programs without additional staffing and still get the routine daily work completed. Please advise if further information is required and how staff should proceed. Res ectfully submitted, 1 *WM° r ., ._. . _ _ ., . . _ ii. 0., ATTACiniIVi"ENT #4 iii,,....., ,.:.:. .: . . __„. _ . _ , . .... . .. . ... _ .. ,, 10...... ........ ii.........._ 0,..... imuminir i ,R W TOWN OF ORO VALLEY WATER UTILITY INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: Chuck Sweet,Town Manager FROM: David Hook,Water Utility Director DATE: November 12, 1999 SUBJECT: Financial Summary Reference Options To Reduce Total Coliform Violations As requested, attached please find a summary of the options to reduce total coliform violations, their fiscal impact to the budget, staff recommendations and the pros and cons of staff's recommendations. If you need additional information, please let me know. ORO VALLEY WATER UTILITY OPTIONS TO REDUCE TOTAL COLIFORM VIOLATIONS Costs to Funds Included Additional Description of Solution Implement in in Budget for Funds Required Options Available FY 99-00 FY 99-00 FY 99-00 Real-time Detection Detection unknown 0 unknown Increased Sampling Performed by Lab Detection $293,000 $ 24,700 $268,300 Increased Sampling Performed by Staff Detection $172,000 $ 17,400 $154,600 Sampling Stations Detection $ 89,000 $ 2,000 $ 87,000 Flushing Program Protection $ 64,000 $ 15,000 $ 49,000 Disinfection Program Protection $128,000 $ 73,000 $ 55,000 STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff respectfully recommends that installation of sampling stations and implementation of disinfection and flushing programs begin as soon as possible. These programs will require additional funding during FY 99-00 in the amount of$191,000. SAMPLING STATIONS PROS CONS Improved accuracy & reliability of samples Cost to retrofit Sample site under control of utility Does not require access to private property Samples reflect distribution system quality Easily disinfected prior to sampling DISINFECTION PROGRAM PROS CONS Improved water quality Cost to implement Reduce/eliminate coliform violations Cost to operate & maintain (inc. staffing) Reduce bacteria build-up in water in mains Increased testing costs Increased reporting requirements Initial change in taste & odor of water Requires public relations program FLUSHING PROGRAM PROS CONS Improved water quality Time to implement Reduce likelihood of contaminants in mains Requires additional personnel Reduced color, odor& taste complaints Requires public relations program Improved maintenance of water system Promotes faster emergency response time F- w 0 w � CC 0_ < co w Q o W z z O �_ I- 0 0 0 W W O � � Z O W to O 2 0 Q > > > W > 0 wn_ F-- II-- 1-7- - p CV w 0 0 0 (n (9 cc w w w 0 w zzz ii z z p0 000 U 0 0 0 Z Z Z W W WI I I I W U- CC I-- � � CO Z Z 0 w (75 J J J — - O 2 W W W 0 0 Q > > > » W W W W > > W > ~ W F-- I.L. F- F- F- > > > > F F F- F- W Q Q Q Q EEE F_- Q Q Q Q w 00000 0 0 0 C-500 w w w E/50 zzzzz wwa. wZZ Z a. Z z O F- F- F- F- F-00 0 000 O 00 v 0 W WW W0 W0 ZZZ Z ZZ W 0 u_ u- ii._- u_ I I I I II ct i ZZZZZ (1) (I) u) (I) (l) (I) O W co U) U) co U Q Q Q J J J J J J O 2 0 0 0 0 0 Z Z z IL a_ u_ u_ u_ 2 FW- I I > (J) (J) III III I II u) 0 0 Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 >U) O ec CO F-- z z }- Z >}-- Z W C0 }. QQ � O F_ W > < 0 < F- O F- (I) J > W 0 Wz 0 0 < Q F= W u- _, 0 z o o- O . a 0 CY °- 0 0 ilia -- O _W W W 0 o w 0 z w ft > Z F- J 0 u) J u) W O F- u 0 J Y joI < Z m 0 O z z O Q J Q Q W Q Q Q > > — — (n O 0 0 c0 2 o 2 (0 O U - z wJ J zzz § § § § z zza. z � _ J Q Q O �- 0) > I- 0 H a) a) 0) a) a) 0) 0) a) 0) a) rn rn a) a) w a) o) rna) 9) c).) o) rnrn0? 97cy) F- W ti ti N N N co cY) c) r- r- N 00 00 o) Q > 0 0 '- O O O N N N O O �- O W f` r- r-. r-. r - cab 00 coOo a-) o r- r- ,- ATTACHMENT #6 Distribution Main d ciea FlushIng • This section will review the various aspects of flushing and cleaning of distribution mains. Included are methods, procedures, monitoring and evaluation, manpower and equipment requirements,safety aspects,system design,and operational considerations. This section is limited in scope to flushing mains and cleaning mains with soft swabs or pigs for improving water quality. These operations may also result in hydraulic improvements in the system. However, in many situations these operations will provide only temporary benefits. More extensive mechanical cleaning and relining of mains is a better approach to improving system hydraulics and will also result in water quality improvements.These more complex operations,however,are beyond the scope of this section. A combined program of flushing and rehabilitation(relining)may provide a more permanent solution to some water quality and hydraulic problems with less inconvenience to customers in the long run than repeated swabbing or pigging. DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS Good design practice will reduce the likelihood of contamination in distribution mains and benefit main flushing and cleaning programs. Following are points to consider when designing a flushing program: • locate blowoff valves at low points and dead ends in the grid to permit removal of sediment (See Appendix B for typical blowoff installations.), • locate hydrants,blowoffs,and valves so that flushing or repair will cause a minimum of disruption in customer service, • design the distribution system with sufficient hydraulic capacity so that mains will be flushed at adequate velocities and for long enough periods without lowering system 37 38 DISTRIBUTION-SYSTEM WA'T'ER QUALITY pressures below 20 psi (140 kPa). Use a minimum flushing velocity of 2.5 fps (0.75 m/s).A velocity of 5.0 fps(1.5 m/s)is desirable,and a velocity of 12 fps(3.6 m/s) may be needed to remove sand from river undercrossings and other subsurface inverts. (Such undercrossings or inverts may have to be removed from service for cleaning.), • design the system so that fire-fighting capability is not impacted, • make a safe means available for disposing flushing water. SYSTEM OPERATIONAL PRACTICES The following practices will aid the water utility's main flushing and cleaning programs: 1. Routinely and systematically flush and/or clean all dead-end mains and other mains subject to sediment deposition. Keep a record of complaints to help locate mains that require routine flushing.Conduct flushing in anticipation of complaints,not just after they occur.In some cases, routine flushing of all mains may be required. 2. Routinely and systematically inspect and test all hydrants and valves in the system, normally once a year. Testing hydrants may require coordination with the local fire department. 3. Record the condition of mains,valves,and other fittings removed from the system to identify causes of failure. 4. Keep records and/or maps showing the date and location of all pressure and water quality complaints. FLUSHING MAINS Mains should be routinely flushed to remove impurities as they accumulate in the distribution system,clean newly installed and repaired mains prior to and after disinfection, and remove impurities that cause complaints or are considered hazardous to public health. The procedures described here, which apply to routine flushing, generally apply to nonroutine flushing as well. Never consider flushing the only solution to water quality problems found in the distribution system. The proper design and operation of distribution facilities and the operation of an effective backflow prevention program should also be used to maintain water quality. While quality control is the primary purpose of flushing, careful observation of system hydraulics during flushing may indicate the location of mains with inadequate capacity, undiscovered restrictions, or closed or partially closed valves. Routine Flushing Program Devising an efficient flushing program requires considerable effort. Accurate records must be kept and examined with care and imagination.Keep a record of all complaints.Plot water quality complaints on a distribution map, distinguishing between different types of complaints sand in water, turbid and discolored water,taste and odor. Figure III-1 is a sample complaint form. If dirty-water complaints are received on a dead-end main,place that main on a routine flushing schedule;for example,once a month. Keep a flushing record,including the time it takes the water to clear. In this example,assume that after a few months the water clears in 6 s. This indicates that flushing should be less frequent and that the main be put on a semiannual flushing schedule. If,after four months,another complaint is received,put the main on a quarterly flushing schedule. When flushing in response to a complaint of dirty or discolored water,it may be best to flush at a very low velocity.This will bleed the dirty water from the affected main. Flushing FLUSHING ANI) CLEANING 39 -.0 Wat r EBMUD e Quality sec t'Ion I Water System Inspection CItYt; •r t�, �tf ,` a.>Y,•• i,, :�•. f RII)UISIIII BY. i TAIE`,, 4 g,' f ! IIII /I +f4.a � f.� ,f et;1,444.30 ,:-t•� l •,{'t .!? .d.j g,i r. �. v, !. "+ ,.-f.�f�l.'.� �`•f' 1�� ...1 .'I••` •�., �1 ti�lll Nl ,3 r .,,,;,.;,:. f. .;(YI<l7:ill}A',�,1��•t,,.r.Tj' ., 'Y ..1•1 ...1' .,. ,. , { 4 ,i:',4...',`•• ' CUSIOMIR, _ . ;< K'I�ADDAISS s�s ,.. ., t,.: .6 ;' n r' '' ( I Al S S P E.'r r i.:44,,t�.44i6�r'��• ,,:o.,..as.,,:tf•i s;„?.,,J.. •ft:• ..._ ,. , -...,-, ,. • .y. %•4•.—, S 'r .. , .:. _ ., - 1'. i.' - ., . �,- ,,:i , q�t ' f< • ,t fEASON FOR INSPECTION w ;, w r o.CONDITION' beii. tt s' t FIRST NOTI•CED: ` 4 • • taste Oddr 0 Sediment • ;= .i.:!,',',..',,,-:4,•":' 0 Illness .El Organismsi . Color + M ,•., + 0 Sample 0 Turbidit ~ME IER NUMBER SIZE READING I!ABACI 'IAP NIIMIII II —ACCOUN I Nil. EAP LdCAIEp _, I I,`±. U1 CSI SIF i(t ' nN S I DI 01 _ ' REPORT OF INSPECTION , ' t.Okks 1.SEEPAGES, f: POOR FLOW _ ._ lMAP NUMBER t t CuSTOIuiin NOTIFIED tbl f�ilfi','• ' ; DISIRICt , . ttt.... , ,, . r .., '. ZONE ' ,? , , MAIN SIZE s.. f:, .•,.f. .. tlAtic rfasst►kl :..iii.,,t .r.• x.5: PSI °,CbIsiSUk44 WAtEFi.PIPE 1•'! ., <• i ,, of�"Sffe^ •i �, .f` � •! 1' '�F 4 a • '. t ... 'A '�,1l�.n j., i�.'��:y ! 1' "} �,' ;�'„yt►, L'rf•.i�.l�" :ydr{��. , t ! (, .�' t Y ! � � ,' - �•❑if{ 1 t ;CONSUMER:. F �.: 4 :x�,,�{ ,4 ; .RtautAlt&ORtSSllkl r;.ti!t^., ' ." oicit �.7 �� G r.,..,4,4.-.-ii-i,.\...,!1,1 1 �,. .r :trp�. ') a.c. ->. -. 'Sa'., � , ;it ''.11.1Vit ¢ t r 1, •2'r.Pt :� • C7p�- /;'}� /�'f{} •� r ,.- f:• l:Ef3�I��It�U(L11,I�.I��I � �d�Ii�Ri�'�+f tfSL.,�1b`l �=r at��C I�i1ERtir,::.,',;.0i,':,;':‘,,';', =� �!.♦:,�'t,, f�IV IV�''.1 �''�i,ryyr i � '>' tY'. �� :I�,t. V I V.t `.f,..'�.'1.t �;.,I �. � '>#.:t 4t.,'"1 4.7.:,'..4.. .w:'i° 'r�{•��IjP�" .�, 4. K' (w. �A"1 .. if/- %'• ,,� Y' ,?'•� S>} .l.* .,f t *k�'.f' •0 f..,', y $',.',!,,,;, 1• tw. ,�l �•'1 v 4. Iii4.:(6,010. k ' aF M. ".t' ,‘•,,,��.}4'•r r „r' � 1 '��:�.> iiiikt, .S4 +•� ;�,: �(+. s.�' r::� �s��.� �r.y5i'.,1Siii' rab.0 ' t •�. �� i it.�'. i•'# ,; /r �:.:� 3.�••'Y � .� , %r}tl{. ti...� t. vI� ��i,•,. .:;k9�1• �j.., i•�.,{Y t1}y Y I b Utt tit• R,AR1E SItU' �::. i '»r ,t +y' w :, ,5.:'SFY,1«;Y �.1 .�, ," �, ',.�. •i w 'f 7• ,RI<� ,f'.i}!t.e ,r r 2 ._ h:,,. x' ;8.t• ti.,, 5s "4 3ff. y, ,Y<i'' ,`:r1'' rr •1x 'a_t ?t.^c ,t,.' c. r .}`•ez•, ,1 Rat.:*,!'; :�. ,• 'rY.. :i '� .�.:'l';?r. .• 's .�.- .c..', �" � .C. � �-•d`'...'�1'�1Gu •�n3>i�� ..li. 't.� ':'�?Z�, '6< �LLIJ. -,,t.,:.:;.: ,'3 ,� F •r,3 .•/ r,. ,,�, 1, s.JI �':. 1.g;11 A.� L^` V, i4 1t y{j '� f: .fit Til i'r? ,. � ,�,eye, .�� '`�•' .:�^4.:..f ,,.iam'� _.t....�'...:�_ _ i�-17'2' en �.: � .,� F-� �.�.-1 P i i��)- �� ` t'� • • �}� ��'''A•. t� �.�j. ..,�s r .t. .;, S.'.�7x it�.is .,,,} t r,-� 4�J � Z'�. �•��` j%.,. 4 9{„. .� t. t�� •'{;. t i .�; t k'yy�_� w" •'rte .,,..- c' HS 1:.f,.?1'' .e, , v"1 5 1,. Lv. f}, i',: y, !' M,Y'Y. 't. "+ t$<,,. t'. R."i .i�` �(1.,j� s q:w'. r' •d 't IQ � ' :t.' .��j,3i'' r f,, 4/1 <"�' '�, _��y. gk'l:i� t,l;, NN r' � ,e,,t♦ri- �/5{i^�,��' •� d 'i?�yY.`: a, . 1{ .uQ� t[. atif%, � •+t�t� �;,..�� w� i:r! 'w:::i., l•fJ '9.;w,ws` :, r '. ! ♦.• Y..•.,•`•.-L'.'.. ?'i'r.V::ii..'. '. 0.., Y4.-� .i , 6. _ J !f A' '`.i !t. i•• F, ??.x• �+:.M a• - ts' t1[f�L� +t'f.t urt.tt:. .�,..� ...�. 'n .w' 3",.. .,:.-..'2.i.,44,--; '�«` t -� f r,L�•:1`t•K ,, ,C�• r ,;. •.,sy;i : � ''rkT .�,:,#,. '} .f^.;r.. --;"4,:i::-: q._t.- - ♦. ,'tr .Qilfk y +...': 1 •��r ?' ,r � p r'•< �. (:u Pt 3�' �' ,+: r t 'K.'. ''r t.l --.-:e-,;;-,7,-.4.,,:,,,..-:::,.,:,:,.. r +7 :h .l.' , ;�,'Y; A '.,„ 4.- is �, .'f <; , ,`[�f , P, r;,:��.{'Iw ,�..�.7.t t.• � 7. •.:F FFS s �,.i � `j Y 5�+ �`� DMI+' .t. "a... .a.....+'�,' 4 �� -.�. ; r ,t.'� .S � '(.'� ��.' '�.�,'�ii y,i','' r ' { ,r.. '�. H. �•r ,..,.,-ii,. .##, 1. +st,• ym.,t�. 'n;,. d'�,'C�c+•,•4.r,,t; �'.�„ .!�.U:,t,.4'�!' # �"�;; i F,'r.};' ��•, 2 �,t` !F 1":.e,. t�� er•�',�'►`!(' •ir '� �:tt vff 7.� (.P;'t y;,...,,.,Y�� :ja ,�}, ti out �.�.ry:t ;'�: !��+.:4;,',,t,..,....4:,ti.� 5. .� {, + �� :#,�• ,..n 1; vy...t S c,il i .7 tv t'Y ,,,t �`,:f `,,+..,�,, t"5.�i S +�. .i•'t' 1',�..`{'�1 h ou/ ✓. >. t t • '� r'• �y .I'a. �( ve/' t., :t�f r: rfti 5 '�t. ..1p.� !!+Ih�. .•t r"yr. �' ',,yf f 5 v: i r ♦ t� ,. :c;. 7'. "'yf :' .Z. _l v,' ..ut.:,. i. •.4 �,rY'... ,.. .a t..t+....i':S.Y,..l.;f 4�,Et25�.:r.$c.�til! ..i,itiu +il.v sll:...tl• �,� ��w.. 'i+. ir• `1� +: '��Al�i.�'.w1 ,3�:t: ��.�.�r� G-23•12/76 Figure Ill-1 Sample Complaint Form at a high rate may further disturb pipeline deposits causing more dirty water.Flushing may then have to be postponed until a thorough system flushing can be arranged. Flush often enough to anticipate complaints but conserve water,energy,and manpower by flushing no more than necessary. Do not be surprised if one state agency requests you to flush while another requests that you start an aggressive water conservation plan. If you do not have records of water quality complaints and main flushing operations,it will be difficult to show the need to flush. A request by a regulatory agency to routinely flush when you believe it is not necessary should be appealed.Provide data that adequately shows there is no need for routine flushing. During a drought when water conservation is essential,the public's awareness of water wastage is heightened,and it maybe necessary to justify or explain flushing operations to the public. It may be necessary to eliminate flushing except under special conditions when drinking water standards may be violated if flushing is not carried out. When setting up a flushing program,remember that heavier sediments accumulate in larger mains and form small mounds similar to the ripples on the bottom of a sandy stream. When one of these mounds forms at a tee with a smaller main and there is flow into the smaller main,the mound is disrupted.Most of the sand is then suspended in the water in the smaller main. Water quality problems will originate in the small mains,but flushing them will often be a waste; your customers have already flushed them for you. A point to consider when establishing your flushing program is when to perform the flushing operation. Flushing at night has several advantages. Water demands are lower at night, and flushing at this time will not lower residual pressures in the system as much as flushing during the day. Day flushing may lower distribution reservoir levels,reducing the 40 DISTRIBUTION-SYSTEM WATER QUALITY fire-fighting reserve. Flushing at night while reservoirs are filling will minimize this problem. Flushing will probably be safer with the reduced traffic at night. While the flushing of foul water from the system at night will be kept out of the public eye,it will be more difficult for crews to identify discolored water by artificial light. It may also be difficult to see where the water drains to. Pay attention to where flushing water discharges. Prevent the water from flooding lawns,basements,and underground utility facilities,such as telephone and electrical vaults. Do not discharge heavily contaminated water into sensitive aquatic environments.Flushing water may require dechlorination to protect aquatic life in natural streams. For dechlorinating procedures,see the section entitled"Operating Procedures." In some cases, water may have to be flushed into tanker trucks. A final point to consider is the effect fire department flow tests may have on water quality. Avoid trouble by offering to cooperate with the fire department and perhaps combine your flushing program with their hydrant testing program. Public Relations Public awareness of a flushing program and its purpose can be helpful.However,the public may consider flushing wasteful, particularly during dry periods if the process is not explained to them. 'The water utility's public image may suffer,especially if it has an active water conservation program. Prepare anyone engaged in flushing to answer waste complaints or questions. Flushing of mains may also cause temporary delivery of dirty water to local consumers. This may result in complaints if consumers are not aware of the flushing program. Consequently,the public should be notified of the purpose and of the temporary disruptions main flushing may cause. Portable signs can be set up at flushing sites,and utility business offices and local fire departments can be notified prior to the flushing of specific areas. In addition, the news media may be willing to help notify the public. Operating Procedures Prepare and follow written procedures during the flushing operations. Following are suggested flushing procedures: 1. Review distribution maps and preplan an entire month's flushing.Divide this work into 5-day units for each week.Determine the initial clean source of flushing water,sections of mains to be flushed at one time,the valves to be used in each case,and the order in which the sections will be flushed. Start at or near a source and work outward so as not to disturb sediments in unflushed portions of the system. If possible,schedule work so that each zone can be completed by the end of the day or so that a natural stopping point is reached.If this is not done, fire protection may be severely restricted. Ensure that all flushing water used comes from areas previously cleaned or from mains large enough to resist sediments being stirred up by the flow. Keep the length of main being flushed as short as possible,especially on small pipe. This will minimize pressure.losses in the system and the length of time each customer may be delivered dirty water. 2. Assure that you have an adequate amount of flushing water at sufficiently high pressures and that you can dispose of the water safely.The rate of flow required to produce a velocity of 2.5 fps (0.75 m/s) in pipes of various diameters is shown in Table III-1. A flushing velocity as high as 12 fps (3.6 m/s) may he needed to remove sand from river undercrossings. Do not flush a large main supplied by a single smaller main; the volume available is usually inadequate for flushing. Hydrant pressure or Pitot gauges are useful in determining flushing rates. Figure 111-2 includes flushing rate and velocity formulas to be used when determining flushing rates. i FLUSHING AND CLEANING 41 Table III-1 Required Flow and Openings to Flush Pipelines with 280-kPa(40-psi)Residual Pressure in Water Main* Flow Required to Produce Hydrant Outlet Nozzles Pipe Size 2.5 fps Velocity Orifice Size No. Size in. mm gpm L/s in. mm in. mm 4 100 100 6.3 15/16 24 1 21/2 65 6 150 220 14 13/8 35 1 2 1/2 65 8 200 390 25 17/s 48 1 2 I/2 65 10 250 610 39 25/to 59 1 21/2 65 12 300 880 56 213/16 71 1 2 t/2 65 16 400 1600 99 35/s 92 2 2 1/2 65 *With 280-k1'a(40-psi)pressure in the main with the hydrant flowing to atmosphere,a 6 3-mm(21/2-in.)hydrant outlet nozzle will discharge approximately 63 L/s(1000 gpm)and a 115-mm(41/2-in.)hydrant nozzle will discharge approximately 160 L/s(2500 gpm).Always check to ensure that pressures are not reduced below 140 kPa(20 psi). tSnuree:Standard for Disinfecting Water Mains. AWWA Standard 0601-R1. AWWWWA, Denver,Colo.(1981). Size of Main Swabs P d Q V Time D L Pitot Disch. Flush. Flush. Req'd. Flushed Press. Dia. Length #of Runs Press. Opening Rate Velocity to Clear Water Date Time Location Zone in. ft. #per Run psi in. m gp fps min. Description Q=Flushing rate in gpm V=Flushing velocity in main in fps d=Diameter of nozzle or opening in inches t)=Diameter of main being flushed in inches P=Pitot gauge pressure at nozzle or opening in psi 0.409 Q Q=26.8 d2t/V V——D2 Figure 111-2 Main Flushing and Swabbing Log Table 111-2 Amounts of Chemicals Required to Neutralize Chlorine in Water Grams Required to Neutralize Chemical Name Chemical Formula 1 g of Chlorine Sulfur dioxide SO2 0.96 Sodium bisulfate NaHSO3 1.4 Sodium sulfite Na2SO3 1.7 Sodium thiosulfate Na2S2O3• 5H20 1.4 42 DISTRIBUTION-SYSTEM WATER QUALI`1'Y 3. Notify the following prior to flushing: • local water utility business office and fire department, • other utilities, such as gas, electric, and telephone companies, who may have underground facilities in the area, • those customers who may be inconvenienced by reduced pressure or dirty water, including - food-service establishments; — hospitals, nursing homes, and other health facilities; — customers with special medical needs, such as home dialysis. 4. Isolate from the system the section to be flushed. Close valves slowly to prevent water hammer. 5. Open the fire hydrant or blowoff valve slowly until the desired flow rate is obtained. When flushing from a dry-barrel fire hydrant,use the gate valve upstream of the hydrant for throttling purposes. Open the hydrant valve fully to prevent water from escaping into the ground through the fire hydrant barrel drain. 6. Direct flushing water away from traffic,pedestrians,and private land. Ensure that flushing water drains to an appropriate storm sewer or watercourse without causing excessive flooding of streets,underground utility vaults,or private property;the utility may be held responsible for any accidents or damage related to the released water. 7. Prevent heavily contaminated water from discharging to sensitive natural watercourses. Check with the local sewer department for conditions of disposal to the sanitary sewer. If sewer disposal is unavailable, flushing into a tanker truck may be necessary. 8. Dechlorinate waters discharging to sensitive natural streams. Following are the steps of dechlorination: a. Estimate the rate of flushing.This may be estimated from previous hydrant flow tests or flushing data. If no data is available,open flushing valve just long enough to take a Pitot gauge measurement. Calculate the flushing rate using the formula given in Figure III-2 (page 41). b. Determine the chlorine residual in the main using a suitable field test kit. c. Prepare a dechlorinating agent solution to be pumped into the flushing discharge using a positive displacement chemical feed pump. Amounts of various dechlorinating agents required to neutralize chlorine are given in Table III-2 (page 41). Sample calculations for a dechlorination example are summarized in Figure III-3. d. Simultaneously flush main and pump dechlorinating agent into the discharge. 9. Check system pressure at a nearby hose bibb.If pressure is less than 20 psi(140 kPa), throttle the flow through the hydrant. When possible,check system pressures in higher or remote areas of the pressure zone to ensure that pressures do not drop below 20 psi(140 kPa). This may necessitate a two-man crew with radios. 10. Record the date, time, location, pressure zone, size and length of main; and estimate the flushing flow rate and velocity,and time required to clear.Take samples noting the water's odor,color,turbidity,and the presence of any visible objects or organisms. See Figure III-2 for a sample flushing log sheet. 11. When the flushing water is clear, close the hydrant or blowoff valves slowly. 12. Immediately mark closed valves on a map and erase the marks when the valves are reopened. Do not depend on your memory. If,at the end of a day's work,valves normally open are closed alert the fire department. 13. Proceed to the next section to be flushed and repeat these procedures.Figures III-4 through III-11 depict some of the primary activities of a main flushing operation. ATTACHMENT #7 Distribution 0 & M 245 Most valves are located along roadways, and operators Some general inspection and maintenance procedures who locate,exercise,or dig up valves for repair are exposed used for hydrants include: to traffic hazards. Routine work is usually done during daylight, but traffic must be warned at all times. Motorists 1• Inspect for leakage and make corrections when neces- must be notified in advance of blocked lanes or work along sary. side of traveled lanes. This can be done by using high-level 2. Open hydrant fully, checking for ease of operation. warning signs, barricades with lights for night work, traffic cones, warning flags, and flagmen. Repair crew vehicles 3. Flush hydrant to waste (take care to direct flow). with flashers can be positioned to alert traffic and to provide 4. Remove all nozzle caps and insect for thd de physical protection for the crew from oncoming traffic at the p p reaams g from impact or cross threading. Wire-brush the nozzle work site. Supervisors should hold a job-site meeting with operators to explain the task, the equipment to be used for and cap threads. Clean and lubricate outlet nozzle threads, preferably with a dry graphite base lubricant, the job,the hazards,the safety procedures to follow and the safety equipment needed. and check for ease of operation. Be sure that the outlet nozzle cap gaskets are in good condition. For additional information on valve maintenance, see 5. Replace caps,tighten with a s Chapter 18, Maintenance, Section 18.26, "Valves," in WA- g spanner wrench,e ch,then back off on the threads slightly so that the caps will not be TER TREATMENT PLANT OPERATION, Volume II, in this series of manuals. excessively tight but will leave sufficient frictional resis- tance to prevent removal by hand. QUESTIONS ~' 6. Check for any exterior obstruction that could interfere with hydrant operation during an emergency. Write your answers in a notebook and then compare your 7. Check dry-barrel hydrants for ' answers with those on page 277. rY y proper drainage. 5.71A How can water utilities avoid serious valve operating 8. Clean exterior of hydrant and repaint if necessary. problems? 9. Be sure that the auxiliary valve is in the fully opened 5.71 B Why should operators be able to quickly find valves? position. 5.71C Why should valves be exercised regularly? 10. If a hydrant is inoperable, tag it with a clearly visible marking to prevent loss of time by fire fighting crews if 5.71D How can you tell if cavitation is occurring at a valve? an emergency should arise before the hydrant is re- paired. Immediately report the condition of this fire 5.72 Fire Hydrants hydrant to your fire department. The different types of hydrants available are described in 11. Prepare a record of your inspection and maintenance Chapter 3, "Distribution System Facilities." Operators re- operations and any repair work. A recommended Hy- sponsible for hydrant inspections should be thoroughly drant Maintenance Report and Master Record are familiar with the various types of hydrants used in their shown in Figure 5.42. system.If questions which are difficult to answer arise about the fire hydrant or its operation, a good source of informa- Everyone working with hydrants should be aware that tion is the hydrant supplier. Contact the supplier whenever when operating a dry-barrel hydrant, it must be opened necessary to obtain descriptive literature, operation and completely so that the drain will become FULLY closed. If maintenance instructions, parts manuals or assistance on this is not done, the drain will remain partially open and particular problems. water seeping through it could saturate the drain field and In general, fire hydrants should be inspected and main- result in hydrant damage from freezing. tained twice a year. These operations are often done in the Hydrants can be partially protected against freezing spring and the fall. However, each hydrant should also be covering them with a box which can be quicklyremoved by emoved inspected after each use. Inspect dry-barrel hydrants after when the hydrant must be used. To keep hydrants from use, especially during freezing weather, to assure that the freezing that won't drain in the winter due to frozen condi- drain remains open when the hydrant is not in use. tiong,use propylene glycol or some other eatable substance that won't freeze or cause water quality problems. Frozen A good source of information on fire hydrants is AWWA's hydrants may be thawed by same methods used for thawing Manual M17, INSTALLATION, OPERATION, AND MA/NTE- NANCE OF FIRE HYDRANTS.16 The operator is referred to pipe. Electric current thawing can be used. Live steam this manual for detailed procedures. injected through a hose into the hydrant barrel is a relatively quick, inexpensive and effective method of thawing. Standardization of hydrants minimizes the requirement for Volocking parts, simplifies repair procedures,.V!' p p p duras, and allows 0; replacingonlydefective a ,,�. elito. �,, � , p rts. Every water utility should 1 keep a basic stock of repair parts on hand for immediate 4/ use. If spare parts are not readily available, YOUR communi- j o. ty's fire-protection A it% 4(4 - � �, i� y p on system could be jeopardized. lif 11691111 Piti The repair job most often performed on fire hydrants is replacing main valves. Therefore, try to keep an ample ..4:.. 1 p :.e. , supply of main valves in your stockroom. Other important p nt items to keep on hand are drain parts,seat rings,stem seals 16 Obtain from Computer Services, AWWA, 6666 West Quincy Avenue, Denver, Colorado 80235. Order No. 30017. Price to members, $9.00;nonmembers, $11.00 246 Water Distribution • HYDRANT MAINTENANCE REPORT FIRE HYDRANT MASTER RECORD XYZ WATER UTILITY XYZ Water Utility Hydrant No Manulacture►l Date Hydrant No. Location Type .MVO Inlet Caps Missing Replaced Greased Bury Hose Nopte Size Thread Type Chains Missing Replaced Freed Pumper Nozzle Size Thread Type Paint O.K.. Repainted Installed by Date W/0 No. Cost Operating Nut, Turns to Open Oper Nut O.K. Greased Replaced Location Line Static Pressure Noules O.K. Caulked Replaced Date Inspected Tested Repaired Painted Opened by Cost Remarks Valve&Seat O.K. Replaced Packing O.K. Tightened Replaced Drainage O K. Corrected Flushed Minutes •Nozzle Open • Pressure Static Residual Flow gpm Branch Valve Condition Any Other Defects Akenue Property Line Water Main—Size/Type o N Inspected By � Defects Corrected By In order to carry out a meaningful inspection and maintenance program,it is essential that each hydrant be recorded as to location,make, type,size,and date of installation. Fig. 5.42 Hydrant maintenance report and master record forms (Reprinted from OPFLOW,by permission.Copyright 1981,The American Water Works Association) and packing, and "traffic-damage" repair kits. These items 5.72A What information can be obtained from a fire hydrant should be stocked for each of the various types and sizes of supplier? hydrants in your system. The number of parts to keep on hand depends on the past experience of your water utility. 5.728 When should fire hydrants be inspected? Fire hydrant vandalism causes serious problems for water 5.72C List some general fire hydrant inspection and mainte- utilities. Illegally opened fire hydrants cause damage due to nance procedures. flooding and washouts.Consumers can suffer damages due 5.72D What happens when a dry-barrel hydrant is operated to a lack of water and pressure. Water may not be available with the valve only partially open? to fight fires when needed and the loss of water results in a loss of revenue for the water utility. 5.73 Meters Fire hydrant caps or guards can be installed on the tops of 5.730 Testingof Meters fire hydrants to eliminate fire hydrant vandalism. Fire hydrants are usually the only part of the distribution Water meters can over- or under-register because of system regularly seen by the general public. Frequent paint- wear, deposits, or turbulence resulting from valves and ing of hydrants creates a favorable impression and is, fittings. Over-registration rarely occurs. Each utility should therefore, an excellent public relations tool. establish a schedule for periodic meter testing based on meter use, water quality, age of meter, cost of testing and water revenue loss. The age of a meter reflects the degree QUESTIONS of wear of the meter parts which also increase when the water is corrosive or abrasive. The potential revenue loss Write your answers in a notebook and then compare your from inaccurate meters which almost always under-register answers with those on page 277. must also be considered. ATTCHM1NT #8 Distribution 0 & M 241 CHAPTER 5. DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE (Lesson 3 of 4 Lessons) 5.71 Valves Conditions of each system will determine how often the valves should be exercised, but in general it is recommend- Distribution system shut-off valves are provided primarily ed that all valves be exercised at least oncePI to isolate small areas for emergency maintenance. Most of a year. Planned ed exercising of valves verifies valve location, determines these valves, therefore, suffer from lack of operation rather whether or not the valve works and extends valve life by than from wear. A comprehensive program of inspection, helpingto clean encrustations from the valve exercising and maintenance of valves on a regular basis can seats and gates. Any valves which do not completely close or open help water utilities avoid potentially serious problems when the need to use a valve arises. should be replaced. Valves whichleak around the stems should be repacked. To determine that a valve is closed, an aquaphone or other listening device can be used. ValvesIvvEA should be exercised in both directions fully closed and fully opened and the number of turns and direction of operation recorded. Valves o eratin in 'p g a direction opposite to that LA JL ��i which is standard for the system need to be identified and this fact recorded. The condition of the valve packing, stem, p g �' stem nut, and gearing should be noted. A timely mainte- )� nance program should be initiated II ] r____ p 9 to correct any problems L_ found during the inspection and exercising. Two types of hydraulic problems can occur while— ...._ \\,\ rF ' operat- � ing a valve, cavitation (CAV-uh-TAY-shun) and water ham- -- —. xi mer. Cavitation results when a partial vacuum(voids)occurs too. 70, Ilion the downstream side of a valve and a small section of the ii pipe is filled with low-pressure vapor pockets from the 411 water. These pockets will collapse downstream (implode) and in doing so create a mechanical shock that causes small chips of metal to break away from the valve surfaces. A ,‘1 ,,,<-1-- --- `~ noisy or vibrating valve may be an indication that cavitation is occurring and the valve may eventually have to be A''� replaced if cavitation is permitted to go on indefinitely.Water hammer is caused by closing a valve too quickly. The water flow is suddenly stopped, shock waves are generated, and Operators should know EXACTLY where to go to shut off any valves at any time in case of a line break or other the resulting large pressure (even though very brief) in- emergency. When breaks occur in water mains, crews often creases throughout the system can result in significant experience problems in FINDING valves whose locations damage.Water hammer can be prevented by always closing are marked incorrectly on system maps. Other problems the valves slowly, regardless of size or type. include valves that won't close or open after they are Valves can be operated either manually or by a power located. Time is often wasted looking for valves and after actuator. Manual operation of large valves not only can be finding them getting them to work.The same devices used to back-breaking labor, but is a slow process and, therefore, locate mains are used to locate valves that may be lost or time consuming and costly. Power equipment (Figures 5.38 buried under earth or snow. and 5.39) is available which will cut valve operating time Routine valve inspections should be conducted and the considerably. Most types of power equipment are portable, following tasks performed: fast and efficient and can be powered by a portable air compressor, an electric generator,or a gas engine. A power 1. Verify the accuracy of the location of the valve boxes on valve operator can also be used to accurately count the the system map (if incorrect, CHANGE THE MAP), number of turns to open or close a valve. 2. After removing the valve box cover, inspect the stem and One of the most important factors in maintaining distribu- nut for damage or obvious leakage, tion system valves is the availability of current and correct 3. Close the valve fully,if possible,and record the number of maps of the distribution system. A portion of a typical turns to the fully closed position, distribution system map for valves andhydrants is shown in Figure 5.40. Each utility should use this type of map, verify 4. Reopen the valve to reestablish system flows, and often that it is accurate, and keep the map up-to-date of any changes such as replacements or additions. Some water 5. Clean valve box cover seat. Sometimes covers on valve departments equip their service trucks with "gate books" boxes will come off when traffic passes over them due to which carry all of the pertinent valve information dirt in the seat. including location, direction of turning to close, and number of turns Exercising(opening and closing a valve)should be done at required. the same time the valve inspection is made. Some manufac- Maintaining current records is as important as maintaining turers recommend that a valve stem never be left in a fully current maps. A typical two-sided valve record form i open or closed position. They recommend that after fully shown in Figure 5.41. The location of a valve is obtained opening or closing a valve, back off the stem by one turn. from a controlled survey bench mark or permanent refer- 242 Water distribution once point.The make of Valve is important because different Separate pressure zones in distribution systems maybe makes have different operating characteristics.The use of a established byclosingvalves, thus increasingthe possibility simple valve humbering system keyed to up-to-date maps is of problems related to the incorrect use of valves. Unex- recommended. This procedure has proven to be quite plained problems with pressure and excessive operation of helpful in locating valves rapidly and In communicating with pumps in a given area have been traced to valves left closed others about particular valves. or open in error.When crews change shifts during a project, Road improvements require constant attention from water valve closures and openings information must be ex- distribution system operators to insure that valves are not changed.Crew chiefs must be sure all valves are restored to lost. Valve boxes can be graded out or covered with pave- proper positions whenever anyone discovers a valve in the wrong position. ►Hent+The center lines of roads,curb lines, and right-of-way lines used as reference points for locating valves can be Repairing in-line(installed)gate valves is a difficult task. If changed. Changed measurements must be noted on valve repairs are needed, proper advance planning is important. record forms. The valves needing repairs must be located.The valves that will be used to isolate a damaged valve must be in good Corrosion is a problem for valves in some areas and can operating condition. The necessary repair parts must be cause failure of bonnet and packing gland bolts. This is obtained in advance. When ordering repair parts, be sure to apparent when stem leakage occurs or when a valve is include the size, make, direction of opening, year of manu- closed and the bonnet separates from the body. Stainless facturer, and other pertinent information in order to assure steel bolts can be used for replacement, and the valve that the proper repair parts will be received. should be encased in polyethylene wrap. Until the valve is isolated and opened up, it Is difficult to Valves left closed in error can cause severe problems In a determine what part of the valve is damaged. Therefore, (iistribution system. Construction and maintenance crews make sure that all replacement parts are available before ()perate valves as they do their work. Contractors and isolating the necessary section of the water main, excavat- plumbers sometimes operate valves without permission. Ing the valve, and making the repairs. I, -Hil ..0!!! 0 . _ 0, G , n, .•y 11,tr 10 00111U. 1 , ,,,„ , __mi. __ 0 a `iN/E111 , I . APfl 'Mo. ,,rio: t AMINO ......i .. 1 Al • .11' • • •�i••.•►•.r••••A IbI••+11mrill moo re..-.:`•••"•r•••. P14t• �' . 4 • VI% r .. 1, • r�•: •fir►' r•.• O••, D• ;�NRiit�tir•ti�%�ir• r.rO 404.1%-4110.eh al fla•sitii:it 4IP i 1pr. •g 4_280 iliicjita 7........4,4:,,I; .misiej-iii• -••• , -I...e.Ida do 'lk 11140. 4.,771. ,• di I 4. ...ob ....... .e-vil .6.t ! *....• .. 4• a. Alb• • r. '• 0 6 °Os . •• • ',•w`` .• ea, .,,,,,,,,www„,,,,„,,,L.....e.0 ..e.. • /. ..• alp., ;rr•• I . •••..w•• 0 . .�••. 'CIL''.4)::eV re.•.... • r • ••. lh',•'••••�6• !'.L . '.• 6•i ••,'•..l .•.1111 6 11$9 �i r•y i��•v.71'01 .':•. • i •• iv , r. 6 ; • :•e• �•`.�! • i •• a a . - • t • . • * • • • Fig. 5.38 How powered valve operators work (Permission of E.H.Wachs Company) 132 WATER DISTRIBUTION 3-5. Records and Maintenance The following section discusses some basic valve-maintenance procedures and the importance of maintaining accurate records, not only on the specifics of the valve but also on the exact location of the valve. Records Before maintenance can be performed on any valve, accurate maps and records must be available providing all pertinent information, if the valve is buried,the exact location must be recorded using stationary landmarks. A sketch or drawing for referencing each valve on the valve record card (Figure 3-40) should be included,showing the location of stakes, buildings, or other reference points, where necessary. The master file of valve-maintenance record cards (Figure 3-41) should be kept in the valve book. A copy of the book should be made available to the maintenance crew. To assist in locating valves, a dip needle or a metal detector can be used to locate valve boxes (Figure 3-42). After the valve has been located, errors in location tie-ins should be recorded on the service card and corrections made on the appropriate valve record card. Reference points or monuments that have been removed or relocated should be noted. in addition to location, the type of valve installed should also be noted. If the valve is of a large diameter, it should be stated whether it is a vertical or horizontal installation, direct or gear operated, and if a bypass valve has been installed. If the valve is not manually operated,complete information should be recorded concerning the actuator's type, power source,and type of operation— local, remote, or automatic. Line pressure may also be noted as well as other information that would be of benefit to the operator. When ordering repair parts, it is essential to know the manufacturer and date of manufacture.This information is cast onto the surface of the valve or noted on attached plates. The size and direction of opening must also be known before parts can be ordered. For maintenance purposes,the number of turns required for full opening and closing should be noted as well as whether the normal position of the valve is open, closed, or partially open. All this information can be kept on file cards and/or in a loose-leaf notebook. Maps with numbered sections to correspond with valve records assist in locating buried valves. A master file should always be kept up-to-date, and copies of working documents should be made available for field use. Any discrepancies between the master file and records should be noted by the crew and updated on the master file. Maintenance Once the valve has been located, inspection and maintenance can begin. Remove the valve-box cover and use a flashlight to inspect the valve. Check the valve box for any damage or evidence of leakage in the area of the stuffing box or 0-ring seal plate. 134 WATER DISTRIBUTION ' • V t iE 1 •• 110 •• '• ;k4.7:-e;',,„ • :,174, • r�"yl' S j iii • 1-.7,104.1•;,.; 'mo►ww,,�W ♦ . .:/ .. st� it .rt " iet* 1 1 Courtesy of Metrotech Corp. Figure 3-42. Locating Valve Box With Metal Detector Remove dirt,gravel,sand,and small rocks from valve boxes using a valve-box cleaner. Note whether the valve is found open or closed. An aquaphone or other similar device or method can be used to ensure that a valve is closed. Where possible,check the operation by closing the valve completely and then opening it. Do not close valves completely on primary transmission mains or dead-end mains if service would be interrupted or severely curtailed. To inspect these, close the valve most of the way, then immediately reopen it. Check the packing. Dry packing will cause difficult operation at all points of valve movement. If the packing leaks excessively,use a socket wrench with a long extension for tightening. Check that leakage drains from the valve box or vault. If necessary, replace the packing. Gate valves. Gate valves can be repacked without being removed from service. Before repacking, open the valve all the way. This prevents excessive leakage when the packing or entire stuffing box is removed by drawing the stem thrust collar tightly against the bonnet on a nonrising-stem valve. Clean the stuffing box. Remove all the old packing from the inside of the stuffing box with a packing hook. Clean all adhering particles from the valve stem and polish it with fine emery cloth. Insert new split-ring packing in the stuffing box and tamp it into place with the packing gland. Stagger ring splits. After the stuffing box is filled, place a few drops of oil on the stem,assemble the gland,and tighten it down on the packing. On valves with 0-ring seals, use the same procedure to replace the 0-ring above the thrust collar. Check for a bent stem. Bent stems allow comparatively free operation when the valve is nearly open or closed but cause considerable binding in the middle portion of travel. Broken or stripped stems or stem nuts 136 WATER DISTRIBUTION PILOT ..:= VALVE h —4 ( l' ! L ir . IP*6:1111 I: liti01$1" i i10.7 .11••••••••.• i .'' •' , fj ` .x#44 fb' 0 } . " (tip .' ',,,4.k i Courtesy of Cla-Val Co.,Newport Beach,Calif. Figure 3-43. Pilot Valve the control to its original setting. Grease the pilot settings with general-purpose grease.To close an open altitude valve,back off the nut on the diaphragm spring setting one or two turns. Return the nut to its exact original position after inspection. Maintenance procedures after isolation of the pilot valve include the following: • Dismantle the valve, remove the valve lid covering the piston chamber, withdraw the piston. • Inspect the walls of the piston and cylinder liner for scoring,and smooth and polish with fine emery cloth. • Inspect the piston face and seat; replace, if necessary. • Check for leakage,keep port open at all times;leakage here indicates a worn piston face or a scored piston or liner surface; constant leakage from pilot-valve waste lines indicates a defective pressure valve, which must be reground or replaced; leakage through the main valve indicates worn seat rings. Exercising valves. Planned exercising of valves keeps them clean and operable, extends their life, and pinpoints problem valves allowing time for scheduling repair or replacement. Proper exercising of valves cannot be overemphasized. Any valve in a system can fail to operate at any time due to lack of proper exercising. In general, valves should be exercised at least once a year and critical valves should be inspected more often. However, the age and water conditions of each system should be taken into consideration in determining the required frequency of valve operation. Most valve exercising programs are conducted in the spring or fall of the year when demand is not too great and the weather is still good. Each utility must determine the best time for a program. VALVES 137 0 . 4 e, �� Ei fili ::,,,..:,,,,,Liit;iiilitt ! t .1 Mr. '•i —....,----•.5 .,,,•,:t, I,9,.i",1 \ 1• 5't;^;,j .4. ,' w \t , -, — .0,41,, %I, Itt7 — i a It„1♦h11.{, f ,,.,..r. 4111 .. 1j 'i .1 . i`�r :rfrt s �•1 A� 14, •• It •• , Fi :4: 1q/'''4,, „ - 4:•tii'.' , 1•'1.777 �.it i4 •` 1t� • ,•,., •.«..•� ,; 1.w. • lieE•O`fri!'?•/. '.,'PY:.1.4"ft . .40.1 .I:, lyt/Al..;.' .fr. f`r.j ..‘ • �t1?'� ►' iti� 1+.;• , i ,1.--.# ,� \ '114:1?;;;it,, :4 4 .1 . .4,t, lir ,'it 1�t: !,•' .I t1 tft�,. ;a �''' ' ;';+ «,• I' •!I! a{,i•f',.p 1 •i.!'• ' ,..,4•4 f t r I •. • d • • ••.• 1+•41•+}3 1 •• 5,'�' ';'')-1;4ill: (Vti'Y.':f•tA.4 ' • '; ,•.4.‘4.• -,,r i , -.,.. ... ..•p.- ,.•.it.... t '..i.‘/)..-..441. .i•/•...}�1t •,;r•i. •R y 4'.;/,'",i.4':•;•' _• / ;. t i); : "':'•-: f•,, fit.. y ! ,1 ;y 4.!it 77.1y�1 IZI . . •• C'•' ,� l�•1 .�.�. . M Jl,�t• �••�,r.�;tt �,'t,' ► ,,,1.!'•:1I. f•I,l•Ia,• ..1 f�.'!. {,v • • . . � 1.'+ 1 •l'.4'. ✓ Y 1,t. •,'.-1,!i�'�'ir • •r • , t t.. ,i � ' Y ,• 'n.••••1 'W. •.•ke•` j•.,'1,J r•t•' '•t�. , f i•0 {o f f' .:. ,' ''�. ,,• A, ►�/,d:N' a• f, Courtesy of E.H. Wachs Co. Figure 3-44. Power Valve-Actuating Equipment The main obstacle to planned valve exercising programs has been that manual exercising of valves by"walking around the key”and keeping an accurate count of turns is a time-consuming process. Power equipment is now available that will reduce valve operating man-hours by at least 65 percent.The equipment selected can be portable, versatile, fast, and efficient (Figure 3-44). Most power equipment fits all standard valves from 6 in.to 60 in.(150 mm to 1500 mm). With power units it is also possible to get a valve operating that may have been considered inoperable. It may take an hour or more to do it, but that is minor when compared to the cost of replacing the valve. When the valve is exercised check the operating nut—replace missing or badly chewed operating nuts. Check and lubricate gears—observe and correct any bad operating condition. Grease the gears. Check the bypass—note whether the bypass is open or closed and whether the small valve is operating satisfactorily. Check the condition of the box or vault—adjust the box or vault if buried or protruding. Reset if the box is too close to the stem. Check the cover and replace it if it is missing or broken. 300 Water Treatment 4. Inspect heating and ventilating equipment in chlorinator 10) Change recorder chart daily or as necessary. area. 11) Check recorder output signal controlling chlorina- tor for control responses on feed rate. Correct 5. Perform scheduled routine preventive maintenance. feed rates through ratio controller. a. Drain and flush water bath. b. Clean evaporator tank. WEEKLY c. Repack gasket and reseat pressure-reducing valves. d. Check heater elements. 1. Put chlorinator on manual control. Operate feed-rate e. Replace anodes. adjustment through full range from zero to full scale(250, 500, 1000, 2000, 4000, 6000, 8000, or 10,000 pounds/ f. Paint system. day). At each end of scale check: 7.452 Chlorinators, Including Injectors a. Chlorinator vacuum. b. Injector vacuum. DAILY c. Solution line pressure. 1. Check injector water supply pressure. Pressures will d. Chlorine pressure at chlorinator. range from 40 to 90 psi(276 to 520 kPa or 2.8 to 6.3 kg/sq If any of the readings do not produce normal set cm) depending on system. points, make proper adjustments. 2. Determine injector vacuum. Values will range from 15 to 1) Injector should produce necessary vacuum at 25 inches (38 to 64 cm) of mercury. chlorinator (5 to 10 inches or 13 to 25 centimeters 3. Check chlorinator vacuum.Values will range from 5 to 10 of mercury). inches (13 to 25 cm) of mercury. 2) Adjust PRV to obtain sufficient pressure and chemi- cal feed for full feed-rate operation of chlorinator. 4. Determine chlorinator chlorine supply pressure. Values will range from 20 to 40 psi (138 to 276 kPa or 1.4 to 2.8 2. If unit performs properly through complete range of feed kg/sq cm) after the pressure regulating valve. rates, return unit to automatic control. If any problems develop, locate source and correct. 5. Read chlorinator feed rate on rotameter tube. Is feed rate at required level? Record rotameter reading and time. 3. Clean chlorine residual analyzer(see Section 7.7, "Meas- urement of Chlorine Residual"), including the following 6. Examine and record mode of control. items: a. Manual a. Clean filters. b. Automatic (single input) b. Clean sample line. c. Automatic (dual input) c. Clean hydraulic dilution wells and baffles. 7. Measure chlorine residual at application point. d. Flush discharge hoses and pipes. e. Clean and flush cell block. 8. Inspect system for chlorine leaks. f. Fill buffer reservoirs. g. Check buffer pump and feed rate. 9. Inspect auxiliary components. h. Wipe machine clean and keep it clean. a. Flow signal input. Does chlorinator feed rate change when flow changes? Chlorinator response is normally MONTHLY checked by biasing (adjusting) flow signal which may drive dosage control unit on chlorinator to full open or 1• Exercise all chlorine valves. closed position. When switch is released, chlorinator 2. Inspect heaters and room ventilation equipment. will return to previous feed rate. During this operation the unit should have responded smoothly through the 3. Check chlorinator vent line to outside of structure for any change. If the response was not smooth, look for . obstructions that could prevent free access to the atmos- mechanical problems of binding, lubrication, or vacu- phere. Bugs and wasps like vent lines for nests. urn leaks. 4. Inspect unit for vacuum leaks. b. If chlorinator also is controlled by a residual analyzer, be sure the analyzer is working properly. Check the 5. Clean rotameter sight glass. following items on the residual analyzer. Be sure to follow the manufacturer's instructions. 6. Inspect all drain lines and hoses. 1) Actual chlorine residual is properly indicated. 7. Perform scheduled routine maintenance. 2) Recorder alarm set point. a. Disassemble, clean and regasket chlorinator (once a 3) Recorder control set point. year). 4) Sample water flow. b. Repack seat and stem of valves. 5) Sample water flow to cell block after dilution with c. Inspect tubing and fittings for leaks. Wash and dry fresh water: thoroughly before reassembling. 6) Adequate flow of dilution water. d. Inspect control system. 7) Filter system and drain. 8) Run comparison tests of chlorine residual. Do 1) Electrical and electronics. tests match with analyzer output readings? 2) Pneumatics. 9) If residual analyzer samples two streams, start 3) Lubrication. other stream flow and compare tested residual of 4) Calibration of total system. that stream with analyzer output readings. Stand- e. Chlorine analyzer. ardize analyzer output readings against tested residuals. Enter changes and corrections in log. 1) Lubrication of chart drives, filter drives and pumps. ......._, ._ . . . i t di MAINTAINING DISINFECTION I4 is II II • a disinfectant residual Given the age and vulnerability of some US water distribution systems, use of a disinfectant residual as an added safeguard makes sense. Charles N. Haas istribution systems represent the final barrier protecting the consumer from expo- sure to microorganisms in potable water. Dynamics occurring within the distribution system may cause chemical changes resulting in deterioration of palata- bility. For these reasons, water providers in the United States have almost universally chosen to maintain a residual disinfectant within the distribution system. This article outlines some of the characteristics of US systems that may influence this choice and describes the benefits associated with maintaining some resid- ual disinfectant within the distribution system. System age and condition add up to increased vulnerability As part of an AWWA Research Foundation project, US water utilities were randomly surveyed to ascer- tain distribution system characteristics. Perhaps the most strik- , '.:� le: .1. , . : .. ..., r-,,y��r n.:Y :. I L'r u } -r'T l...+Jl�.� t,r•'.;+ 41' ...At} 1 yl'.:,h'Ir ,f.-1 h.Y 4��- S.:. ,, '.7 r.� .._ Y.,, ,.. ...., ,i;,,,,..'0,;,, 4'Y,r , r. . ...:r".-,,y ,.y'� q.. �7'.�dr�': w,. •r,.: .:15,. l r 5'/ x,...,,. LG�. fi-..,,r# 1./..Y rJ X,.-k•M j1. +� �.�..1, d..l,j• 4 :!':.1F , :5.�.5.'':.,. ,,.. , .,,.,:..,.T'. .�:r .c,it' i-'ei•/ '1Lr k%rn�..,..� ? 'J '�.•i� �. S!t { i.,� µ,.q..f t 'rl'. l • u. .i,ra... ntar1„"•i.. th•':� .e Y,qw a,,r. •,. �,:,+..„ ;'t a'4 ...t rn. Y y,.r �� Y �Y,.{� rr, � ,r..,Y..� .r. t,h.r,. s.;�e x .'{w �..,r.:: .r d. �kr a...t ,..;Y x r: ,.,r,i•' .�. . ..;5r. _�[ .,�, , .'1« :.`�'��,'• ,� ,,N �:• �M1Y. fi...,.y[»,'� ,��,:, �l111 cllaract recti ofthe- �..{' 1'f' •a..,.'4° .1 : 7.: , ,r3 :rF..�.. t, •.�.+F':.F I., .'.. .,a•. .? n •d�.,"'{r,>•r.•i•.t�:....ry.,. .,:��•F ,. fr_i � .,.: ....,..F,:�'ry ...:...• w.,.,t+.� ''ri '.3'.:+Y�t dx..n. ��i 1. r :',::,1,1..!�r( r rl"7y.F.Jf s:,.r ��!liiiitri I ,,,..r•:r. ..w, r�r '�t•,7.'rt s wf..r*•�s� w:r:',,.,f. r:• cw�` • �, "F r,f� r r•4�,•:p,.,�y 1,•��:; g'x:.: ,;,.. ! �' ;.5',. :�:r;7,:. r,t u�. .M:,�a r, G�,'L:9 r � :'�. �.r'�5'd.Y�'�'•of,,ih. •e Yt�..:,;•' 3,i.,M. Y 4tile :.r t.,�' L 4 r t'4 k >' ;`�tipr� Y.,, systems surveyed was ,, Y' ' . 'ti i te 1 . 'o t vi '”, y :�: Y Y i�1 r'' w�'L' fogib'otio.',14V0,r ' -iv,',.r. '..y. �.. %r: 4"A' ,,wY. P� nr r' ,05 , ,q' their relative a e. Table I le.!:.,).,„,....,. �"',,..r; ,5r. � .• y,,� ,,: ....."1.:..,....,.._....,, .,�. .a:, ,,� :I,r ,a'�'1. t�,��N,'�rl,.r"1. vi'''�,t �.'',;l.r 9 i. .tl,:k.' _t -a ,.4,s 'rY p1L w,: Y.:Y y.Fy,.,k.'�,;•.r,'�4 • • n T 1�.t- Itli.,..fiticitog-,,c., �4� summarizes the fraction j} .:a. :, k f^j. 4,'7': .5. '',1 - r ', +/TLt r.fi• %' ' '''-i: ,: r �",} 5'q:. t"3{C� yjy.��"y 'Y 'i9..:.".f•,t;' fi�:-�?:+►In -r� �(.7r 4'7 L7.' .1,. ;.� ,o ,:«�Y♦ r '� ;/ +tyrrpici;� :'S"zr. i<X .i.h' .:.'l r t 1 4�• 214� V'R '1bij. M f��:. Y`:. Y5 4: .� .u.�•� l ti,a,d sinfec aft e a a04 s!4 1'S` r q , ,r o f pipes older than 2 0 N',\(e • ;s s 4Q 1. b 1 t .tip..0.,T4r. 0 ' �tf'�'. �1 ..yx years for water utilities P.c,5.. \'rf '''''fit ��l .'�-�1�.1� .f i �,�}'r r,�� `I �t'.� � J` f�f!7'...,•• �i ��'.`;�.Y:��.t. � .�� 4".,: *ti:, nef its v'''' t '•, aS■xy■+yit r a e`'' t.i ,..l.or tiO'T 0 1 1 y■f i t4 fit f �w servingvarious popula- .,,•!,.� .. ,. .. �,, . Ij'• Y tir .•. 7,. �'�r �•^,'"5i� ,'N^t !r A1'1p,,1''ri ", .;' rotes Ing a a1nst t 0404..1. . r e s of . sIo QI;,c t , '`1t 1 .i •tion sizes and lists the ,,; � '!.';rf ,.?�".!`•1M'"i- 5". !r?1,r ;. ` •r..:.. ti.� , '"':7 �� ;t"" t ,. 1.:,1'�n, 3, ,;. �,r;��.� 5:•��r age � r 1 er L�/�I�r s; � U I, o r,t es s c ■�}y(■iy■a■��■!� l a■y+p■T�` 1y■��■} '4 { ''1 �.R...Y.:P', 7'I.:•`' ii,5':'ry.�, 4.'�j■tT•,.. rr.5 K o.5. �.•A o p, .,1 - 'Ieert4rophIc,r ., .a` �,i R+.7r.q.. , q.�:�'x F"4 d?f.�,i,r ,,,,,,,,,,,-4,...,.:,,,E, ,,':,•r•,Y� A ! f 'F�•.I...r t J rt r. ,�, i ,1� r r.7 :': j., .N'S r..4 ::%i i ,,, i l.n5. •,y „/ti f •, J'i :.w: ':(�'ik 4 i i :r •r a x ',,y: v Yri r r "`''� fg: e. 0.-fO 1■T.t 1pic row`■TT Q : r aitS `';.''A 'It,)' For executive summary, �' 7 'r• 1 , .7 , •• 1 Tr �.. .w 4. ,, ...,,,,,,....v.,....,,,,.,.....;...7 -� :� •,• � . •,1•., r (y -'. ! : ,,......:.,,,,.:.)11,,:.,,:,,,:. �. . !• t,5r ul.., �x :..hr:.El ''�•!t Ll + 7 l:..l, : .1.._:,1... ..l: ..,,,,...-v.,.,!.;.: .,'i. k 7 P...,.i, _.-.4 :'i (,,, .J,,: ,,:p i,..r;.. 7•: { /.:.� .I'y1 .,4, 1. . '-,:-..:.,?....':.f li .d .5. �'. ,', 1 Y I ''yy ;p. 1....F,'1:T.,' ':,.q:!:11.!'"!,',.' .are 'n�u q,' t sl,YF 3l. sL n k, r)r. k 'n lX,.: page 9. .. r:� .,.r:: '.: ":1 r ,r '.'�.: fr e 1,,,V!,:'.1,•::,,,` ;'1 • 6 1r�,..: r.1..# i ' k:, /U:,Y.,},,+,:1 see 162. yyerg 4 �. , �. JANUARY 1999 C.N.IIAAS 65 i Fraction of water lost in distribution system Main breaks are o n e possible cause of failure. As shown in 'Fable 2, mails breaks 60 are a frequent occurrence in utilities of all sizes and increase roughly proportionately with the size of the population (and pre- su lnbl the distributionsystem). 'These Y breaks provide a route by which the sanitary ▪ 4o integrity of distribution systems can be a ,.:4 breached. Use of a residual disinfectant offers 0 some measure of protection against the o w.. adverse effects of these events. CO A less catastrophic index of distribution JD E 20 system vulnerability is loss of water caused by Z leakage. Leaks also point to the potential for io ' intrusion of material into the distribution sys- tem. Most utilities surveyed appear to lose from 10 to 15 percent of finished water dur- d' in distribution (Figure 1 A small proportion �tl �6 fid► ��t loo g ( g )• 1 1 UVatarLbss--perceiiE of utilities lose more than 50 percent of their production during transmission. Levels of water loss are independent of utility size. Regrowth may occur. Conceptual model of distribution system processes Disinfection of drinking water does not result in complete Y ' , sterilization. With large vol- ,,,, 66 de.it 6 lIvi ',A unies of water being treated, s tterl no disinfection process can ,..,.,—,.., . ,. .,�.;ew,$;..,_ result in the complete elinii- -..= :'d `� nation of pathogens or indi- demand , :, .'' ' ` cator organisms. Given the -- = - :' ��fi,brie' g ,,, ., presence of nutrients, some + regrowth is theoretically pos- '�-,��$: : •�k �=, *: �- . � � sible. In I . 'i6 t. ,, ..: fact, the regrowth of f 6;r' ,,;; 4.,K ,.,,,,,.,,::a,, . �4,,: , »,,,,,,,,,r4:. ,,.;f.,..x�. , �>liatiii:ti', Collformns and oilier organisms ieac�.,.� g .;.•. e fit .:t `" pi;µ7 l'''' f r, M�MI 4 .y Y.44.i'., ��p& y.I in drinking water has been 2 , well documented for at least 30 years.I-4 The presence of a microbial biofilm may offer a protective niche for seques- tration of both indicator or- ganisms and pathogens.5-7 '1,t .;.0yr ,` r'. Age of oldest section of distribution system for US water utilities Use of a residual provides l de� a mechaIliSln to protect against Petbent of iilliee Age of oldest itegniont--years ; reinoculation of the flowing :',. aopiettoi dIdek Than ., water with pathogens se- Served d Yoa g Moan Minimu � Maximum 1 gtestered (acid perhaps null-�,, <500 60.25 21 10 35 t i ,1 v i n in (h e b i ) • ,N 501-3,300 58.86 50 2 112 ) ( �1111. 4, 3,301-10,000 58.37 62 1i 134 10,001-50,000 60:81 7, 20 180 • 4''';'1'''s6'` Use of a disinfectant 50,001-500,000 42.63 6-t 12 120 ,* *','',,, >500,000 69:57 91 20 140 residual rests on three til 4 � ,,*; ,T4d., , � arguments N' In brief, three arguments of the systems'oldest section. For the are advanced to support maintaining residuals in a two largest population categories (utilities serving water distribution system. more than 50,000 people), the average age of the old- • Use of a residual minimizes the propensity for est section of the system is typically more than 50 regrowth or reinoculation (from the biofilm) of indicator years. For the largest utilities, the average age of the 1 system's oldest section approaches 100 years. These This information was originally presented at a symposium on disinfectant data indicate that many US systems are at or near the residuals sponsored by AWWA and the International Water Services Asso- ciation(iWSA)and held in Philadelphia,Pa.,April 26-28, 1998,and Mud- i end of their useful lives and arearticular) vul p Y liera- Beim,Germany,Sept.28-30, 1998.This article will also appear in the Feb- ole to failure. ruary issue of iWSA's journal,Aqua. , 68 VOLUME 91,ISSUE 1 JOURNAL AWWA y , "L- ` A random survey of US or pathogenic vegetative `` , '� '�,;��' ` microorganisms.. 4 ; ;� .. utilities showed that in . , t x d - '� �` rf systems serving more than • Use of a residual re- �� ta„' , 50,000 people,the average duces the risk of general # $ 'y ` age of the oldest section contamination from eXo- f P ..r4 , _ of the distribution system genous intrusions into the 4 : 4 ti, 4', ',t, is more than 50 years. . N�. y t,a r.. ._fig, , distribution system. 4 • Use of a residual , t: " serves as a sentinel of any S * ay r they noted a correspond- breach in system integrity , '1,i, c�` ing decrease in the mean and can detect intrusions ' ' . ��S number of free and at- ,At; iiiore rapidly than micro- /_, 1'!'; ►.k tacked bacteria. This ef- bial monitoring. P 1 (f ;':'',. 4 , feet was muted, however, Residual maintenance ( •: , when concentrations of � 1 fit. �� , offers yet another bene- i' i i' .',\ � ry dissolved organic carbon fit, i.e., continued disin- A ' , : ~ were > 0.6 mg/L. feciion potency. It is well , i t , :�,�, ''` A number of authors recognized that resistant ,f ,f (including Bois et al) have organisms such as Giardia `.1 . presumed that the central and Cryptosporidium re- 1'.1' i •,.,, # limiting g nutrient is organic quire high C x T(concen- j,t t ,,: ;, r* carbon or some fraction of iration times tune values �' ) � �� ►��: � � organic carbon, such as for acceptable disinfection. c �'�I` �i,-;y' AN, assimilable or Mode rad- Regrowth is mini- 0 �:,:c r f .4 t? able organic carbon (AOC mined. The regrowth of , r i a :, ,w or BDOC). This maynot , i t rte;�+ t�,['. ��.y t°.�i ,.`�F �.. � i�� , A� ) organisms in the hulk Pi ' } „ �'� aA c ter a% �°sk 4q4 :,b; :...,—,,0:111"' be the case, however. If water of a distribution i� r , Ff - ; ' r,;,gy AOC or BDOC was always system in the presence of f 4 t , r di the limiting nutrient, then disinfectant represents a it might be possible in balance between growth and inactivation processes.8 principle to help control distribution system regrowth Another factor that must be considered is the addi- and reinoculation by minimizing carbon (or AOC or tional interchange with the pipe wall that takes place BDOC). On the other hand, if carbon is not the limit- in the presence of biofilm formation. This overall ing nutrient,such controls (though perhaps desirable for relationship is shown conceptually in Figure 2, mod- other reasons) will not be effective. ified from Bois et al.9 Using a multifactorial experimental design, Ilaas As Figure 2 shows, disinfectant residuals inactivate et all° spiked replicate samples of Lake Michigan both attached and free bacteria and are also consumed water with ammonia—nitrogen, carbon, iron, nitrate, in abiotic reactions with pipe-wall materials (including phosphate, and various combinations of these at con- perhaps microbially produced encrustations). Nutri- centrations equal to historic average concentrations. cats promote the growth of living bacteria in both Samples were incubated at 5°C and measured for phases and are also increased by the decomposition heterotrophic plate counts (HPCs) (using a four-day, of dead and decaying microorganisms from both phases. 35°C incubation on spread plates) up to three weeks The conceptual model in Figure 2 was imple- following incubation. mented mathematically by Bois et al.9 From these Table 3 shows a number of statistically significant simulations, Bois and colleagues concluded that there primary influences on microbial growth (expressed was all interactive effect among the presumed limit- as logia densities), as well as a more numerous but less ing nutrient, organic carbon, and disinfectant resid- consistent pattern of secondary and tertiary influ- uals. With each increase in chlorine concentration, ences. Haas et alis)observed a consistent effect of phos- phorus addition on stimulating microbial counts and a minor, inconsistent effect of carbon and other nutri- Frequency of main breaks ents.This study indicates that limitation by phospho- rus may be a possible factor controlling microbial Breaks Per Year growth (at least for this particular water sample). Population Served Average Standard Deviation A similar finding o f phosphorus l imiting micro- bial icro-bial growth in drinking water has been noted by other <500 1.33 0.58 authors in more recent work.i i To the degree that 501-3,300 7.51 27.7 - phosphorus limitation of microbial growth is a wide- 3,301-10,000 13.27 15.6 I 10,001-50,000 41.99 59.2 spread occurrence in drinking water, the use of nutri- ,,' 50,001-500,000 97.12 111 tint controls to limit microbial regrowth is of limited :,," +< .;; >500,000 488 547 14,,,i;. value. Controlling microbial regrowth through (lis- ',,-i',-:, ' '`' ' infectant residuals may be the only realistic tool avail- IANI MANY i 999 C IJ.HAAS S 67 1 Inactivation of pathogens and Indicator organisms shows I1P(, `111(1 (Morin(' residual results in tap water mixed with 1 percent autoclaved sewage from sampling g stat 1()11 S within t l l e 13 a l t i- more, Md., distribution system. As the ---- contort -- S.Jyphlmurtt►ti —Pi—S.sonnei table shows, when residuals rose above i -- -8acteriophege 12 A-- polio vIrua 0.04 mg/I„ A P C s were reduced from 11-100 to 1-10, a statistically significant ' li difference. Further analysis of these obser- i Vations led to the formulation of a quan- 0,i titative multiple regression equation to express log of IIPC and its relation to chlo- rine residual and turbidity. o 0.01 logio (III'C) = 0.67-0.93 (Cl2 residual) (1) +0.34 (turbidity—[1tu) -:w + 0.02 (temperature—"C) f 0.60 V V :. Risk from contamination is reduced. A second major benefit attributed to the presence of chlorine residuals is protec- 0.6001 tion against contamination from intru- 1 1 i i i l i g 0 20 40, 80, 06 sob 120 sion into distribution systems caused by y breaks, infiltration, and cross-connections. t Pree chlorine di:46 -4.1 it404 psi-- ,lac 13 Geldrelch described two outbreaks in Effects of nutrient addition on regrowth of indigenous systems without a disinfectant NPC organisms in Lake Michigan water* residual; these outbreaks likely . could have been prevented or Nutrient minimized in severity by the blit' 1 A nionin-ifitrogen enrbian Int Nitiate-kitrogen Phosphate presence of a residual. • In 1989-90, E. coli -0.27 6 0.38 0157:117 contamination in 8 0.itt 0.12 0.80 Cabool, Mo. (population 10 0.16 0.1 0 87 2,090), led to 243 cases of ill- 1 -0,10 0.08 0,46 16 o.12 0.i 037 ness. Of these, 32 victims 21 .-0.18 6.15 were hospitalized and four -;i,.y. *Numbers Indicate id org ahieni y dtiferencee relative to controls.Absence of ent indicates no died. T 11 e water S u ) )i W a S gib g densityry1 I y statistically significant primary effect(phosphate v 5 percept), groundwater distributed '.,rik4;,4 without disinfection or any l 1I { Relationship between chlorine residual and heterotrophic plate count '°•,- -` other treatment. The pattern (four days,35°C)in Baltimore,Md.,distribution system samples12 of illness was consistent with ,,A ehioriiie baaietiai Range-Mg/1a scenario in which repair of V''` Plate count a main break allowed intru- I;'Fe's` u „ mber/mL. 0-0.04 0.06-0.2 0.ii-0.4 6.4i-b.ti 0.8i-0.8 0.81--0.i 1.01-1.2 skin of pathogens from runoff h N. ` �+ � <1 1 g 25 "_ 14 5 or animal sources into the tit, 1-10 8J 5J 48 115 i17 41 15 distribution system. With no ,�`'�ri,;�y¢, 11-100 85 , 31 25 47 16 11 5 � l'�" ,';', 101-1;000 48 8 4 2 4 0 residual, the contaminationi, ,i 1,001-10,000 9 i 1 0 0 0 0 was dispersed and diluted ;4'1::.4.;;'' ;�.'{�� into the system flow. p Y.4}7 4 '.;',',7, J , y t�, �,4,q a:± - • A 1993 outbreak of Salmonella typhimurium in able, particularly given the increasing use of phos- Gideon, Mo., resulted in an attack rate of 44 per- phorus-based corrosion inhibitors (some of which cent in a community of 1,104. The system used might serve as microbial substrates). The author is untreated groundwater without disinfection. Dete- unaware of any studies on the interaction between rioration of a supply reservoir allowed animal waste nutrient phosphorus and chlorine residuals in the to contaminate the supply; thermal destratification distribution system environment. Research is needed promoted mixing with the bulk flow, and the absence to provide insight into this interaction. of a residual resulted in little barrier to community The efficacy of chlorine residuals in controlling exposure. distribution system plate counts (presumably by reduc- Because both outbreaks involved vegetative bac- ing regrowth, reinoculation, or both) was demon- terial pathogens of reasonable sensitivity to chlorine strated by Olivieri and colleagues12 (Table 4).Table 4 residuals, they point up the possible dangers inherent ' 68 VOLUME 91,ISSUE 1 JOURNAL AWWA J w in relying solely on mechanical integrity to protect. Regrowth in Drinking Water. Appl.e F,uvir: Micro- public health. biol., 62:7:2201 (1996). The presence of a chlorine residual can protect 3. DEANER, D.G. & KERRi, K.D. Regrowth of Fecal against the intrusion of pathogens and indicator or- Coliforms. Jour AWWA, 61:9:465 (Sept. 1969). ganisms. Figure 3 shows an experiment in which 4. HAAS, C.N. ET AL. Ecology of Acid-Fast Organ- tap water was mixed with 1 percent autoclaved isms in Water Supply Treatment and Distribu- sewage, and the inactivation of added microorgan- tion Systems.Jour.AWWA, 75:3:139 (Mar. 1983). isms was monitored.12 A series of investigations of 5. LECHEVALL.IER, M.W.; LOWRY, C.D.; & LEE, R.G. this type by Olivieri and colleagues12 led to the con- Disinfecting Biofilms in a Model Distribution elusions that (1) chlorine residual is functional in the System. Jour.AWWA, 82:7:87 (July 1990). distribution system and provides protection against 6. LERICHE, V. & CARPENTIER, B. Viable but Noncul- posttreatment contamination and (2) a free chlo- turable Salmonella typhimurium in Single- and rine residual is more effective than combined resid- Binary-Species Biofilms in Response to Chlorine ual chlorine in neutralizing microorganisms in the Treatment. Jour. Food Protection, 58:1 1:1 186 contaminant. (1995). Residuals signal contamination. A third role 7. NORTON, C.D. &LECIIEVALLIER, M.W. Chloranlill- of disinfectant residuals, which was most strongly ation: Its Effect on Distribution System Water noted in Snead et a1,12 is as a "flag" or sentinel of Quality. Jour. AWWA, 88:7:66 (July 1997). contamination. When a distribution system is ober- 8. I-IAAs, C.N. Application of Predator-Prey Mod- ated and monitored in a consistent fashion so that , els to Disinfection. Jour WPCF, 53:378 (1981). operators and managers understand the anticipated 9. Bois, F.Y. ET AL. Dynamic Modeling of Bacteria in pattern of chlorine residuals, then any deviation a Pilot Water Distribution System. Water Res., from the pattern may signal changes in the system. 31:12:3146 (1997). Such a signal may trigger investigation of the source 10. HAAS, C.N. ET AL. Preliminary Determination of of the changes, e.g., a cross-connection, infiltra Limiting Nutrients for Indigenous Bacteria in tion from a main break, or leakage of sewage into Chicago Intake Water. Water,Air, &Soil Pollution, the system. 37:65 (1988). Increasingly sophisticated models of chemical 11. MIETTINEN, I.T. ET AL. Phosphorus and Bacterial changes in distribution systems, including changes Growth in Drinking Water. Appl. &Envir Micro- in chlorine residual,14-16 are becoming available. biol., 63:8:3242 (1997). Real-tune sensors of water quality (including chlorine 12. SNEAD, M.C. ET AL. Benefits of Maintaining a residual) are being developed. Coupling these sys- Chlorine Residual in Water Supply Systems. EPA terns to create semiautomated control offers a dis- 600/2-80-010, USEPA, Washington (1980). tinct advantage for distribution systems. Compared 13. GELDREICH, E.E.Microbial Quality of Water Supply in with microbial concentrations, disinfectant residuals Distribution Systems. CRC Lewis Publ., Boca Raton, can be measured quite rapidly, which would enable Fla. (1996). suppliers to obtain a quicker assessment of a system's 14. VASCONCELOS, J.J. ET AL. Kinetics of Chlorine integrity. Monitoring of residuals alone, however, Decay. Jour.AWWA, 89:7:54 (July 1997). cannot and should not supplant a well-designed 15. ZHANG, G.R. ET AL. Modeling of Chlorine Resid- microbial monitoring program.13 ual in the Water Distribution Network of Macao. Envir. Technol., 13:937 (1992). Conclusion 16. ROSSMAN, L.A.; CLARK, R.M.; & GRAYMAN, W.M. Early in the history of chlorination, it was recog- Modeling Chlorine Residuals in Drinking Water nized that chlorine application in water treatment Distribution Systems. Jour Enver: Engrg. ASCE, was not a universal safeguard against all waterborne 120:4:803 (1994). disease.'7 Recent recognition of chlorine-resistant 17. Is Chlorination Effective Against All Waterborne protozoans has highlighted the importance of multi- Disease? Jour. AMA, 78:283 (1922). pie treatment processes to ensure public health.There are justifiable reasons for maintenance of residuals x t «6 , About the author: Charles N. in water distribution systems.As with any other tech- Haas is L.D. Betz Professor of Envi- r nology, however, there is no single solution to all ronmental Engineering, School of problems, nor is more always better. Industry efforts Environmental Science Engineering , should focus on developing optimum strategies for ; ° t, `; and Policy, Drexel University, protection of distribution systems. !; 44, Philadelphia,PA 19104.A past chair a, of AWWA's Disinfection Committee, References ````� , t Haas received BS and MS degrees 1. NEDEN, D.G. ET AL. Comparing Chlorination and from the Illinois Institute of Technology in Chicago and a Chloramination for Controlling Bacterial PhD from the University of Illinois in Urbana.He has more Regrowth. Jour.AWWA, 84:7:80 (July 1992). than 20 years'experience in disinfection research and has 2. LECIIEVALLIER, M.W.; WELCH, N.J.; & SMiTH, D.B. published numerous articles in JOURNAL AWWA and other Full-Scale Studies of Factors Related to Coliform professional journals. JANUARY 1999 C.N.IiAAS 69 EEA: Selected Cases Page 1 of 5 it,)-7---6/1 FEDERAL ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT: e6)-- SELECTED CASES Case 1 Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill, 437 U.S. 153 (1978) (The Snail Darter case) The Facts The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), established by President Franklin Roosevelt during the Great Depression to bring electricity to parts of the rural south, began construction of the Tellico Dam and River Project on the Little Tennessee River in 1967. The goal of the project was to create not only hydroelectric power, but shoreline development, recreational opportunities, and flood control. When fully operational, the planners intended the Tellico Dam to impound water covering approximately 16,500 acres, converting the Little Tennessee's shallow, fast-flowing waters into a deep reservoir some 30 miles in length. In 1973, an ichthyologist [ichthyology is the study of fish] exploring the area that would be flooded by the Tellico Dam, discovered a previously unknown species of fish: a three-inch, tannish-colored perch called the Snail Darter. Studies of this small fish showed that the whole species lived in that small part of the Little Tennessee River which would be turned into the Tellico Dam Reservoir. To protect the Snail Darter and its habitat, the Secretary of the Interior listed it as an Endangered Species. The Lawsuit District Court (trial court): In 1976, a citizens group, including farmers, sportsmen, archaeologists, and representatives of the Cherokee Nation sued the TVA in Federal District Court to "enjoin" [stop] construction of the dam and creation of the reservoir arguing that these actions would violate the Endangered Species Act by causing the extinction of the Snail Darter. The plaintiffs argued that once a federal project is shown to jeopardize an endangered species, a court must issue an "injunction" that will halt the activity. The District Court agreed with the plaintiffs that completion of the Tellico Dam project would indeed destroy the Snail Darter's critical habitat and probably lead to its becoming extinct. In spite of this, the Court said: (1) the project was 80% complete(and stopping the project would waste the millions in taxpayer money already spent), and (2) the Congress continuously allocated funds for the project even though it knew about the Snail Darter's plight. Therefore, the project could be completed. http://www.marin.org/npokea/cases.html 11/22/99 EEA: Selected Cases Page 2 of 5 In its decision, the Courtp osed an interesting question: If it ruled for the Snail Darter,wouldn't it bepossible that projects 99% completed could be derailed if an p endangered species was discovered before the final 1% was accomplished? Following the District Court's decision, the TVA informed Congress that it was continuing its efforts to save the Snail Darter(by transplanting it to another section of the Little Tennessee River) and Congress provided funding to complete the project. The Court of Appeals: The federal Appeals Court, reviewing the ruling of the District Court, disagreed with the District Court's decision and demanded that all activityat the Tellico Project which "may destroy or modify the critical habitat of J the Snail Darter" be stopped. The Court said that the project could not continue until one of two things occurred: (1) Congresslegislatively exempted the Tellico Project from compliance with the Endangered Species Act, or (2)the Snail Darter was no longer in danger of extinction. As to the question asked by the District Court whether a project could be stopped dead in its tracks on the eve of completion, the Appeals Court said that "the detrimental impact of a project upon an endangered species may not always be perceived before construction is well underway." The Appeals Court said that o 90% calculating the social and whether a dam is 50/o or completed is irrelevant in calcu at g scientific costs attributable to the disappearance of a unique form of life." Following the Court of Appeals decision, Congress again decided to fund the Tellico Dam Project, but now included additional moneys for TVA's efforts to relocate the Snail Darter to a suitable habitat beyond the reach of the Tellico Dam reservoir. The Supreme Court: The Supreme Court, reviewing the ruling of the Appeals Court, asked itself two questions: (1)Would the TVA violate the Endangered Species Act if it completed and operated the Tellico Dam as planned? (2) If the TVA's actions would violate the Act, is an "injunction" the appropriate way to address the problem? The Supreme Court answered yes to both questions. Chief Justice Warren Burger explained the Court's thinking about the Snail Darter and the Endangered Species Act: "It may seem curious to some that the survival of a relatively small number of three- inch fish among all the countless millions of species [that exist] would require the permanent halting of a virtually completed dam for which Congress has expended more than $100 million. The paradox is not minimized by the fact that Congress http-. n //www.mann.org/ p o/eea/cases.html 11/22/99 EEA: Selected Cases Page 3 of 5 . continued to appropriateg sums public large of money for the project, even after ... [it the dam'sI ... impact upon the survival of the snail darter". knew about p "One would be hard pressed to find a statutory provision whose terms were any plainer than those in Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. Its very words affirmatively command all federal agencies "to insure that actions authorized, funded, or carried out bythem do not jeopardize the continued existence" of an endangered species or "result in the destruction or modification of habitat of such species". This language admits of no exceptions." "Thisof the Act will produce results requiring the sacrifice of the anticipated view benefits of the project and of many millions of dollars in public funds. But p � examinationlanguage,of the lan e, history, and structure of the legislation ... indicates g beyond doubt that Congress intended endangered species to be afforded the highest of priorities". The Supe agreed me Court a with the Appeals Court. The Tellico Dam project could not be completed. The Fate of the Snail Darter Following Supreme the Su reme Court's decision,the "God Committee", created under Section 7 of the Act, assembled to consider exempting the Snail Darter and the Tellicop ' Dam project from the restrictions of the Endangered Species Act. On the � basis ofeconomic conomic rather than ecological grounds,the Committee denied the Tellico project an exemption. The rulings of the Supreme Court and the "God Committee" should have ensured p the survival of the Snail Darter. In mid-1979, however, Senator Howard Baker(the Republican Senate minorityleader) and Congressman John Duncan, both from . buried a small provision into a large piece of legislation pending before Tennessee, Congress. This provision undid the Supreme Court's decision in TVA v. Hill and the Con .g provided that the Tellico Dam project could be completed without further legal delay. The project was completed in late-1979. No Snail Darters survived in that part of the Little Tennessee River impacted by the Tellico Dam project. Small populations of the Snail Darter, however,were subsequently discovered. As a result, the Department of Interior now lists the q Y species as "threatened" rather than "endangered". Case 2 Babbitt v. Sweet Home, 115 S.Ct. 2407 (1995) (The protection of habitat case) The Facts http.//www.mann.org/np o/ eea/cases.html 11/22/99 EEA: Selected Cases Page 4 of 5 The federalEndangeredSpecies S ecies Act (ESA) specifically states that it is illegal to "take" endangered or threatened species. The word "take" is defined in any listed e g Section 9 of ESA to mean "harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect." While "shoot" or "kill", two of the words used to define "take", are words with a specific and commonly understood meaning, the word "harm" is vague and could have a number of different meanings. To avoid confusion, the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the agency within the federal Department oP f the Interior responsible for protecting endangered and threatened animals, issued regulation that included a definition of"harm". The plants and a � a "harmed" 'if thereis states that an endangered or threatened species is regulationg "significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, or sheltering." The direct result of this definition is two-fold: g g (1) the habitat of an endangered and threatened species can not be modified by human activityif our actions will result in death or injury to the protected plant or animal; (2) g housin and commercial development, or other activities such as r or logging, that will significantly modify the habitat of an endangered or agriculture gg g, g threatened species, is restricted even where the activity will not directly kill or injure the plant or animal. The Lawsuit The District Court: Sweet Home Chapter of Communities for a Great Oregon Home), organization whose membership includes landowners and people (Sweet Ho ), an on the logging industry, as well as a number of logging companies, sued dependentgg g ry p the Department of the Interior and the US Fish and Wildlife Service. Sweet Home claimed that the Wildlife Service's regulation defining harm to include "habitat modification" expanded the protection given to endangered and threatened species the Northern S otted Owl and the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker) to a (specifically p degree that Congress never intended when it passed ESA. The District Court disagreed with Sweet Home, ruling that "Congress intended an expansive interpretation of the word "take," an interpretation that encompasses habitat P • • that modification." In addition, the District Court noted Congress had amended ESA a number of times after the Wildlife Service adopted the regulations. If , felt that the regulations went beyond what it intended in passing the Congress g it amplehadopportunity to revise and clarify the meaning of the word "harm" in pp t3' the law. Bynot doingso, the District Court reasoned that Congress implicitly agreed with the Wildlife Service's interpretation. The Court of Appeals: The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit disagreed and overruled the District Court's decision. The Court of Appeals reasoned that the word "harm", like the other words in the definition of"take", should only limit activities that actually result in the "direct application of force" against ag n endangered or threatened species. Habitat modification, unlike "shoot" or "kill", is not a "direct application of force." Supreme Court: The decision of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia http://www.marin.org/npokea/cases.html 11/22/99 EEA: Selected Cases Page 5 of 5 Circuit contradicted an earlier decision by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (the federal appeals court withjurisdictionestern states) in a case called Palilia v. p.. over the w Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources.When two federal Courts of Appeal disagree on an issue of law,the US Supreme Court is often called upon to issue its opinion on the matter, settling the dispute by providing a single nation-wide interpretation of the law. The SupremeCourt agreed with the position of the Ninth Circuit in Palilia, g Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, and upholding overruling the pp theregulationsby issued the US Fish and Wildlife Service. Justice Stevens,writing for the majority,'ori , g ave suggested whythe Court found that the regulation defining gg "harm" was appropriate: (1) the dictionary definition of"harm" is "to cause hurt or damage to". The definition in Webster's Dictionary does not say only direct or willful action causing injury is "harm". Unless the word "harm" includes indirect as well as direct injury, "harm" would have no meaning separate from the other words included in the definition ion of"take" i.e. kill, shoot,trap). (2) the definition of"harm" is consistent Congress' clear expression of ESA's broad purpose to protect endangered and with p threatened wildlife. The law specifically says that it was enacted "to provide a means ecosystems wherebythe upon which endangered species and threatened species depend may be conserved." The Fate of the Endangered Species Act The SupremeCourt's rulingin Sweet Home, issued in late June, 1995, is not the last word on whether habitat modification will be prohibited under the federal Endangered Species Act. The furor of the "property rights" movement, a powerful nation-wide conservative backlash against the perceived injustices of ESA and the federalagencies responsible for enforcing its provisions, is resulting in Congressional review of the statute. The 105th Congress is currently debating whether to significantly revise or even repeal the law. Mission Statement I Curriculum I Acknowledgements I The Rat Skunk I Hypothetical Problems I Course Chronology I Quotations I Historical Timeline I Endangered Species ActI Selected Cases I Species Data I Map I Trial Court Transcript I Reading: The Sierra Club-Wild by Law I Reading: Sue Hubbell-A Country Year http.//www.mann.org/n /eea/cases.html 11/22/99 po /1-)--)--,9 a) died- .‘0- A�/ (4 o �o �p TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ;J e • Building Safety • Parks and Recreation ,- • Planning and Zoning • Transit Services PO, ,` NDEOpJ\ 11/1/99 To Whom It May Concern, Our aim is to notify affected parties that Town staff will be implementing the attached Pygmy- Owl Policy on December 1, 1999. The policy was designed to help prevent the "take" of a Cactus Ferruginous Pygmy-Owl. A primary goal is to limit the Town's potential liability by insuring compliance with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) requirements. As you are aware, USFWS is charged with enforcing the Endangered Species Act(ESA). This includes preventing harassment/harm to pygmy-owls, designating habitat areas, and creating a viable recovery program. Within Oro Valley, only the area west of La Cholla Boulevard is designated as critical habitat; however, most of the property within the Town meets the elevation threshold and vegetative criterion specified within the current USFWS protocol. For all potential habitat areas, USFWS has recommended a pygmy-owl survey prior to any site disturbance. If a property owner or his agent harms/harasses an endangered species, a substantial fine and/or civil action may be levied. Furthermore, a permitting authority may be enjoined or held accountable for actions that are likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species. The attached Pygmy-Owl Policy will serve to help insure Town compliance with USFWS requirements. The following is a list of a few key provisions: 1. Unless the USFWS specifically exempts the site, pygmy-owl survey documentation must be included upon submittal of a rezoning, plat, development plan, or grading permit application. 2. All staff reports will include information on survey documentation. If the survey documentation is not provided or indicates the presence of a pygmy-owl, staff will recommend denial of the project until the issue is appropriately resolved. 3. Grading permits will be denied if valid surveys are not provided. 4. Grading permits will be conditioned to expire in relation to the term of survey validity. We understand that requirements involving the pygmy-owl are continually evolving. If you have any questions, please contact me at 520-797-9797 or at bve l l a@orova l ley.net. Sincerely, //A_,e --,...,.._ Bayer Vella Senior Planner \\OV PZD\PZ1\PROJECTS\PYGMYOWL\Revised Owl Policy Public Intro.doc PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES PYGMY-OWL NOTIFICATION & SURVEY PROCEDURES SOP # 10A Copies to: Effective: December 1, 1999 All Planners Supersedes: SOP #10 Engineers Zoning Enforcement Building Codes Policy: The Town of Oro Valley is acting to help insure that each proposed development minimizes the potential take of a Cactus Ferruginous Pygmy-Owl. Proof of a valid survey may be required for general plan amendments, rezonings, preliminary and final plats, development plans, and grading permits. Building permits require acknowledgement by the applicant regarding their responsibilities under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). This SOP is not applicable to any other permit/review actions. PROCEDURES FOR DETERIMINING IF DOCUMENTATION REGARDING A VALID PYGMY-OWL SURVEY IS REQUIRED Planners & Engineers Each submittal must be evaluated in accordance with U.S. Fish& Wildlife Service (USFWS) protocol (see attachment). Elevation characteristics and vegetative type must be examined: Elevation: The entire Town is suitable for pygmy-owl habitat. Vegetation: At the time of formal application submittal, the applicant may submit a written determination specifying whether the onsite vegetation meets USFWS protocol for exemption. This determination is to be made by a professional who is qualified to conduct an Oro Valley Site Resource Inventory. 1. If the site does meet USFWS protocol for exemption, the rezoning., plat. or development plan may be submitted for formal approval without survey documentation. The planner must add a note to the file to insure that field verification occurs during the Native Plant Salvage inspection. 2. If the applicant does not provide a determination that the site meets USFWS protocol for exemption, the applicant will be informed that one of the two following items must accompany a submittal: a. Documentation regarding a valid survey (see Survey Requirements section) Pygmy-Owl SOP Page 2 OR b. A site specific notice from the USFWS that a survey is not required. Special Exemption: Existing features and structures such as buildings, roads, aqueducts etc. that do not include habitat elements are not considered habitat. Unless the application includes a proposal to expand an existing graded area, the aforementioned areas are exempt from survey reporting requirements. PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS, REZONINGS, PRELIMINARY & FINAL PLATS, AND DEVELOPMENT PLANS Planners All proposed developments submitted for consideration by the DRB, Planning & Zoning Commission, and Town Council will be transmitted to the USFWS Division. The following point of contact and address will be applicable: Arizona Ecological Services U.S. Fish and Wildlife Field Division 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103 Phoenix, Arizona 85021-4951 USFWS will be allotted the same amount of time to review the project as we currently provide to other agencies and departments. All development related staff reports shall contain a section dedicated to ESA issues. If valid survey documentation has not beenp rovided or is invalid due to expiration of time etc., staff must notify the applicant in writing that valid survey documentation is needed prior to public hearing review. If sufficient documentation is not received prior to report submittal for public hearing, staff must recommend denial of the project due to insufficient information regarding ESA compliance. All reports will include a recommendation that all approvals should be conditioned to include verbiage identical to that required of grading permits (see PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING GRADING PERMITS #2). If the survey documentation establishes that a pygmy-owl utilizes the site or an area adjacent to the site, staff must recommend denial of the project at all phases of review until the applicant submits written verification from U.S. Fish& Wildlife that development may occur. Zoning Inspectors For any file flagged as exempt from survey requirements due to lack of vegetation, staff must verify the findings of the vegetative assessment during the Native Plant Salvage inspection. Pygmy-Owl SOP Page 3 PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING GRADING PERMITS Engineer Conditions of Permit Issuance: Grading permits may only be issued in accordance with the following procedures: 1. All grading permits expire on the date the survey becomes invalid. As part of the required survey documentation(see Survey Requirements section), a permitted biologist must establish the expiration date. Extensions will be granted on a case by case basis. 2. Each permit will include the following condition statement: This property may be a habitat for the Cactus Ferruginous Pygmy-owl, as determined by the United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. Approval of this application/permit does not intend, nor should it be construed, to imply compliance with Federal or State regulations. If a Pygmy-Owl is detected on the site or within 1500 feet of the project prior to and/or during any stage of development, all site development related work must cease immediately. A permit will not be issued or an existing permit or approval may be invalidated or work delayed by the Town until evidence of an approved U.S. Fish and Wildlife habitat conservation plan is submitted. If you have any questions concerning your responsibilities,please contact: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Field Division 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite103 Phoenix, Arizona 85021-4951 Phone (602) 640-2720 Fax (602) 620-2730 3. If it is established within the survey documentation that a pygmy-owl utilizes the site and/or an area within 1500 feet of the site, the grading permit will be denied or put on hold until the applicant submits written verification from USFWS that development may occur. PROCEDURES FOR PROCESSING BUILDING PERMITS A building permit may only be issued in accordance with the following procedures: 1. The Planner and/or Building Permit review staff will provide the applicant with the attached "Notice". The applicant will be required to sign the "Notice" prior to submittal unless valid survey documentation has been submitted (see next page, "Survey Requirements"). In turn, the Planner/Permit Review Staff is required to file the "Notice"with the application. 2. The Advance Planning Division will forward a quarterly spreadsheet summary of the Pygmy-Owl SOP Page 4 Notice to the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Field Division, 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103, Phoenix, AZ 85021-4951. The original will be kept on file with the permit application. 3. All permits will conditioned by adding the same statement depicted in number #2 of the GRADING PERMIT section. SURVEY REQUIREMENTS Surveys must be conducted by a USFWS permitted pygmy-owl survey specialist. The USFWS certification list will be made available at the front counter. Submittal of only a pygmy-owl survey will be deemed insufficient. Documentation must be submitted from a USFWS permitted specialist. She/he must verify that the site has been surveyed, the date the survey results expire, and a determination whether a pygmy-owl(s) utilizes the site or any areas within 1500' of the site. Advance Planning Team Leader Date Current Planning Team Leader Date Enforcement Team Leader Date Planning and Zoning Administrator Date F:\ADMIN\PROCEDURES\PYGMYOWL.SOP.DOC TOWN OF ORO VALLEY Planning and Zoning Department 11,000 North La Canada Drive Oro Valley,Arizona 85737 Phone#(520) 797-9797 Fax# (520)742-1022 The Town of Oro Valley is advising all landowners to collect surveys and forward development information to the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) regarding the Cactus Ferruginous Pygmy-Owl. To that end, this form must be signed prior to approval of a Building Permit. As depicted in the attached flyer from the USFWS, recent surveys have indicated low and declining numbers of pygmy-owls in Arizona. Therefore, the pygmy-owl was listed as an endangered species in Arizona in March of 1997. Under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), an endangered species is one likely to become extinct in the foreseeable future. It is a violation of federal law to harm any endangered species. Accordingly, the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service is recommending surveys of potential pygmy-owl habitat prior to any development. That habitat, as defined by the USFWS, includes all properties below 4,000 feet in elevation where larger saguaro, ironwood, mesquite, or palo verde vegetation exists. The surveys will help establish the viability and extent of the pygmy-owl population. Please read and sign the following notice. This notice will be collected for any custom home development in a non-critical habitat area, as depicted on the attached map. It will be retained in your file and a copy will be sent to the USFWS. NOTICE This property may be a habitat for the Cactus Ferruginous Pygmy-owl, as determined by the United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. The Pygmy-owl has been declared an endangered species, and is protected by federal law. Be aware that under federal statute, 16 U.S.C. 1538, it is unlawful for any person to take any endangered species within the United States. The term "take," as defined in 16 U.S.C. 1532(19), means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, trap, capture, or collect an endangered species, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. As specified by federal law, unlawful harm can include actions, which destroy or significantly modify the habitat of the endangered species. Be advised that notice of the issuance of this permit will be forwarded to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and to the Arizona Game and Fish Department. Issuance of this permit does not intend, nor should it be construed, to imply compliance with Federal or State regulations. If you have any questions concerning your responsibilities under federal law, please contact: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Field Division 2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103 Phoenix,Arizona 85021-4951 Phone(602)640-2720 Fax(602) 620-2730 Signature Date Case/File Number