Você está na página 1de 368

AWWA RESEARCH

FOUNDATION
6666 West Quincy Avenue
Denver, Colorado 80235

RESEARCH REPORT
SUBJECT AREA: Distribution Systems
BACTERIAL REGROWTH
IN
DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS

Prepared by:

W.G. Characklis, Director


Institute for Biological and Chemical Process Analysis
Montana State University
Bozeman, MT 59717

in collaboration with

South Central Connecticut Regional Water Authority


American Water Works Service Company
Stoner and Associates, Inc.

Prepared for:

AWWA Research Foundation


6666 W. Quincy Avenue
Denver, CO 80235

January 1988

Published by the American Water Works Association


DISCLAIMER

This study was funded by the American Water Works Association Research
Foundation (AWWARF) . AWWARF assumes no responsibility for the content of
the research study reported in this publication, or for the opinions or
statements of fact expressed in the report. The mention of tradenames for
commercial products does not represent or inply the approval or endorsement
of AWWARF. This report is presented solely for informational purposes.
Although the research described in this document has been funded in part by
the United States Environmental Protection Agency through a Cooperative
Agreement, CR-811335-01, to AWWARF, it has not been subjected to Agency
review and therefore does not necessarily reflect the views of the Agency
and no official endorsement should be inferred.

Copyright 1988
by
American Water Works Association Research Foundation
American Water Works Association
Printed in U.S.

ISBN 0-89867-418-2
TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ............................ v

LIST OF FIGURES ........................... via

FOREWORD ............................... xi

ACKNOWLFJJGEMENTS .......................... xaii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY by W.G. Characklas ................. xv

1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................... 1


1.1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION ..................... 1
1.2 REGROWTH AND AFTERGROWTH ................... 1
1.3 UTILITY EXPERIENCE - SCCRWA EPISODE ............. 3
1.4 BIOFILM PROCESSES ...................... 6
1.5 BIOFILMS IN DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM ............... 9
1.6 INJURED ORGANISMS. ...................... 10
1.7 SUMMARY ........................... 10
1.8 PROJECT GOAL ......................... 10
1.9 PROJECT OBJECTIVES ...................... 10

2.0 HISTORICAL DATA ANALYSIS by D.Goodman and M. Cunnane. ....... 13


2.1 THE DATA SET ......................... 13
2.2 GROUNDWATER VERSUS SURFACE WATER COLIFORM DENSITIES ..... 15
2.3 SOURCES FOR DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM COLIFORMS .......... 21
2.4 DAY-OF-THE-WEEK AND COLIFORM OCCURRENCES ........... 22
2.5 SIMULTANEITY OF COLIFORM OCCURRENCES AMONG DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS
............................... 22
2.6 PREDICTING DISTRIBUTION MFTC ................. 28
2.7 CONCLUSIONS ......................... 42

3.0 DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM MODELLING by W.A. Hunt. ............ 43


3.1 INTRODUCTION ......................... 43
3.2 PROGRAM FOR MODELLING CHLORINE ................ 43
3.3 STEADY STATE MODELLING .................... 45
3.4 SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS ..................... 53
3.5 CALIBRATION OF THE CHLORINE PREDICTION MODEL ......... 54
3.6 GRAPHIC RESULTS ....................... 62
3.7 DYNAMIC MODELLING ...................... 62
3.8 CONCLUSIONS ......................... 72

4.0 MICROBIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS AND TESTING A.K. Camper and G.A. McFeters. 73
4.1 INTRODUCTION ......................... 73
4.2 COLIFORM NUTRITIONAL REQUIREMENTS .............. 73
4.3 TESTS FOR OUGOTROPHY .................... 74
4.4 ASSIMILABLE ORGANIC CARBON DETERMINATIONS .......... 82
4.5 PIPELINE REACTOR ....................... 88
4.6 TUBERCLE SAMPLES ....................... 92
4.7 CONCLUSIONS ......................... 93
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

5.0 PILOT PLANT EXPERIMENTS by E. van der Wende and W.G. Characklis . . 97
5.1 EQUIPMENT AND EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN .............. 97
5.2 INFLUENCE OF CHLORINATED FILTER BACKWASH ON BIOFILM PROCESSES 98
5.3 GROWTH RATES OF HPC BACTERIA IN THE BIOFILM AND WATER PHASES . 107
5.4 OOLIFORM CHALLENGE TO THE BIOFILM .............. 114
5.5 INFLUENCE OF FLUID SHEAR STRESS ON BIOFILM DETACHMENT .... 116
5.6 THE INFLUENCE OF CHLORINE ON BIOFILM DETACHMENT ....... 120
5.7 INFLUENCE OF CHLORINE ON BIOFILM ACCUMULATION ........ 121
5.8 CONCLUSIONS ......................... 127

CONCLUSIONS .............................. 129

FUTURE RESEARCH NEEDS ......................... 133

REFERENCES .............................. 135

APPENDICES .............................. 139

Appendix A Historical Data Analysis ................. 140


Appendix A.I Inventory of Data .................. 140
Appendix A. 2 The Magnitude of the Missing Observation Problem . . 146
Appendix A.3 Sample Scheduling at the Distribution System Stations
.................................. 148
Appendix A.4 Definition and Logic of Maximum MFTC Comparisons. . . 206
Appendix A.5 Comparison of Groundwater and Surface Water ..... 252
Appendix A. 6 Validation of the MFTC-Day of the Week Pattern ... 260
Appendix A.7 Principal Components Analysis ............ 281
Appendix B Distribution System Modelling ............... 294
Appendix B.I Sensitivity Analysis ................ 294
Appendix B.2 Calibration Calculations .............. 296
Appendix B.3 MSU Chlorine Demand Study .............. 298
Appendix B.4 24-hour Measurements of the Chlorine Residuals in the
Saltonstall System ................. 305
Appendix C Microbiological Analysis and Testing (empty)........ 315
Appendix D Pilot Plant Experiments .................. 316
Appendix D.I Various Tables ................... 316

IV
LIST OF TABTF.fi

Table Page
Table 2.1 List of Variables for 1985 Data .............. 20
Table 2.2 Comparison of Observed and Expected Frequency for all
Distribution Systems ......................... 30
Table 2.3 Comparison of Observed and Expected Frequency for
Groundwater Systems .......................... 31
Table 2.4 Multiple Linear Regression: Backward Elimination. All
Variables were Standardized Prior to Analysis. ............ 33
Table 2.5 Principal Components Analysis. ............... 35
Table 2.6 Principal Components 2, 3, and 4. .............. 36
Table 2.7 Multiple Linear Regression of Distribution MFTC on Principal
Components 2, 3, and 4. ........................ 37
Table 2.8 Results of Discriminant Analysis. .............. 41
Table 3.1 Representative Junctions for Parametric Analysis of
Modelling Chlorine Residuals ..................... 47
Table 3.2 Effect of Skeletonization on Pressure and Chlorine
Residuals ............................... 52
Table 3.3 Effect of Reaction Rate Coefficients and Dosage Rates on
Chlorine Residuals, 180-pipe System. ................. 55
Table 3.4 Redistribution of System Demand Flows ........... 56
Table 3.5 Effect of Demand Relocation on Pressure and Chlorine
Residuals, 180-pipe System, C0 =3.9 ppm ................ 57
Table 3.6 Sensitivity Index of Chlorine Residuals at Junctions to System
and Process Parameters ........................ 58
Table 3.7 Results of Model Calibration ................ 61
Table 3.8 Chlorine Residuals ..................... 70
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Table Page
Table 4.1 Comparison of Maximum Cell Count Values and Growth Rates for
Coliform Isolated in New Haven System and Clinical Coliforms. The Data are
the Ratios of the New Haven Isolate to the Clinical Isolate. The New Haven
Isolate Always Grew Better. ...................... 81
Table 4.2 Bacterial Growth in New Haven Distribution Water Samples.
Organic Carbon Concentrate is Reported as mg/L and Cell Counts
as CFU/mL ............................... 87
Table 4.3 AOC Conversions to mg Acetate Carbon Equivalents ...... 90
Table 4.4 Analyses Conducted in the Pipeline Reactor ......... 91
Table 4.5 Tubercle, Sediment, and Flush Sample Bacterial and Chemical
Evaluations ............................. 95
Table 5.1 The Types of Analyses Performed on the Rototorque and
Filter Effluent Water, Rototorque Biofilm, and Pilot Filter Media
Granules for Experiment 5.2 ..................... 102
Table 5.2 HPC Bacteria Concentration in cfu/mL in the Water Phases of
the RotoTorque@s of RTS A During Experiment 5.3 ............ 109
Table 5.3 Coliform Density in Biofilm as a Function of Time and
Position in the RT System. RT Surface Area is 0.207 m^ ......... 115
Table 5.4 Coliforms in Water Phase of RTS B During Experijnent 5.4 as a
Function of Time and Position. RT Volume is 1575 mL. ......... 119
Table 5.5 CHN Analysis of Biofilm .................. 123
Table 5.6 List of Water Quality and Biofilm Analyses Conducted in the
RotoTorque@ System During Experiment 5.7. ............... 124

VI
LIST OF FIGURES

Page
Figure 2.1-A Heterotrophic Bacteria and Coliforms in the Raw Water and
Effluent of the Saltonstall Treatment Plant (Surface Water) ....... 16
Figure 2.1-B Heterotrophic Bacteria and Coliforms in the Raw Water and
Effluent of the North Cheshire Treatment Plant (Ground Water) ...... 17
Figure 2.2-A Schematic Diagram of Saltonstall Surface Water Treatment
Plant Indicating Chemical Feed Points and Sampling Points ........ 18
Figure 2.2-B Schematic Diagram of North Cheshire Well Field Indicating
Chemical Feed Points and Sampling Points. Note the Effluent Sampling
Point Originating in the Distribution System ............. 19
Figure 2.3-A Cumulative Coliform Sample Distribution by Month and Day of
the Week for the SCCRWA Distribution System (1985) ........... 23
Figure 2.3-B Cumulative Coliform Sample Distribution by Month and Day of
the Week for the SCCRWA Distribution System (1985) ........... 24
Figure 2.4 a) MFTC Percent Positive Over all Distribution Systems (1985).
b) MFTC Fraction Positive Corrected for Station Effect Over all
Distribution Systems (1985) ....................... 25
Figure 2.5 a) MFTC Percent Positive Over all Treated Effluent Stations
(1985). b) MFTC Percent Positive Over all Raw Influent Stations (1985). . 26
Figure 2.6 Positive MFTC Simultaneity Among Distribution Systems (1985). 27
Figure 2.7 a) Positive MFTC Simultaneity of Surface Water Supplied
Distribution Systems (1985). b) Positive MFTC Simultaneity of Groundwater
Supplied Distribution Systems (1985).................. 29
Figure 2.8 Distribution MFTC Versus Discriminant Function Scores (1985).
Analysis was Performed on Weekly Averages. .............. 40
Figure 3.1 Saltonstall Service Area 74 Pipe System. ......... 48
Figure 3.2 Saltonstall Service Area 103 Pipe System. (Hatched Zone is
Location of 77 Additional Pipes Comprising the 180 Pipe Systems).... 49
Figure 3.3 Saltonstall Service Area. Enlargement of 103 Pipe System
Hatched Zone .............................. 50
Figure 3.4 Saltonstall Service Area 103 Pipe System. (Hatched Zone is
Location of 77 Additional Pipes Comprising the 180 Pipe Systems).... 63
Figure 3.5 Saltonstall Service Area. ................. 65
Figure 3.6 Diurnal Demand Flows and Reservoir Outflow. ........ 66

VII
LIST OF FIGURES (continued)

Figure Page
Figure 3.7 Spatial Variation of Chlorine Residuals. ......... 69
Figure 4.1 Growth of Clinical and New Haven KLebsiella pneumoniae in
Various Levels of Yeast Extract .................... 76
Figure 4.2 Growth of Clinical, New Haven, and Enterotoxigenic (ETEC)
Escherichia coli in Various Levels of Yeast Extract .......... 77
Figure 4.3 Maximum Increase in Cell Numbers of Clinical and New Haven
KLebsiella pneumoniae Grown in Various Levels of Yeast Extract .... 78
Figure 4.4 Maximum Increase in Cell Numbers of Clinical, New Haven and
Enterotoxigenic (ETEC) Escherichia coli Grown in Various Levels of Yeast
Extract ................................ 79
Figure 4.5 Maximum Growth Rates (u) for Clinical and New Haven KLebsiella
pneumoniae Grown in Various Levels of Yeast Extract .......... 80
Figure 4.6 Maximum Growth Rates (u) for Clinical, New Haven, and
Enterotoxigenic (ETEC) Escherichia coli Grown in Various Levels of Yeast
Extract ................................ 83
Figure 4.7 Maximum Increase in Cell Numbers of Enterobacter aercgenes and
Enterobact cloacae Grown in Various Levels of Yeast Extract ...... 84
Figure 4.8 Maximum Growth Rates (u) for Enterobacter aerogenes and
Enterobacter cloacae Grown in Various Levels of Yeast Extract ..... 85
Figure 4.9 Pipeline Reactor ..................... 89
Figure 5.1 Rototorque System (RTS) .................. 99
Figure 5.2 Rototorque (RT) ...................... 100
Figure 5.3 Hydraulic Pressure of Filter Effluent Immediately Before and
After Filter Backwash. ........................ 105
Figure 5.4 Planktonic Cell (HPC) Concentration and Biofilm Cell
Concentration* in RTS A (No Chlorine; Semi log Scale) ........ 112
Figure 5.5 Planktonic Cell (HPC) Concentration in RTS A Plotted Against
Rototorque (5.5a) or Hydraulic Detention Time (5.5b).......... 113
Figure 5.6 Coliform Concentration in the Effluent of RTS B. ..... 117
Figure 5.7 Turbidity of Rototorque Effluents for Various Simulated Flow
Velocities .............................. 118

VIII
LIST OF FIGURES (continued)

Figure 5.8 Planktonic Cell (HPC) Concentration and BiofiLm Cell


Concentration in RTS B (Low Chlorine Concentration; Semi log Scale)
................................... 122

Figure 5.9 Planktonic Cell (HPC) Concentration and Biofilm Cell


Concentration in RTS A (High Chlorine Concentration; Semi log Scale). . 126

IX
FOREWORD

This report is part of the on-going research program of the AWWA Research
Foundation. The research described in the following pages was funded by
the Foundation in behalf of its members and subscribers in particular and
the water supply industry in general. Selected for funding by AWWARF's
Board of Trustees, the project was identified as a practical, priority need
of the industry. It is hoped that this publication will receive wide and
serious attention and that its findings, conclusions, and recommendations
will be applied in communities throughout the United States and Canada.
The Research Foundation was created by the water supply industry as its
center for cooperative research and development. The Foundation itself
does not conduct research; it functions as a planning and management
agency, awarding contracts to other institutions, such as water utilities,
universities, engineering firms, and other organ-1 :ations. The scientific
and technical expertise of the staff is further enhanced by industry
volunteers who serve on Project Advisory Committees and on other standing
committees and councils." An extensive planning process involves many
hundreds of water professionals in the important task of keeping the
Foundation's program responsive to the practical, operational needs of
local utilities and to the general research and development needs of a
progressive industry.
All aspects of water supply are served by AWWARF's research agenda:
resources, treatment and operations, distribution and storage, water
quality and analysis, economics and management. The ultimate purpose of
this effort is to assist local water suppliers to provide the highest
possible quality of water, economically and reliably. The Foundation's
Trustees are pleased to offer this publication as contribution toward that
end.
This document describes the use of predictive transport processes, bacteri
ological procedures and models as a means to monitor the effect of water
treatment practices on water quality, including bacterial populations and
regrowth in the distribution and storage network. The influence and corre
lations of water treatment processes on bacterial breakthrough and biofilm
accumulation in the distribution system are presented.

\j-se.
ome 8. Gilbert Jara^s F. Manwaring, P.E.
rman, Board of Trustees xecutive Director
"AWWA Research Foundation AWWA Research Foundation

XI
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Institute for Biological and Chemical Process Analysis and the
individual authors gratefully acknowledge the following organizations for
significant contributions in funds and in-kind services:
SOOTH CENTRAL CENNBCnaJT RECTCNAL WV1ER AUTHORITY

AMERICAN WOXR WORKS SERVICE COMPANY

SOONER ASSOdATES, INC.

The authors of this report also thank the personnel from the South Central
Connecticut Regional Water Authority (SCCRWA) for their many contributions.
Special acknowledgements go to:
Frances Ludwig
Rebbecca Calderon
Darrell Smith
Joe Grochowski
Tom Gaidish
Our thanks to the members of the AWWARF Project Advisory Committee for
their advice and comments throughout the project:
Joyce Kippin, Salem & Beverly Water Supply Board
Ed Geldreich, U.S.E.P.A.
Marc LeChevallier, American Water Works Service Co.
Our thanks to Joseph R. Kroon, Stoner Associates, Inc. for his help with
the distribution system modelling.
IRA personnel involved in the project are also acknowledged for their work;
Pam Refling and Shari McCaughey for preparation of samples, Wendy Wesen and
Diane Doede for manuscript preparation related to the quarterly reports and
this final report, and Mark Jordan for his drawing and construction work.
Nick Zelver from Bridger Scientific is acknowledged for design and
supervisory work related to the pilot systems.
Dr. A.B. Cunningham is acknowledged for his analysis of the hydraulics of
the pilot filter.
Ewout van der Wende would like to thank Fran Ludwig, Rebbecca Calderon,
Darrell Smith, Joe Grochowski and Tom Gaidish for their great cooperation
during his visits and would also like to thank them and their respective
families for the very good times after 5 o'clock.

XIII
ERCJECT SUMMARY

W.G. Characklis

BACTERIAL POPULATIONS IN POTABLE WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS

Terminology
Occurrences of excessive bacterial populations in distribution systems,
sometimes referred to as events or blooms in the literature, have troubled
utilities because of their possible implications for the hygienic safety of
their product. The water utility industry uses "regrowth" and "aftergrowth"
synonymously to describe the processes contributing to the unexplained
increase in number of organisms with travel time away from the treatment
plant. However, Brazos et al (1985) proposed the following more specific
definitions: regrowth is the recovery of disinfectant-injured cells which
have passed into the distribution system from the water source or treatment
plant and aftergrowth is microbial growth in a water distribution system.
Both terms implicate the microbial growth process in the phenomenon of
increased microbial cell numbers. More importantly to this study, the terms
do not clearly discriminate between the two primary mechanisms by which the
microbes appear in the distribution system, i.e., breakthrough in the
treatment plant and growth within the distribution system. Thus, two terms
are used throughout this report which distinguish between the two modes of
contamination:
Breakthrough is the increase in bacterial numbers in the distribution
system resulting from viable bacteria passing through the disinfection
process.
Injured organisms, resulting from insufficient disinfection, contribute to
the effects of breakthrough. The organisms passing through the disinfection
processes may sometimes result from growth of bacteria in the treatment
plant (e.g., in filters) or in storage tanks prior to disinfection. Thus,
breakthrough is a transport process as opposed to growth which is a
transformation or reaction process in which the requisite compounds are
transformed, with the release of energy, into bacterial cells. Transport of
bacterial cells through the disinfection process is observed frequently
because disinfection is not sterilization.
Growth is the increase in viable bacterial numbers in the distribution
system resulting from bacterial growth in the distribution system
downstream of the disinfection process.
Growth occurs at the expense of substrate which provides the metabolic
energy. Usually, the substrate is an organic compound(s). In some cases, a
reduced inorganic compound (e.g., ferrous iron) can provide the energy.
Growth cannot occur unless organisms inoculate the distribution system as a
result of breakthrough. Thus, the mechanisms are interrelated. The
consequences of growth are compounded by the size of the inoculum population

xv
whether it originates via breakthrough or from a biofilm residing in the
distribution system. Growth may occur in biofilms, which may take the form
of tubercles or sediments, or in the distribution system water. The pilot
plant experiments in this project only addressed the growth process.
An episode is an occurrence of "excessive" viable bacteria in the
distribution system.
Episodes result from breakthrough and growth and other mechanisms. Thus,
episode refers to the occurrence while breakthrough and growth refer to its
causes. Coliforms are frequently entering the distribution system via
breakthrough without an episode occurring.
Excessive viable bacteria are viable bacterial numbers which
exceeed the drinking water standards.
Since present standards only refer to coliforms, excessive bacteria only
refers to coliforms. Thus, Pseudomonas cannot be in excess. The standard for
the membrane filtration method permits a maxiinum of one coliform per 100
milliliters based on a monthly average of all samples.
Insufficient chlorine concentration is a chlorine residual which
permits excessive viable bacteria.
An insufficient chlorine dose at the disinfection point will permit
excessive viable bacteria to exist at some location in the distribution
system. Since chlorine residual varies spatially and temporally in the
distribution system, insufficient chlorine concentration may exist in one
part of the system (e.g., "dead ends") and not in another (e.g., constantly
flowing regions). Chlorine concentration may vary radially in the pipe as
well as axially.
Planktonic cells are viable bacterial cells suspended in the water phase.
The terms breakthrough, growth, episode, excessive viable bacteria,
insufficient chlorine concentration and planktonic cells are underlined
throughout the report to emphasize their precise definitions. Boldfaced,
indented sections describe research findings from this project.
Effects
First and foremost, excessive bacterial numbers in the drinking water
distribution systems indicate a hygienically unacceptable water. In addition
to obvious health concerns, other undesirable effects are associated with
excessive bacterial populations in drinking water. Various bacterial
species have been implicated in the physical deterioration of pipes by
accelerating the production of tubercles which restrict flow thereby
increasing frictional resistance and, hence, pumping costs. Corrosion
mediated by bacteria also leads to a reduction in the useful life of the
pipes. Taste and odor complaints have frequently been associated with
bacterial activity.

XVI
High concentrations of non-coliforms 1) interfere with the enumeration of
coliforms, 2) may serve as opportunistic pathogens, and 3) indicate general
microbiological deterioration of the treatment and distribution systems.
Finally, coliforms that colonize and reproduce within the distribution
system confound the use of coliforms as indicators of fecal pollution in
potable water. These concerns have motivated efforts to understand the
microbial ecology of drinking water distribution systems and to develop
practical approaches to control bacteria within potable water systems.
The SCCRWA Episodes
Beginning in the spring of 1984, the South Central Connecticut Regional
Water Authority (SCCRWA), in New Haven CT, recovered excessively high
numbers of coliforms from the distribution system. Coliform episodes peaked
in August when the mean coliform concentration for the month was 12 times
the allowable standard of 1 cfu/100 mL. Coliforms were recovered from
sampling locations throughout the water supply system. The coliforms present
were identified mainly as species of KLebsiella and Enterobacter, organisms
that do not generally pose a health risk. These coliforms are typical of
those found in water distribution system biofilms. There was little
evidence of Escherichia coli, the coliform most frequently associated with
fecal contamination.
Various investigations were initiated within SCCRWA in an effort to identify
the cause of the problem. The results from these investigations indicated
that the high coliform numbers were not due to 1) contamination through
cross-connections, 2) sampling, or 3) analytical procedures. It was thought
that chronic breakthrough during treatment was not the probable cause for
coliforms in the distribution system. Therefore, breakthrough was assumed to
be less important than growth.
SCCRWA initiated research locally and with the Institute for Biological and
Chemical Process Analysis (IPA), Montana State University, to investigate
the causes of the problem, the influence of chlorine, and the potential
health significance of growth (biofilm organisms).
There were no episodes in the SCCRWA system in 1986, the period of this
study. However, coliforms were frequently detected in the distribution water
samples. No coliforms were detected in the pilot plant biofilms or the
distribution system biofilms/tubercles during 1986. Thus, it was concluded
that conditions in the biofilms and other pipe deposits were not conducive
to maintenance or proliferation of coliforms in 1986.
No episodes occurred in the SCCEWA system during the project
period.

As part of the research, historical data supplied by SCCRWA were analyzed


for the purpose of identifying relationships between operating and
environmental variables and coliform episodes in the distribution systems.

XVII
Results from the Historical Data
Conditions conducive to MFTC positives. These analyses were conducted with a
level of resolution which merely accounted for the presence or absence of
membrane filter total coliform (MFTC) positives in the distribution system
without regard for the coliform number as long as there was at least one in
that week (data were averaged on a weekly basis) .
Conditions conducive to MFTC episodes. These analyses were conducted with a
level of resolution which accounted for actual weekly averages of
distribution coliform counts. The analysis found three groups of variables
which contributed to prediction of the MFTC counts in the distribution
system. These can be expressed as three sets of independent circumstances
which are conducive to high coliform counts in the distribution saitples:
(1) High pH (pH range 6.8-7.5) in raw, treated effluent, and
distribution water simultaneously; coupled with low
concentration of free chlorine in the distribution water.
(2) High turbidity in raw, treated effluent, and distribution
water sijmiltaneously; coupled with low concentration of free
chlorine in the distribution water.
(3) High coliform counts in the treated effluent; coupled with
low concentrations of total chlorine in the distribution
water.
This analysis is not confounded with seasonal effects and indicates the
following:
Sufficient chlorination is generally effective in suppressing
distribution system coliforms. There are three "environmental"
conditions which increase the risk of coliform outbreaks if
chlorination is insufficient:
1. high pH high pH generally decreases the disinfection
effectiveness of chlorine;
2. high turbidity which may be an index to conditions of high
surface runoff, associated perhaps with increased nutrient supply;
and
3. high coliform counts in the treated effluent which suggests
coliform breakthrough possibly a result of coliform growth in the
treatment plant or in sampling lines.

Efficacy of Multivariate Statistical Techniques


The complexity of the breakthrough and growth phenomena posed special
problems for the statistical analysis. The most satisfactory predictive
resolution was achieved by regression on principal components. Two other

XVIII
commonly used statistical techniques, multiple regression and discriminant
analysis, proved disappointing.
Water Utility Data Bases
In accomplishing the statistical analysis, certain difficulties were
encountered related to data base format which appear to be prevalent
throughout the water utility industry. The format for water utility data
bases has been organized primarily to satisfy regulatory requirements as
opposed to supporting diagnostic analyses. Efforts are required to correct
this policy.
INFLUENCE OF WATER TREATMENT PROCESSES

SCCRWA surface water supplies are processed in treatment plants which may
incorporate coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation, filtration, and
chlorination (disinfection) operations. These conventional water treatment
processes are designed to eliminate a variety of waterborne contaminants
including viable bacteria. Processes such as coagulation/flocculation and
sedimentation remove particulate material which may harbor large numbers of
adsorbed bacteria.
Filtration
Evidence indicates that bacteria adsorb to the filter medium which provides
an hospitable environment for the growth and proliferation of bacteria. The
filters offer a high surface area to volume ratio for microbial adsorption.
In addition, the continuous flow of water, even when it contains a low
concentration of organic compounds and nutrients, provides a large flux of
energy and nutrients for growth and reproduction of the adsorbed cells. As
the cells reproduce and form colonies, some of the cells detach and reenter
the fluid stream.
Chlorinated Backwash of Pilot Filters
Experiments were conducted with pilot filters at the SCCRWA West River plant
to determine the effect of a chlorinated backwash on filter effluent quality
as reflected by heterotrophic plate count (HPC) bacteria numbers, coliform
numbers, and total organic carbon (TOC) concentration. Two pilot filters
were operated in parallel and each was backwashed every day. One was
backwashed with chlorinated water and the other with chlorine-free water.
Filter effluent quality. The results indicate that chlorinated backwash
decreased microbiological activity in the filter as evidenced by bacterial
numbers adsorbed to the filter media. As a result of the reduced bacterial
activity in the filter with chlorinated backwash, more organic carbon
entered the distribution system and was available for growth to organisms in
the distribution system.
Microbial activity in the filter is advantageous because microbial
nutrients are removed in the plant and are not available for
subsequent growth in the distribution system.

XIX
Filter performance. Headless was higher in the filter without chlorinated
backwash indicating substantially greater "clogging". However, the
performance of the filter with chlorine-free backwash resulted in more
effective filtration presumably because of decreased pore volume and more
adsorptive filter media surfaces.
Filter performance was improved by the activity of adsorbed
microorganisms in the medium.
Influence on distribution system processes. The effluents from the pilot
filters entered a pilot distribution system (see below) where the effects of
chlorinated backwash were observed. The filter with chlorinated backwash
water produced an effluent which led to an apparent increased biofilm
accumulation in the pilot distribution system. Both biofilm cell numbers and
biofilm organic carbon in the pilot distribution system were higher with
water from the filter with chlorinated backwash.
Effluent from biologically active filters results in less
biological activity in the distribution system.
Disinfection
Disinfection, generally the last process in the treatment train, rids the
water of pathogenic microorganisms. Coliforms are used as indicators of
pathogenic organisms of fecal origin. Treatment of water to maintain an
effluent of < 1 coliform/100 mL has generally proven to be an effective
barrier against transmission of infectious diseases by water. Nevertheless,
disinfection is not the same as sterilization and, as a result, the
distribution system is frequently being inoculated with bacteria which pass
through the treatment plant. Periodically, coliforms (MFTC) are among the
bacteria detected in the treatment plant effluent.
SCCRWA Groundwater Supplies
Statistical analysis of SCCFWA historical data indicates that, on the
average, the percent positive MFTC in treatment effluents from groundwater
supplies was about three times greater than in treatment effluents from
surface water supplies. Thus in terms of the frequency of positive MFTC,
treated groundwater entering the distribution system contains more coliforms
than treated surface water entering the pipe system. Analysis also indicates
that MFTC per cent positives increases from the raw water to the effluent
(treatment of groundwater supplies is limited to chlorination) leading to
the distribution system. The increase in coliform numbers during
groundwater processing is suspected to be due, at least in part, to the use
of distribution water as a lubricant for well pumps. The long sampling line
leading from the distribution water offers an opportunity for biofilm to
influence the effluent coliform numbers also.
Simultaneity of Coliform Episodes
Statistical analysis indicates that coliform episodes occur more often in
four or more individual distribution subsystems simultaneously than can be
ascribed to chance alone. Since simultaneous episodes at four treatment

xx
plants due to chance operational problems is unlikely, the finding suggests
that coliform episodes are often associated with environmentally driven
factors which are correlated over the entire region.
BIOFIIM ACXIMJIATION IN THE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM

Biofilm refers to microbial cells immobilized at the pipe surface or on a


particle (suspended in the water or stationary within a filter). The cells
are immobilized 1) in a matrix of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS),
2) in tubercles (mineral deposits), 3) sediment deposits, 4) a combination
of mechanisms, or 5) by some unknown mechanisms. The EPS is a very
adsorptive surface for cations (especially multivalent cations such as
calcium, zinc, or iron), particulate material (binding of sediments), and
for other microbial cells. Cells and associated materials are continuously
or episodically detaching from the surface and are reentrained in the bulk
water.
Conditions within drinking water distribution systems are suitable for
biofilm formation which ultimately may lead to release of bacteria into
drinking water. Biofilms in drinking water systems contain microbial
communities consisting of numerous species, sometimes in relatively high
numbers. One of the important influences on microbial biofilm diversity in a
distribution system is chlorine concentration.
Previous investigations initiated within SCCRWA suggested that biofilms in
the distribution network contribute significantly to coliform episodes.
Thus, our first objective was to devise a pilot system to accomplish the
following: 1) simulate the SCCRWA distribution system environment, 2)
observe biofilm processes and 3) provide relatively convenient methods for
sampling the water and biofilm.
The Pilot Distribution System
Plug flow. The distribution pipe network has characteristics which are
predominantly similar to a plug flow reactor (PFR) in that water is
continuously fed to the front end of the system and travels as a "plug"
through the pipes, although it is acknowledged that flow reversals do occur
from time to time in some of the pipes. Ideally, elements of water move
progressively through the reactor without mixing in the direction of flow so
that radial gradients do not exist but axial gradients (e.g., chlorine
concentration) are important (the composition of the water is uniform over
any cross section, though the composition obviously changes with distance
through the reactor). The most important feature of the PFR from the
standpoint of microbial physiology is the progressive change in
environmental conditions seen by an organism traversing the reactor. In
fact, the situation in the ideal PFR is the same as that in the batch1
reactor, with residence time in the PFR replacing batch reactor holding
time. The biofilm organisms in a PFR also "see" different environmental
conditions depending on their location in the PFR.

batch is a closed system (e.g. a flask)

XXI
Rote/Torque^ System (RTS). The experimental apparatus used to simulate the
distribution system consists of two (2) RotoTorque@ Reactor Systems (RTS)
located at the West River water treatment plant within the SCCRWA, New
Haven. Each RTS consists of 4 individual RotoTorque@ reactors (RT) in
series. A RT consists of a PVC pipe section or an iron pipe section (6"
I.D.) with a bitumastic coating containing an inlet and an outlet. A solid
PVC cylindrical drum spins inside this pipe section with a variable
rotational speed.
The RotoTorque@ system provides significant advantages in simulating the
distribution system environment, especially in relation to biofilm
processes: 1) the four RotoTorques@ (each a continuous flow, stirred tank
reactor) in series simulate the plug flow characteristics of the
distribution system. Gradients in organic carbon, cell activity and
chlorine residual can be observed from one RotoTorque@ to the next, similar
to the gradients in the distribution system. No gradients exist in the
fluid phase of any individual RT since each individual RT is a CFSTR. Thus,
sampling is simple because the RT concentration equals RT effluent
concentration. The fluid residence time in each reactor determines the
residence time in the experimental system in much the same way as fluid
velocity controls residence time in the distribution system, 2) fluid shear
stress is controlled by the rotational speed of the drum and liquid
residence time is independently controlled by fluid flow rate into the
reactor (i.e., fluid shear stress and liquid residence time can be
controlled independently), 3) the pipe surface can be sampled conveniently
for biofilm.
Biofilm Processes
Organisms in biofilms are contrasted with planktonic organisms primarily
because of the significant effect of transport processes which generally are
rate-controlling the biofilm accumulation process. The transport processes
of concern may occur in the liquid phase (e.g., attachment or detachment) as
well as in the biofilm (e.g., diffusion of nutrients or chlorine).
The progression of biofilm accumulation is the net result of at least three
processes including:
1. transport and adsorption of cells at the pipe wall
2. cell reproduction and product formation
3. net detachment of biofilm components from the pipe wall by
erosion or sloughing
Biofilm begins to accumulate when a cell is transported from the liquid
phase to the substratum (the pipe surface). Once cells are adsorbed or
entrapped at the pipe surface, metabolism at the pipe surface ensues which
requires energy (substrate), i.e., assimilable organic carbon (AOC), and
other nutrients. As the film accumulates, detachment of biofilm becomes
more evident. Chlorine influences the rate and extent of all these
processes.

XXII
Transport and Adsorption of Cells
The first step in biofilm accumulation on a clean surface is transport of
cells from the liquid to the pipe surface where a fraction of them adsorb.
The cells presumably enter the distribution system via breakthrough. It
should be emphasized that disinfection is not synonymous with sterilization
and, thus, some cells are always entering the distribution system in this
way. Some relatively small fraction of these cells adsorb to surfaces, even
in the presence of chlorine (see CHLORINE; pg. xx) Cell adsorption rate to
the pipe wall is proportional to the number of cells in the water so the
extent of cell removal during water treatment influences cell adsorption
rate in the distribution system. Results indicate that chlorine
concentration influences the accumulation rate, extent, and microbial
population of biofilms in the distribution system.
Growth, Reproduction, and Product Formation within the Biofilm
Once a significant number of cells has adsorbed, the biofilm develops,
primarily by growth processes, supported by nutrients transported by the
large flows in the system. Rate and extent of growth and product formation
by biofilm organisms is generally controlled by one nutrient. Organic carbon
serves as the primary energy source (substrate) for microbial activity in
many drinking water distribution systems.
Substrate loading rate. Despite their apparent significance, relatively
little organic carbon data are reported for drinking water in the U.S. In
the past year, as much as 5 mg TOC/L has been recovered from SCCRWA drinking
water samples. Although substrate (organic carbon) concentration is an
important variable in biofilm processes, substrate loading rate is also a
critical variable. Substrate loading rate in a pipe can be defined as
follows:
S F S v d
A 4 L
where Ns = substrate loading rate, S = substrate concentration, A = surface
area of the pipe, F = volumetric flow rate in the pipe, v = mean fluid
velocity, d = pipe diameter, and L = pipe length. Therefore, metabolic rate
in the biofilm depends on physical variables (F, d, and L) as well as S. For
example, a pipe with a flow of 500 lymin (132 gpm) will transport as much as
2.5 grams organic carbon per minute, a significant supply of metabolic
energy for a biofilm. If flow rate (i.e., water demand) were doubled,
supply of metabolic energy would double. Thus, flow rate or water demand may
be an important factor influencing growth in the distribution system. If
all the carbon were assimilable (see AOC, pg. xviii) and biofilm growth were
allowed to continue uninhibited, almost 2 pounds (900 g) of biofilm could
accumulate in approximately 15 feet (4.65 m) of pipe (6" (15 cm) I.D.)
surface in one day. If half of the accumulation per day sloughed from the
surface, the cellular carbon concentration in the distribution water would
be on the order of 0.6 mg TOC/L...an almost undetectable TOC level due to
the dilution rate in the pipe. Nevertheless, 0.6 mg TOC/L could easily
represent as much as 105 - 106 organisms/100 mL.

XXIII
Pipe deposits indicate that significant numbers of viable cells (up
to 109 per gram deposit) are maintained in parts of the
distribution system. A large supply of organic carbon (energy) is
necessary to maintain this population over the entire distribution
system. The deposits contain on the order 0.5 -3.5% organic carbon
(OC) (Table 4.4).
Microbial products. However, the cell numbers can only account for about 10%
of the OC. The remainder must be attributed to non-viable cells, organic
molecules or particles entering with the treatment plant effluent, and/or
microbial products. Microbial product formation may account for a
significant fraction of the assimilated organic carbon in the distribution
system. Extracellular polymers make up the capsules surrounding the
individual cells (planktonic and biofilm cells) and also form the organic
matrix which immobilizes the biofilm cells. The extracellular polymers
surrounding the bacteria may also reduce the biocidal effectiveness of
chlorine since organic material generally has a high chlorine demand.
Growth rate. The pilot tests clearly indicate that growth of planktonic
cells is negligible compared to growth of biofilm cells even without a
chlorine residual present. Specific growth rate of planktonic cells was
sometimes negative indicating a dieoff as the cells progressed through the
plug flow RTS. Specific growth rate (or cell turnover rate) in the biofilm,
on the other hand, was as high as 0.06 day~l in the distribution system
environment without chlorine present. A representative,, maximum growth rate
for a heterotrophic population is about 12 day"1 . A one day (24 h) residence
time is characteristic of the Saltonstall subsystem of the SCCRWA network.
If cells in the water could reproduce as fast as the biofilm organisms (they
do not), only a 6% increase in suspended cells would be observed from the
treatment plant effluent to the furthest tap in the system.
Planktonic microbial growth in the distribution system is
negligible.
Detachment
The detachment of microorganisms from the biofilm is a major focus of this
research program. Detachment processes can be classified as erosion or
sloughing.
Erosion. Erosion of biofilm occurs continuously and rather uniformly over
the biofilm surface releasing microscopic biofilm segments into the bulk
water. Increased fluid shear stress and increasing biofilm thickness
increase biofilm erosion rates. Erosion occurred continuously throughout the
entire testing period in the RTS and planktonic cell numbers were generally
observed to increase with corresponding increases in biofilm accumulation
(biofilm thickness).
Erosion of microbial cells from biofilms was the major cause of
planktonic cells in the pilot distribution system. Erosion rate
increased with fluid velocity.

XXIV
Sloughing. Sloughing is the detachment of macroscopic patches of biofilm
from the pipe believed to be controlled by mechanisms internal to the
biofilm. In tests without chlorine treatment, sloughing occurred throughout
most of the pilot distribution system (RIS) after several months exposure.
It is conceivable that such sloughing events can occur in "dead" flow areas
in distribution systems which are periodically subject to hydraulic
disturbances. When the hydraulic disturbances occur, biofilm cells are
released to the water. The dead flow areas have relatively little if any
chlorine residual as indicated by the chlorine residual simulations (see
CHLORINE) as well as subsequent water sampling and analyses. The
experimental findings are consistent with actual monitoring data from
locations in the distribution system which are subject to known hydraulic
disturbances but not low chlorine residuals.
Unexplained sloughing of biofilm cells into the water was observed
in the chlorine-free pilot tests.

Fluid shear stress. A planned controlled increase in fluid shear stress also
initiated a major sloughing event in the RTS. Both sloughing events resulted
in dramatic increases of planktonic cell counts. In both cases, detachment
rate was higher in locations where biofilm was thicker. Historical data
from SCCRWA indicate that a day-of-the-week pattern exists for MFTC in
distribution water. Increased counts for distribution MFTC occurred on
Thursday, Friday, and Saturday for seven months in 1985. However, no simlar
pattern exists for raw water or treated effluents. Previous statistical
analysis of historical data shows that water demand is weakly correlated
with coliform levels when seasonal factors are controlled. However, adequate
historical hydraulic data to test the hypothesis in the actual SCCRWA
distribution system were not available. Pilot testing in this project
indicates a potentially strong influence of fluid flow rate on coliform
episodes.
Sloughing resulted from rapid increases in flow velocity in the
pilot tests.
Besides influencing fluid shear stress at the biofilm-water interface, flow
rate also increases substrate loading rate which increases growth rate in
the biofilm leading to increased erosion rates.
Periodic chlorination. Shock chlorine treatment of biofilms not previously
chlorinated also produced dramatic sloughing events indicating that biofilms
can be partially removed by larger doses of chlorine. No sloughing was
observed in the pilot tests in which chlorine was continuously added (period
of two months).
Sloughing was initiated by shock chlorine treatment of biofilms.
Assimilable Organic Carbon (AOC)
Best estimates indicate that the Assimilable Organic Carbon (AOC)
concentration in SCCRWA distribution water is about 4-20% of the Total
Organic Carbon (TOC) concentration. Since TOC is on the order of 1-5 mg/L,

xxv
the AOC is approximately 0.05-1.0 mg AOC/L. At first glance, this appears to
be a very dilute nutrient source. However as illustrated above, 1.0 mg AOC/L
under ideal conditions will yield as much as 0.4 mg/L cellular mass which
converts to as many as 105 - 107 eelIs/100 mL.
Assimilable organic carbon in the distribution water is sufficient
to sustain a significantly high population of microorganisms.
The utilizable fraction of the TOC (AOC) at New Haven, higher than
determined in some other water systems, provides the energy and carbon for
microbial growth in the distribution water. However, carbon may not be the
growth-limiting nutrient in the distribution system water throughout the
year.
Environmental isolates. The SCCEWA K. pneumoniae and E. coli isolates are
capable of growth under very low nutrient conditions (oligotrophic) in the
planktonic form. Their reproductive capabilities exceed that of their
clinical counterparts indicating that the environmental strains are adapted
to replication in oligotrophic conditions.
The reproductive capabilities of isolates from the SCCFWA
distribution system exceed that of their clinical counterparts
indicating that the environmental strains are adapted to
replication in oligotrophic conditions.
Coliforms in the RTS biofilm. Coliforms entering the RTS from the pilot
filter system did not colonize the RTS biofilms and, as a consequence,
coliforms did not accumulate in the pilot distribution system biofilm during
tests with chlorine-free water. Furthermore, the viable coliform
concentration in the RTS water phase decreased through the pilot system.
When artificially introduced into the pilot distribution system, coliforms
did adsorb to the biofilm. However the adsorbed organisms were diluted out
of the biofilm by faster growing organisms and eventually disappeared. There
were no concurrent episodes during the experimental testing. It must be
concluded, therefore, that coliforms could not compete effectively with
other organisms in the biofilm during the testing period. Since no coliform
episodes occurred during this study, these results may simply indicate that
conditions during the project period were not conducive to coliform
proliferation in the biofilms.
Tubercles, Sediments, and Deposits
Tubercles and sediment from distribution pipe are microenvironments in which
coliforms and other bacteria can proliferate. Coliforms have been isolated
from tubercles in other distribution systems.
Tubercle and sediment material from distribution system pipes in SCCRWA and
AWWSC contained high levels of heterotrophic bacteria (104 - 109 cells/g).
Iron bacteria and sulfate-reducing bacteria were found associated with most
tubercles on iron pipe. No coliforms were found in the tubercle samples.
Since no coliform episodes occurred during this study, these results may

XXVI
simply indicate that conditions during the project period were not conducive
to coliform proliferation in tubercles or sediments.
CHDDRINE
Predicting Chlorine Residuals
An existing model for describing hydrodynamics in the pipe network was
modified to predict disinfectant residual based on chlorine demand of the
water as a function of time and location. Ranges of chlorine residuals at
steady state were determined with the model for the maximum and minimum
flows in the Saltonstall subsystem within SCCRWA. The model predicted
several locations in the Saltonstall system which regularly have a chlorine
residual of approximately zero. The model indicated that the major reason
for such low chlorine residuals was unusually low flows in that area.
Intensive sampling and analysis based on these model predictions supported
the model. Predicted chlorine residuals from the model are most sensitive to
changes in the system flow demands suggesting another means by which water
demand influences bacterial counts in distribution systems.
The modelling of the distribution system chlorine residuals
indicated chlorine deficient regions are most probably caused by
extremely low flow rates which correspond to long hydraulic
residence times.
Hydraulic modelling is not necessarily ready for general utility
application. However, rapid advances have been made in this project.
Already, dynamic modelling has replaced the steady state model described in
this report. Dynamic modelling of water distribution hydraulics is not
widely used for system design and only rarely for operations. As a
historical note, the Hardy-Cross method of distribution system analysis was
published in 1936 but was not widely used until adapted for mainframe
computers in the 1970's. Thus, we believe dynamic modelling will be a useful
design and management tool soon not only for chlorine residual, but also for
predicting spatial distribution of biofilm, temperature, and other important
environmental and operational parameters as a function of time.
Observation of chlorine demand kinetics in the distribution system were
necessary for model verification. Intensive sampling and monitoring in the
SCCRWA Saltonstall subsystem indicated that the chlorine demand of the pipe
walls is greater than the chlorine demand of the water. As a consequence,
chlorine concentration will probably decrease faster as the water velocity
decreases and water passes through smaller pipes (higher surface area-to-
volume ratio).
Chlorine demand of the distribution system surfaces exceeded the
demand of the distribution water.
Influence on Biofilm Processes
Overall accumulation. Biofilm is easily established on pipe surfaces exposed
to filtered effluent from a plant meeting all goals and standards of a
properly operated water treatment facility including maintenance of a

XXVII
chlorine residual. In the pilot distribution system carrying water with
approximate chlorine residuals of 0.3 and 0.8 mg/L, HPC-bacteria grew in the
protective biofilm environment but not in the water phase. At very low
chlorine residuals (<0.2 mg/L), biofilm accumulation in the pilot
distribution system was substantial and the rate of accumulation was
relatively rapid. Even in the test system with 0.8 mg/L chlorine residual,
significant biofilm accumulated after approximately 35 days. We have
concluded that chlorination in the treatment plant filter or the
distribution system "pushes" the biofilm accumulation further into the
distribution system. If the chlorine dose is insufficient, the biofilm
manifests itself in the distribution system. If the chlorine dosage is
"sufficient", no biofilm-related problems will be evident.
Biofilms accumulated in the presence of chlorinated water. The
upper limit investigated was 0.8 mg/L free chlorine residual. The
viable planktonic cell concentration increases with increasing
biofilm accumulation.
Approximately 75-90% of the biofilm population which accumulated in the
entry regions during the high chlorine (0.8 mg/L) tests were of the same
genus (Pseudomonas). This suggests that these organisms had specific
properties which permitted growth at higher rates than other cells in the
chlorinated water.
Chlorine residual influenced the biofilm population distribution,
at least in the early stages of accumulation on the pipe wall
surface.

Detachment. Periodic chlorine treatment at high concentration effectively


removed biofilms accumulated in the pilot distribution system carrying
chlorine-free tap water.
Injured Organisms
Injured coliforms are partially responsible for the breakthrough phenomenon.
A variety of influences such as sublethal concentrations of chlorine and
copper are known to cause a form of reversible injury to coliform bacteria
in drinking water. The bacteria are unable to grow and form colonies on the
commonly used media such as m-endo but are able to recover and grow under
other conditions. Therefore, such bacteria are not seen in drinking water
when standard methods are used for coliform enumeration. In some drinking
water systems, large numbers of coliforms are injured and relatively high
numbers of injured bacteria pass conventional treatment barriers undetected.
Thus, coliforms may enter drinking water distribution systems undetected and
inoculate biofilm communities or sediments where the cells recover and grow.
There is evidence that injured organisms are not significant in the SCCRWA
system. Since no coliform episodes occurred during this study, these results
may simply indicate that conditions during the project period were not
conducive to occurrences of injured coliforms. Thus, the question of injured
coliforms is not resolved.

XXVIII
SUMMARY

The problems of growth in the distribution system have been addressed


through statistical analysis of water utility historical data, sampling and
analysis of water and deposits from distribution systems, and
experimentation in pilot water treatment systems and pilot water
distribution systems. The statistical methods, analytical methods, and pilot
plant experimental methods have paved the way for future, more effective
research and development programs. Although breakthrough can be significant,
the results clearly indicate the significant influence of biofilms on
microbiological water quality in water distribution systems. The modelling
of distribution systems also holds great promise as a design and operational
tool. The project work has prepared the groundwork for an effective program
to ameliorate the problems of growth in water distribution systems.

XXIX
1.0 INTRODUCTION

W.G. Characklis

1.1 PROJECT ORGANIZATION

The research program was a combined effort by South Central Connecticut


Regional Water Authority (SCCRWA), American Water Works Service Company
(AWWSC), Stoner and Associates, Inc. and the Institute for Biological and
Chemical Process Analysis (IPA), Montana State University. The efforts
at SCCRWA were coordinated by Frances ludwig, at AWWSC by Mark LeChevallier,
at Stoner by Joseph Kroon, and at IPA by W.G. Characklis. The project effort
at IPA was shared by four principal investigators: Dr. Daniel Goodman,
Historical Data Analysis, Dr. W.A. Hunt, Distribution System Modelling, Dr.
G.A. McFeters, Microbiological Analysis and Testing, and Dr. W.G.
Characklis, Pilot Plant Experiments. Much of the sampling and analysis
accomplished in relation to the pilot plant experiments was accomplished by
SCCRWA. The distribution modelling and historical data analysis used
information provided by SCCRWA. Resources were not sufficient to analyze
data provided by AWWSC. Stoner and Associates provided the basis for the
distribution computer model.
1.2 REGROWTH AND AFTERGROWTH

Occurrences of excessive bacterial populations in distribution systems,


sometimes referred to as events or blooms in the literature, have troubled
utilities because of their possible implications for the hygienic safety of
their product. The water utility industry uses "regrowth" and "aftergrowth"
synonymously to describe the processes contributing to the unexplained
increase in number of organisms with travel time away from the treatment
plant effluent to the customer tap. However, Brazos et al (1985) proposed
the following more specific definitions: reqrowth is the recovery of
disinfectant-injured cells which have passed into the distribution system
from the water source or treatment plant and aftergrowth is microbial growth
in a water distribution system. Both terms implicate the microbial growth
process in the phenomenon of increased microbial cell numbers. More
importantly to this study, the terms do not clearly discriminate between the
two primary mechanisms by which the microbes appear in the distribution
system, i.e., breakthrough in the treatment plant and growth within the
distribution system. Thus, two terms are used throughout this report which
distinguish between the two modes of contamination:
Breakthrough is the increase in bacterial numbers in the distribution
system resulting from viable bacteria passing through the disinfection
process.
Injured organisms, resulting from insufficient disinfection, contribute to
the effects of breakthrough. The organisms passing through the disinfection
processes may sometimes result from growth of bacteria in the treatment
plant (e.g., in filters) or in storage tanks prior to disinfection. Thus,
breakthrough is a transport process as opposed to growth which is a
transformation or reaction process in which the requisite chemicals are
transformed, with the release of energy, into bacterial cells. Transport of
bacterial cells through the disinfection process is observed frequently
because disinfection is not sterilization.
Growth is the increase in viable bacterial numbers in the distribution
system resulting from bacterial growth in the distribution system
downstream of the disinfection process.
Growth occurs at the expense of substrate. The substrate is usually an
organic compound(s). However, the substrate can sometimes be a reduced
inorganic (e.g., ferrous iron) which provides the energy for growth. Growth
cannot occur unless organisms inoculate the distribution system as a result
of breakthrough. Thus, the mechanisms are interrelated. The consequences of
growth are compounded by the size of the inoculum population whether it
originates via breakthrough or from a biofilm residing in the distribution
system. Growth may occur in biofilms (including tubercles or sediments) or
in the distribution system water. The pilot plant experiments in this
project only addressed the growth process.
An episode is an occurrence of "excessive" viable bacteria in the
distribution system.
Episodes result from breakthrough and growth and other mechanisms. Thus,
episode refers to the occurrence while breakthrough and growth refer to its
causes. Coliforms are frequently entering the distribution system via
breakthrough without an episode occurring.
Excessive viable bacteria are viable bacterial numbers which exceeed
the drinking water standards.
Since present standards only refer to coliforms, excessive bacteria only
refers to coliforms. Thus, Pseudomonas cannot be in excess. The standard
permits a maximum of one coliform per 100 milliliters based on a monthly
average of all samples.
Insufficient chlorine concentration is a chlorine residual which
permits excessive viable bacteria.
An insufficient chlorine dose at the disinfection point will permit
excessive viable bacteria to exist at some location in the distribution
system. Since chlorine residual varies spatially and temporally in the
distribution system, insufficient chlorine concentration may exist in one
part of the system (e.g., "dead ends") and not in another (e.g., constantly
flowing regions). Chlorine concentration may vary radially in the pipe as
well as axially.
Plahktonic cells are viable bacterial cells suspended in the water phase.
The terms breakthrough, growth, episode, excessive viable bacteria, and
insufficient chlorine concentration and planktonic cells are underlined
throughout the report to emphasize their precise definitions. Boldfaced,
indented sections describe research findings from this project.
One of the first reports of bacterial growth in a distribution system was
published in 1930 (Committee on Water Supply, 1930) and described
"aftergrowth" of indicator bacteria occurring within numerous systems.
Aftergrowth reflected an increase in bacterial numbers as water was
transported through the distribution system. A subsequent publication by
Howard (1940) further described the problem and suggested that bacterial
growth on the walls (biofilm) within the distribution system was involved.
This problem persists in the drinking water industry today partially because
insightful analyses are hampered by the reluctance to publish the data.
There have been many reports within the past two decades describing chronic
water quality problems associated with bacterial number increases within
distribution systems.
Various undesirable effects have been associated with the occurrence of high
bacterial numbers in drinking water. The physical deterioration of pipes
has been ascribed to bacteria associated with tubercle formation that
restricts flow of water increasing frictional resistance and, hence, pumping
costs (O 1 Connor, et al., 1975). Corrosion mediated by bacteria also leads
to a reduction in the useful life of the pipes (Tuovinen, et al., 1980).
Taste and odor complaints have been associated with bacterial growth in the
earliest reports (Committee on Water Supply, 1930; Howard, 1940) as well as
more recently (O 1 Connor, et al., 1975; Victoreen, 1984; Krcon, 1984). Other
indicators of water quality deterioration have been likewise associated with
microbial activity within the system (Geldreich, et al., 1972; Olson, 1982;
Victoreen, 1984).
There are other concerns regarding high numbers of microorganisms and their
activity within drinking water distribution networks. Geldreich (1972),
pointed out that high concentrations of non-coliforms interfere with the
enumeration of coliforms, can be opportunistic pathogens, and indicate
general microbiological deterioration of the treatment and distribution
systems. The recent observation (Stout, et al., 1985) that bacteria
belonging to the genus Legionella grow as a part of the microbial community
found within the hot water systems of some health care institutions clearly
justifies these concerns. Finally, coliforms that colonize and reproduce
within the distribution system confuse the interpretation given these
bacteria in potable water as pollution indicators since coliforms exceeding
1 cfu/lOOmL (monthly average of all samples) in drinking water are a
violation of the National Safe Drinking Water Act. These concerns have
motivated efforts to understand the microbial ecology of drinking water
distribution systems and to develop practical approaches to control bacteria
within potable water systems.
1.3 UTILITY EXPERIENCE - SCCRWA EPISODE

Despite the longstanding awareness of problems associated with high


bacterial numbers in drinking water distribution systems, little detailed
information is available concerning the causes of these episodes or the
causative processes. There is only indirect evidence to support the widely
held view that bacteria actively reproduce in drinking water systems.
However, bacterial growth within the distribution system is consistent with
the best available observations in experimental systems (Victoreen, 1984a,
Victoreen, 1984b). Reports suggest that chemical enrichment, wanner
temperatures in the source water, and/or rainfall-runoff events associated
with spring and summer conditions in the watershed, might be causative
factors. Recent findings suggest that injured coliforms passed undetected
from the treatment process to seed the distribution system (J. Kippin,
personal communication) in a growth occurrence at Springfield, Illinois in
1982 (Hudson, et al., 1983).
Beginning in the spring of 1984, the South Central Connecticut Regional
Water Authority (SCCRWA), in New Haven CT, recovered excessively high
numbers of coliforms from the distribution system. Coliform episodes peaked
in August when the mean coliform concentration for the month was 12 times
the allowable standard of 1 cfu/100 mL. Coliforms were recovered from
sampling locations throughout the water supply system. The coliforms present
were identified as species of KLebsiella and Enterobacter. organisms that do
not pose a health risk to the normal population. There was no evidence of
Escherichia coli, a coliform associated with fecal contamination. After
consultation with state and federal officials, the Authority increased
chlorine levels to a maximum of 8.0 mg/L in treated effluents and began a
comprehensive flushing program. Because of the types and numbers of
coliforms present, no order was issued for consumers to boil their water.
Coliform numbers gradually declined and by January chlorine levels were
reduced to maintain a minimum residual of 1.0 mg/L at all locations. A
residual of 4.0 mg/L was maintained in the effluent from Lake Gaillard, the
only unfiltered surface supply. Coliform episodes occurred sporadically in
November, December, and February, indicating that the problem had not been
eliminated and could likely recur.
1.3.1 Actions by the Utility
A variety of investigations were initiated in an effort to identify the
cause of the problem. Monitoring frequency of raw water, treated effluents,
and the distribution system was increased. All treatment facilities were
thoroughly inspected and wells and filtration plants were disinfected.
Sampling and laboratory procedures were audited to determine whether samples
could have been contaminated during collection or analysis. The zinc-
containing corrosion inhibitor which had been used throughout the system was
changed to sodium polyphosphate at two isolated supplies. The phosphate
addition point was changed to allow for chlorine contact time prior to
injection of phosphate, and a 10 mg/L chlorine residual was maintained in
all phosphate solutions. Operation and maintenance procedures were revised,
including cleaning and painting of tanks, cleaning and lining of pipes, and
flushing of the distribution system. The potential for cross-connections
was evaluated.
The SCCRWA conducted a thorough review of changes that had occurred in the
water supply system within the past ten years, and considered the resulting
changes in flow patterns. A biostatistician was retained to analyze
historic water quality and operational data for possible correlations with
coliform numbers. Other water utilities that had experienced a similar
problem were consulted and case reports analyzed.
1.3.2 Conclusions and Recommendations
The available evidence supports the following SCCFWA conclusions:
1. There was no contamination through cross-connections, sampling, or
analytical procedures.
2. Chronic breakthrough during treatment was not responsible for the
recoveries of coliforms in the distribution system.
3. The coliforms are typical of those found in water distribution system
biofilms.
4. Biofilm properties may have been affected by changes in SCCKWA water
supplies and treatment that had occurred in the past ten years.
Abandonment of small unfiltered reservoirs, addition of groundwater
supplies, and construction of filtration plants tend to reduce the
concentration of nutrients available for microbial growth, promoting
selection for organisms adapted to a low nutrient environment.
5. Bacterial production of extracellular polysaccharide, which enhances
nutrient uptake, also provides protection from the bactericidal effects of
chlorine.
6. Statistical analysis of historic data shows that flow rate is weakly
correlated with coliform levels when seasonal factors are controlled.
7. Zinc-containing corrosion inhibitor may have an influence on biofilm
properties.
8. The precise factors that control biofilm growth and trigger its
detachment are not fully understood.
SCCFWA's present plans for controlling the problem include a comprehensive
flushing program and maintaining a minimum chlorine residual of 0.5 to 1.0
mg/L in all parts of the distribution system. Alternative treatment
strategies will be investigated for possible long-term control of microbial

SCCRWA has initiated research locally and in collaboration with this team of
researchers at MSU, to determine the potential causes of the problem, the
importance of nutritional factors, influence of chlorine, and the potential
health significance of biofilm organisms.
1.3.3 Other Utility Experiences
The elimination of coliform episodes in drinking water systems has been
sought through operational alternatives which have met with only limited
success. However, the application of phosphate-based corrosion inhibitors
(Lowther and Moser, 1984), and elevated pH (Martin, et al., 1982 and J.
Kippin, personal communication) have yielded some positive results. In
addition, sudden changes in flow and pressure gradients (hydraulic
transients) (Reilly and Kippen, 1978; Tuovinen, et al., 1980), presumably
desorb attached bacteria or colonized particulates from surfaces into the
bulk water. Thus, continuous operation without extreme changes in pressure
gradients is recommended (Kroon, 1984). Costello (1984) summarizes the
state-of-the-art in operational control of bacterial growth problems and
recommends regular flushing, adequate disinfection, reconditioning or
replacement of mains, and the elimination of dead-end sections, all widely
accepted procedures for proper system operation. However, since these
procedures can be quite costly, more information is needed before operational
alternatives for drinking water plants and distribution systems are deemed
effective for the prevention or control of bacterial episodes.
1.4 BIOFTIM PROCESSES

Biofilm refers to microbial cells immobilized at the pipe surface or on a


suspended particle. The cells are immobilized 1) in a matrix of extracellular
polymeric substances (EPS), 2) in tubercles (mineral deposits), 3) in
sediment deposits, 4) a combination of both, or 5) by some unknown mechanism.
The EPS are frequently products of microbial metabolism and may play a
significant role in the ecology of the cell including protection from the
oxidative effects of chlorine. The EPS provides a very adsorptive surface
for cations (especially multivalent cations such as calcium, zinc, iron),
particulate material and for other microbial cells. EPS may concentrate
nutrients from the aqueous phase. Cells and other associated materials are
continuously or episodically detaching from the surface and are reentrained
in the bulk water.
Organisms in biofilms are contrasted with planktonic organisms primarily
because of the significant effect of transport processes which generally are
rate-controlling the biofilm accumulation process. The transport processes of
concern may occur in the liquid phase (e.g., attachment or detachment) as
well as in the biofilm (e.g., diffusion of nutrients or chlorine).
The progression of biofilm accumulation is the net result of at least three
processes including:
1. transport and adsorption of cells at the pipe wall;
2. cell reproduction and product formation; and
3. net detachment of biofilm components from the pipe wall by erosion or
sloughing.
Biofilm begins to accumulate when a cell is transported from the liquid phase
to the substratum (the pipe wall surface). Once cells are adsorbed or
entrapped at the pipe surface, metabolism at the pipe surface ensues which
requires energy (substrate), i.e., assimilable organic carbon (AOC), and
other nutrients. As the film accumulates, detachment of biofilm becomes more
evident. Chlorine influences the rate and extent of all these processes.
1.4.1 Transport and Adsorption of Cells
The first step in biofilm accumulation on a clean surface is transport of
cells from the liquid to the pipe surface where a fraction of them adsorb.
The cells presumably enter the distribution system via breakthrough. It
should be emphasized that disinfection is not synonymous with sterilization
and, thus, some cells are always entering the distribution system in this
way. Some relatively small fraction of these cells adsorb to surfaces, even
in the presence of chlorine. Cell adsorption rate to the pipe wall is
proportional to the number of cells in the water so the extent of cell
removal during water treatment influences cell adsorption rate in the
distribution system. Results indicate that chlorine concentration influences
the accumulation rate, extent, and microbial population of biofilms in the
distribution system.
1.4.2 Growth. Reproduction, and Product Formation within the Biofilm
Once a significant number of cells has adsorbed, the biofilm accumulates,
primarily by growth processes, fueled by nutrients transported by the large
flows in the system. Rate and extent of growth and product formation by
biofilm organisms is generally controlled by one nutrient. Organic carbon
probably serves as the primary energy source (substrate) for microbial
activity in many drinking water distribution systems. Exceptions may be
severe cases of red water where iron is the energy source.
Substrate loading rate. Despite their apparent significance, relatively
little organic carbon data are reported for drinking water in the U.S. In
the past year, as much as 5 mg TOC/L has been recovered from SCCRWA drinking
water samples. Although substrate (organic carbon) concentration is an
important variable in biofilm processes, substrate loading rate is also a
critical variable. Substrate loading rate in a pipe can be defined as
follows:
S F S v d
Ns = =
A 4 L

where Ns = substrate loading rate, S = substrate concentration, A = surface


area of the pipe, F = volumetric flow rate in the pipe, v = mean fluid
velocity, d = pipe diameter, and L = pipe length. Therefore, metabolic rate
in the biofilm depends on physical variables (F, d, and L) as well as S. For
example, a pipe with a flow of 500 lymin (132 gpm) will transport as much as
2.5 grams organic carbon per minute, a significant supply of metabolic energy
for a biofilm. If flow rate (i.e., water demand) were doubled, supply of
metabolic energy would double. Thus, flow rate or water demand may be an
important factor influencing growth in the distribution system. If all the
carbon were assimilable (see AOC) and biofilm growth were allowed to continue
uninhibited, almost 2 pounds (900 g) of biofilm could accumulate in
approximately 15 feet (4.05 m) of pipe (6" (15 cm) I.D.) surface in one day.
If half of the accumulation per day sloughed from the surface, the cellular
carbon concentration in the distribution water would be on the order of 0.6
mg TOC/L...an almost undetectable TOC level due to the dilution rate in the
pipe. Nevertheless, 0.6 mg TOC/L could easily represent as much as 105 - 106
organisms/100 mL.
Microbial products. However, the cell numbers can only account for about 10%
of the organic carbon (OC). The remainder must be attributed to non-viable
cells, organic molecules or particles entering with the treatment plant
effluent, and/or microbial products. Microbial product formation may account
for a significant fraction of the assimilated organic carbon in the
distribution system. Extracellular polymers make up the capsules surrounding
the individual cells (planktonic and biofilm cells) and also form the organic
matrix which immobilizes the biof ilm cells. The extracellular polymers
surrounding the bacteria may also reduce the biocidal effectiveness of
chlorine since organic material generally is characterized by a high chlorine
demand.
Growth rate. The pilot tests clearly indicate that growth of planktonic cells
is negligible compared to growth of biofilm cells even without a chlorine
residual present. Specific growth rate of planktonic cells was sometimes
negative indicating a dieoff as the cells progressed through the plug flow
KTS. Specific growth rate (or cell turnover rate) in the biof ilm, on the
other hand, was as high as 0.06 day"1 in the distribution system environment
without chlorine present. A representative maximum growth rate for a
heterotrophic population is about 12 day"1 . A one day (24 h) residence time
is characteristic of the Saltonstall subsystem of the SCCFWA network. If
cells in the water could reproduce as fast as the biof ilm organisms (they do
not), only a 6% increase in suspended cells would be observed from the
treatment plant effluent to the furthest tap in the system.
1.4.3 Detachment
The detachment' of specific microorganisms from the biof ilm is a major focus
of this research program. Detachment processes can be classified as erosion
or sloughing.
Erosion. Erosion of biofilm occurs continuously and rather uniformly over the
biofilm surface releasing microscopic biofilm segments into the bulk water.
Increased fluid shear stress and increasing biofilm thickness generally
increase biofilm erosion rates.
Sloughing. Sloughing is the detachment of macroscopic patches of biofilm from
the pipe believed to be controlled by mechanisms internal to the biofilm. It
is conceivable that sloughing events can occur in "dead" flow areas in
distribution systems which are periodically subject to hydraulic
disturbances. When the hydraulic disturbances occur, biofilm cells are
released to the water. The dead flow areas generally have relatively low
chlorine residual. Sloughing events in chlorinated biofilm systems have never
been reported.
Fluid shear stress. The effect of increased fluid velocity on biofilm
processes in the pipeline is to increase substrate loading rate and to
increase shear stress forces at the biofilm-^water interface. The effect on
Ns has been mentioned above. Fluid shear stress can strongly influence
biofilm erosion and sloughing processes.
Combined effects of fluid flow rate, substrate concentration, and shear
stress. Fluid flow rate and substrate concentration determine the substrate
loading rate to a biofilm. Shear stress clearly influences erosion rate from
the biofilm. Then, the combination of substrate concentration, fluid flow
rate, and shear stress determines the quantity and the composition
(microbiological and chemical) of detached material.
1.5 BIOFIIMS IN DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM

Geldreich (1972) suggested that conditions within drinking water distribution


systems are suitable for biofilm formation which can ultimately lead to
release of bacteria into drinking water. It is believed that biofilms in
drinking water systems are communities containing numerous types of
microorganisms, sometimes in relatively high numbers. Diverse communities
that were sometimes layered, including representatives of many groups of
microorganisms.
1.5.1 Nutrition of Biofilms
Organic carbon probably serves as the primary energy source for microbial
activity in drinking water distribution systems. Exceptions may be severe
cases of red water where iron is the primary energy source. Yet, there are
little reported organic carbon data for drinking water although volatile
solids have been correlated with high numbers of SPC bacteria in a drinking
water system (17). The SCCKWA has found as much as 5 mg C/L from drinking
water samples (unpublished results). This amount of TOG provides a
significant flow of energy to a biofilm in an open system like a water pipe
when substrate flux is considered (see Section 1.4.1).
1.5.2 Tubercles
Coliforms have been isolated from tubercles. Presumably, the solid surface
of the tubercle provides a protected, microenvironment where growth is
possible (in contrast to the bulk-phase water where nutrients are presumably
present in such low concentrations precluding the growth of coliforms). In
general however, coliform growth appears to be more dependent on nutrients in
the bulk phase than on nutrients in tubercles. This appears the case even in
studies with undisturbed 35 year old tubercles in a pipe removed from a
distribution system. Another study with nutrients extracted from tubercles
resulted in relatively little microbial growth (Alien and Geldreich, 1977).
1.5.3 Nutrient Syntropy
Reports (Hudson, et al., 1983; O 1 Connor, et al., 1975) generally indicate
that coliform episodes are preceded by elevated populations of non-coliforms.
Noncoliforms may be important to coliform growth through some type of
nutrient syntropy. Extracellular organic secretions from autochthonous
autotrophic and mixotrophic bacteria (Agate, et. al., 1969) within the
tubercle/biofilm (Tuovinen, et al., 1980) serve as nutrients for coliforms.
Haack and McFeters (1982) described a nutrient syntropy in which algal
extracellular products served as nutrients for heterotrophs, including
coliforms, in a biofilm community of an oligotrophic alpine stream. Talbot
and Seidler (1979) demonstrated that a unique compound found in redwood
served as nutrient for KLebsiella species in drinking water storage tanks
made from that material.
Thus, if nutrients are the major limitation to bacterial growth in drinking
water systems, then both coliforms and non-coliforms respond when the source
water becomes sufficiently enriched.
1.6 INJURED ORGANISMS

Injured coliforms may contribute to the breakthrough phenomenon. A variety


of influences such as sublethal concentrations of chlorine and copper are
known to cause a form of reversible injury to coliform bacteria in drinking
water (LeChevallier and McFeters, 1985). As a result, the bacteria are
unable to grow and form colonies on the commonly used media such as nv-endo
(LeChevallier and McFeters, 1985). Therefore, such bacteria are not seen in
drinking water when standard methods are used for coliform enumeration. The
majority of coliforms in some drinking water systems experiencing coliform
episodes are injured (McFeters, Kippen and LeChevallier, 1986). Relatively
high numbers of injured bacteria pass conventional treatment barriers
undetected (McFeters, Kippen and LeChevallier, 1986) suggesting that
coliforms enter drinking water distribution systems undetected and seed
biofilm communities or sediments where these cells recover and grow.
1.7 SUMMARY

Coliforms and other bacteria grow within biofilms in complex and dynamic
communities within the drinking water distribution system. Sporadically, the
organisms slough off the pipe surface resulting in unacceptable, bacterial
levels in potable water. The prediction and/or prevention of such episodes
cannot be achieved without adequate information relating the microbial
ecology of the pipe-surface community and the pipeline transport process to
operating variables that can be altered within the constraints of drinking
water treatment technology.
1.8 PROJECT GOAL

The primary goal of this study was to evaluate the use of a computer model
that predicts chlorine residuals in a water distribution system and
biological process models in conjunction with routine testing as a means to
monitor the effect of water treatment and water distribution practices on
bacterial populations in the distribution and storage network of water
systems. Observations were conducted in operating distribution systems and
in a pilot treatment plant/distribution system at the South Central
Connecticut Regional Water Authority in New Haven, CT.
1.9 PROJECT OBJECTIVES

The project objectives were as follows:


1. Analyze historical data supplied by SCCRWA to identify relationships
between operating and environmental variables and coliform episodes in the
distribution systems.

10
2. An existing model for describing hydrodynamics in the pipe network was
modified to predict disinfectant residual based on chlorine demand of the
water as a function of time and location. Observation of chlorine demand
kinetics in the distribution system was conducted for model verification.
3. Standard and novel bacterial tests, as well as other physical and
chemical analyses, were conducted on the water and deposits from the pipe
surfaces in the distribution system, in the pilot systems, and in the
laboratory systems to determine their usefulness in identifying, detecting or
predicting coliform episodes in the distribution system.
4. Various parameters were evaluated to determine their impact on biofilm
processes. They included modifications in treatment practices, flow
variations, and changes in nutrient content. The pilot plant and laboratory-
scale reactors, as well as the actual distribution system, were used for
these tests.

11
2.0 HISTORICAL DATA ANALYSIS

D. Goodman and M. Cunnane


2.1 THE DATA SET
Approximately ten megabytes of data on magnetic tape were provided
by South Central Connecticut Regional Water Authority (SCCFWA) for
the historical data analysis. The tape included daily observations of
hydraulic and water quality variables for the raw water influents, treated
water effluents, and distribution system sampling locations. These data
were collected from 1976 through 1985 for the distribution system, 1982
through 1985 for the treated effluents, and 1983 through 1985 for the raw
influents. An inventory of data provided on the tape, based on the
accompanying documentation, is given in Appendix A.I.
Prior to statistical investigations, it was necessary to reformat the data
base into a more useful form which included the following:
1) all data for each of the three categories (raw, effluent, and
distribution) were uniformly formatted so that inquiry into any of
the years or locations did not require specialized programming,
2) a sorting step in which the data were organized according to date
of the record and its location. This step permitted simpler access to
the data in a shorter time.
Two additional problems required attention prior to statistical analyses:
1) The data base did not distinguish between an entry which had the
value zero and an entry which was not observed, i.e. analysis not
done. Frequent inclusion of missing data points as zeroes could
invalidate the analysis.
2) The second problem resulted from the resampling protocol in the
distribution system. When a coliform density greater than zero is
found at a particular location (regular sampling day), the location
must be resampled every succeeding day (nonregular sampling day)
until two consecutive observations of zero coliforms occur. Awareness
of this protocol is essential, since it makes the observations
conditional and predicated on the coliform density. The conditional
nature of the data invalidates the use of certain statistical
techniques which are based on an assumption of independent sampling.
We treated the problem concerning missing data coded as zero (versus
observed zeros) by acquiring the laboratory data sheets for the month of
June for the years 1982 through 1985 and comparing these data to those in
our data base. We found that, at least for the month of June, there was not
a serious problem in regard to this issue. Thus, all zeros were regarded as
actual observations. The specific results and details of this comparison
are given in Appendix A.2.

13
The distribution system data base was reconstructed to eliminate
observations from nonregular sampling days. Subsequent analyses used data
collected only on regular sampling days. The results and details of this
procedure are given in Appendix A. 3.
The format of water utility data bases should be organized to
permit diagnostic analyses as well as satisfy regulatory

The resulting data base clearly pointed to 1985 as the most complete year
and indicated that it was appropriate to use weekly averages (or averages
over longer periods) in the analyses. The reasons for these actions depend
on the more specific details of the database.
There are three categories of data raw water, water treatment plant
effluent, and distribution water. The raw water samples are taken each day
from the influent to the water treatment plant facilities. Raw water comes
from either lakes or wells. These samples are never from mixed sources.
Effluent water samples are collected each day from effluent of the
treatment facilities which are any sites where disinfectant may be added.
The distribution water sampling sites are located throughout the municipal
drinking water distribution system and are downstream of treatment
facilities. The distribution system is divided into eight individual
subsystems by SCCRWA: 1) Cheshire Wells, 2) Gaillard, 3) Gaillard - West
River, 4) Gaillard - Whitney, 5) Gaillard - Whitney - Wells, 6)
Saltonstall, 7) Sleeping Giant - Mt. Carmel Wells, and 8) West River. The
water flowing in each of these systems can mix with water from adjacent
systems, with the exception of Cheshire Wells and Saltonstall. These two
systems are isolated. In any individual system, there are from two to
thirteen locations which were sampled about three times each week during
1985 (and fewer times during previous years) .
The use of 1985 data and weekly averages relates to the distribution system
sampling schedule and frequency. During 1985, about half of the sample
locations in the eight distribution systems were sampled on Monday,
Wednesday, and Friday, and the other half on Tuesday, Thursday, and
Saturday. Thus, if analyses were carried out on daily data, only about half
of the system would be observed each day. A two or four day average could
represent an entire system but the sample size would be small in some cases.
By using a weekly average, sample sizes are normally greater than 15 for the
distribution systems and the time period is not much longer than for the
two- or four-day averages. For the years previous to 1985, the distribution
system data are far less complete and sample locations were sometimes
observed only once each week. Thus, 1985 was a better year for the
analyses. A complete list of the sampling schedule and frequency for each
station in each distribution system from 1982 through 1985 is given in Table
A. 7 of Appendix A. 3.
A complete list of the measured variables for all years and all data types
is given in Appendix A.I. Table 2.1 is a list of the variables measured in
1985 used for most of the statistical analyses.

14
2.2 GROUNDWATER VERSUS SURFACE WATER CDLTFORM DENSITIES

The SCCRWA system showed a marked difference between percent positive MFTC
observations in treated effluent water from groundwater as opposed to
surface supplies.
The effluent MFTC percent positive for groundwater supplies was
about three times greater than that for surface water supplies.
Thus, in terms of the frequency of positive MFTC, groundwater
entering the distribution system contained more coliforms than
surface water entering the distribtution system.
Surface water coliform densities averaged about 25 cfu/lOOmL for the raw
influent and about 1 cfu/lOOmL for the treated effluent. Conversely,
coliform densities in the groundwater raw influent average near 0 cfu/lOOmL
and increase to about 2 or 3 cfu/lOOmL in the treated effluent samples.
A major difference between surface and groundwater treatment is the absence
of filters or any type of contact tanks at the groundwater sites. In every
surface water treatment plant (Figure 2.2-A), there is at least one vessel
in which the disinfectant undergoes mixing. Similar features are not
clearly shown on the groundwater treatment schematics (Figure 2.2-B). In
addition, the groundwater sites frequently use distribution system water
from other locations as a lubricant for water-cooled pump bearings. The
distribution system water can thereby increase groundwater bacterial counts
at the treated effluent sampling point, especially when the groundwater
pumps are only operating intermittently and water is quiescent for
significant periods. The long line leading from the distribution system to
the treated effluent sampling point may also contain significant amounts of
biofilm which may contribute to coliforms in the treated effluent samples at
the groundwater sites (Figure 2.2-B).
Thus, a comparison of raw influent and treated effluent suggests that
coliform numbers increase during groundwater "treatment" (Figure 2.1-B)
whereas coliforms are reduced during surface water treatment (Figure 2.1-
A).
The increase in coliforms during groundwater processing may be
partially due to the use of return distribution water used for
lubrication or even accumulation of biofilms in the long pipelines
leading to the sampling site.
The increase in coliform numbers from raw groundwater to groundwater
treated effluent (sampling point) is so large that the coliform
concentration in this effluent is greater than that in surface water
treated effluent. Therefore, percent MFTC positives are greater in
groundwater treated effluent than in surface water treated effluent. The
chi-square test indicates that a statistically significant difference
exists between % positive coliforms in surface water and groundwater
treated effluents.

15
.

48

1985 1986
Raw Efflmnt

a.s

48

FIGURE 2.1-A Heterotrophic Bacteria and Coliforms in the Raw Water


and Effluent of the Saltonstall Treatment Plant (Surface Water).

16
o
0.
r
«
"5
o
0.

39 43

>•
I
I
'tilt
A, Im
19 28 37 46 21 30 39 48

1986
Effluwit

FIGURE 2.1-B Heterotrophic Bacteria and Coliforms in the Raw Water and
Effluent of the North Cheshire Treatment Plant (Ground Water).

17
LAKE SALTONSTALL WATER TREATMENT PLANT
CHEMICAL FEED SCHEMATIC
ROUTE 1 , EAST HAVEN , CONN.

Ca> Raw Water


Sampling Point

CD Effluent
Sampling Pokit

© Phosphate

[pi] Chlorine

/F\ Fluoride
CD* Sampling point

'"p! Polymer
I*
u. ('C\ Caustic

'"A; Alum

FIGURE 2.2-A Schematic Diagram of Saltonstall Surface Water Treatment


Plant Indicating Chemical Feed Points and Sampling Points.

18
NORTH CHESHIRE WELL FIELD
BLACKS RD. CHESHIRE, CONN.
CHEMICAL FEED SCHEMATIC

WELL*3
Pho»phate
Chlorrve

Fluor ide
Raw water
Sampling point
Effluent
Sampling point

WELLiM

MOTE: 'P; PTiosphate no longer fed


to suction side of pumps

DISTRIBUTION MAIN

FIGURE 2.2-B Schematic Diagram of North Cheshire Well Field Indicating


Chemical Feed Points and Sampling Points. Note the Effluent Sampling Point
Originating in the Distribution System.

19
TABLE 2.1
List of Variables for 1985 Data

DATA CATEGORY
VARIABLE NAME RAW EFFLUENT DISTRIBUTION

FREE CHIDRINE X X
TOTAL CHLORINE X X
COLOR XXX
TURBIDITY XXX
pH XXX
TEMPERATURE XXX
STANDARD PLATE COUNT (SPC) XXX
MEMBRANE FILTER TOTAL COLIFORM (MFTC) XXX
MEMBRANE FILTER FECAL COLIFORM (MFFC) XXX
ATYPICAL BACTERIA (ATYP) XXX
MEMBRANE FILTER FECAL STREPTOCOCCUS
(MFFS) X

20
2.3 SOURCES FOR DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM COLIFOEMS

The MFTC observations from raw, effluent, and distribution system waters
indicate excess coliforms may occur during any season. The main concern was
the causes of the occurrences of coliform bacteria in the distribution
systems. It is conceivable that the coliform outbreaks originate in the raw
supply, survive the treatment process, and then enter the distribution
systems. However, high coliform counts could also be attributable to
increases at the treatment stations. For example, organisms can grow in the
treatment plant filters (Section 5.0) and the released organisms enter the
distribution system through the plant effluent. In addition, biofiLm
accumulation in the long sampling lines in the SOCRWA system may also
contribute to high coliform counts, i.e., growth of coliforms within the
distribution systems, in the water or on pipe surfaces prior to treatment
effluent sample, is also a plausible source.
Identification of coliform sources and their relative contribution is
important to water utilities, so that alternative remedial measures can be
evaluated. The search for the sources consisted of two tasks. First, a
frequency analysis was performed comparing the daily MFTC maximum for each
distribution system to that for its corresponding (by day and system)
treated effluent and raw influent. To supplement this analysis, trajectory
plots were constructed of weekly MFTC averages and maxima by week. Second,
distribution, effluent, and influent MFTC were plotted against one another
in scatter plots to identify any patterns in the data. In these plots, the
entire water supply system is analyzed rather than each of the eight
individual systems. Both daily MFTC averages and maxima, and weekly MFTC
averages, were used for these plots. Additionally, a simple contingency
table was used to corroborate the interpretations of the scatter plots. The
results of the analyses are presented in Appendix A.4.
The results suggest that coliform episodes in the distribution
systems may be a result of either growth and/or breakthrough within
the distribution system.
SCCRWA personnel suggested that the finding of simultaneous occurence of
coliforms in groundwater effluents and distribution system argues against
contamination from treated effluents. Much of the Cheshire system probably
contains water that is more than one day old. In addition to transmission
time, there are two well fields in Cheshire, at opposite ends of the
system. Since they are pumping against each other, there is "quite likely"
a plug of water that goes back and forth and has a slow turnover. There is
also 5 million gallons of storage in the middle of the system which
increases detention time in the system. Water leaving the tank during peak
demand periods in the summer is "probably quite old". Simultaneity can also
be explained by hydraulic disturbances or other factors which trigger
biofilm detachment or cell growth. This would affect biofilms in well
fields, effluent lines, or distribution systems.

21
2.4 DAY-OF-THE-WEEK AND COLIFORM OCCURRENCES

Coliform outbreaks are more prevalent on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday as


indicated by SCCRWA in bar charts of 1985 distribution system MFTC percent
positives (Figures 2.3-A and 2.3-B). However, the pattern was only observed
in March, April, May, July, August, September, and October. Our
investigation of this phenomenon has revealed, in addition, that no pattern
exists for treated effluent and raw influent (Figures 2.4 and 2.5).
A day-of-the-week pattern exists for MFTC in distribution water.
Increased distribution MPTC occured on Thursday, Friday, and
Saturday for seven months in 1985. However, no similar pattern
exists for raw water or treated effluents.
The analyses did not provide an explanation for this phenomenon. Hypotheses
to explain coliform outbreaks on Thursday, Friday,and Saturday are generally
based on changes in water use patterns within the distribution system.
The details of the day-of-the-week phenomenon are presented in Appendix
A.6. In addition, the day-of-the-week pattern in other water quality
variables are also examined.
2.5 SMJLTANEITY OF COLIFORM OCCURRENCES AMONG DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS

The intermittent outbreaks of coliform bacteria in all eight of the


distribution systems during 1985 is unquestionable. The statistical
analysis indicates that simultaneity of the episodes among some of the
systems is also a feature of the phenomenon.
During a coliform episode, four or more individual distribution
subsystems systems will be affected simultaneously.
This finding enables one to conclude that distribution systems were
normally affected simultaneously by coliforms during 1985.
The analysis was a simple comparison between observed and expected
frequencies of the number of distribution systems simultaneously positive.
The histogram of Figure 2.6 shows the observed distribution for the number
of systems simultaneously positive by day during 1985. The maximum number
of systems possibly positive on any day was reduced from eight to seven
when we eliminated the West River system from the analysis (due to fewer
sampling locations). The expected distribution was approximated by a
binomial with the parameter, p, equal to the probability of a single system
being positive. This parameter was determined from the data set, and is the
ratio of the number of systems positive to the number of systems reporting
over all days observed in 1985. If a tendency for systems to be
simultaneously positive (or zero) exists, the binomial will overestimate the
unimodal-peaks of the observed distribution, since its estimates are
entirely dependent on the number of systems and the probability for a

22
50 -i———-
JUNE

MAY
C/J
APR

MAR
O !
t 30-i FEB

JAM
LVJI

to
CO
Q- 77/777A
// '////A
V// /•' '

Ld
O
!
:
te
£10, mm
CL !
^^^

0
MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT

FIGURE 2.3-A Cumulative Coliform Sample Distribution by Month and Day of the
Week for the SCCRWA Distribution System (1985). (Percent positives for January
= 0).
80
DEC

NOV
CO
UJ
_J OCT
QL 604
SEP
CO

AUG

JUL

IV)

kV\^>

0
TUE THU SAT

FIGURE 2.3-B Cumulative Coliform Sample Distribution by Month and Day of the
Week for the SCCFWA Distribution System (1985) .
o cr

CORRECTED FRACTION POSITIVE MFTC PERCENT POSITIVE

VD <
00 <D

cn

V0
oo
ui
o

FIGURE 2.5 a) MFTC Percent Positive Over all Treated Effluent Stations
(1985). b) MFTC Percent Positive Over all Raw Influent Stations (1985).

26
140

120H

10CM

80H

LJ
r>
Q
Ld
60H

40H

20H
Legend
WJ. OBSERVED
r//Z-. EXPECTED

01234567
NUMBER OF SYSTEMS SIMULTANEOUSLY POSITIVE

FIGURE 2.6 Positive MFTC Simultaneity Among Distribution Systems (1985)

27
single system to be positive (parameter p). The binomial probabilities are
not conditional on the coliform density of other systems.
The results from the analysis are provided in Table 2.2. The
conclusion that four or more systems are frequently positive on a day of
coliform excess is made by comparing the probabilities of observed and
expected (= by chance only) frequencies for each possible number of systems
simultaneously positive (0 to 7). The binomial distribution gives an
underestimate for the situation in which 0, 4, 5, 6, and 7 systems are
simultaneously positive in 1985. This means that the observed distribution
of simultaneity of coliform occurrences among the 7 systems can not be
explained by chance alone for these situations. The differences between the
observed and expected frequencies are large here.
Ooliform episodes in the distribution systems are partly caused by a
(external) factor that effects systems simiLtateously.
Surface water and groundwater supplied systems were separated and
tested for simultaneity in a manner identical to that used above. The West
River system was eliminated from the analysis of surface water for the same
reason as above. The histograms of the observed distributions are shown in
Figure 2.7, and the comparisons between the observed and expected
probabilities are given in Table 2.3. In both cases, it was more common for
systems to be simultaneously positive or simultaneously zero. In the
analysis on groundwater systems (Cheshire Wells and Sleeping Giant-Mt.
Carmel Wells), it was more common than can be explained by chance for both
systems to be zero or positive. Similarly, in the surface water systems
(Gaillard, Gaillard-West River, Gaillard-Whitney, Gaillard-Whitney-Wells,
and Saltonstall) it was more common that zero or three or more systems were
positive.
For future work it would be interesting to determine how much of
this simultaneity can be accounted for by seasonality (since we already
have documented that coliform episodes are more common in certain times of
the year). This would be tested by examining simultaneity, in the same
fashion, only conducting the test within-season, or within-month, thus
revealing whether the effect is detectable within short time periods. This
partitioning would probably require a larger sample size than we have from
1985 alone.
2.6 PREDICTING DISTRIBUTION MFTC

In this final section of the historical data analysis, variables from the
1985 data base are identified which are accurate predictors of distribution
MFTC. We pursued a three step analysis which includes multiple and simple
linear regression, multiple regression on principal components, and a
discriminant analysis. Statistical Analysis System (SAS) was used for all
computations.

28
150

012345
NUMBER OF SYSTEMS SIMULTANEOUSLY POSITIVE

300

>- 200H
u
UJ

o
LJ
o:
Legend
LL. 100-
OBSERVED
EE EXPECTED

0 1 2
NUMBER OF SYSTEMS SIMULTANEOUSLY POSITIVE

FIGURE 2.7 a) Positive MFTC Simultaneity of Surface Water Supplied


Distribution Systems (1985). b) Positive MFTC Simultaneity of Groundwater
Supplied Distribution Systems (1985).

29
TABLE 2.2

Comparison of Observed and Expected Frequency (from Binomial; n=7,


p=0.1662) or all Distribution Systems.

# of systems 01234567
simultaneously +
observed
frequency 118 49 29 18 10 7 5 1
observed
frequency(%) 0.50 0.21 0.12 0.10 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.004
expected
frequency 66.4 92.6 55.4 18.4 3.67 0.45 0.02 0.001

expected
frequency(%) 0.28 0.40 0.23 0.08 0.02 0.002 0.000 0.000
observed minus
expected freq. 51.6 -43.6 -36.4 -0.4 6.33 6.55 4.98 0.999

30
TABLE 2.3

Comparison of Observed and Expected Frequency for Groundwater Systems


(From Binomial,n=2,p=0.1591) and for Surface Water Systems (From Binomial
(From Binomial,n=5,p=0.1690).

# of systems
simultaneously + 012345
groundwater systems
observed
frequency 185 36 20
observed
frequency(%) 0.768 0.149 0.083
expected
frequency 0.707 0.268 0.025
expected
frequency(%) 170.4 64.6 6.0
observed minus
expected freq. 14.6 -28.6 14.0
surface water systems
observed
frequency 131 57 24 13 12 2
observed
frequency(%) 0.548 0.239 0.100 0.054 0.050 0.008
expected
frequency 94.6 96.3 39.2 7.89 0.717 0.024

expected
frequency 0.396 0.403 0.164 0.033 0.003 0.0001

observed minus
expected freq. 36.4 - 39.3 -15.2 5.11 11.283 1.976

31
The data are all weekly averages over all distribution systems. Simple
regressions on daily observations were insignificant. Therefore, they had
no predictive value. The averaging step reduced the random noise in the
data so that the predictive value of the variables is more exposed.
When more data are available, including hydraulic data which permit
assessment of mixing between systems, these analyses should be repeated on
weekly within-system averages, giving greater resolution than is possible
when averaging systems together.
2.6.1 Multiple and Simple Linear Regression
Selecting a linear model to describe our response variable, distribution
system MFTC, requires either choosing a set of independent variables a
priori, or implementing a variable-selection technique through which a
model is derived. For this data set, a model was derived using the
backward elimination technique which first includes all variables in the
model and then eliminates one variable at a time, until the model contains
only those variables which provide a statistically significant
contribution to the model prediction. The results of this analysis are
presented in Table 2.4.
The most important predictors of distribution MFTC, based on
regression analysis were (in order of importance) pH, treatment
effluent MFTC, and raw water turbidity.
The R-squared term indicates the fraction of the total variance of the
response variable accounted for by the regression. The R-squared value of
0.521 indicates that the regression model accounts for 52.1% of the
variance of distribution MFTC. The sequential sums of squares indicate
the relative influence of a predictor variable on the R-squared term
according to the sequence of elimination. Thus, effluent pH had the most
influence on distribution MFTC and effluent turbidity the least.
The F statistic indicates that the probability of a value greater than the
F value (7.82) of 0.0001 for this model means that there is a 0.01% chance
that our regression is not a true predictor and only arose by chance.
Simple regressions were performed on each predictor variable in the
multiple regression model. The most important observation drawn from these
regressions is that distribution total chlorine and effluent turbidity are
relatively unimportant predictors.
2.6.2 Principal Components Analyses
Principal components analyses are useful for understanding patterns in
large multivariate data sets and for disclosing information concealed by
multicollinearities. Two analyses were performed using principal
components: 1) one designed to reveal the configuration of the data set
and 2) another which uses the principal components as independent
variables to predict distribution MFTC. Details of the Principal

32
TABIE 2.4

Multiple Linear Regression: Backward Elimination. All Variables Were


Standardized Prior to Analysis.

Initial Model Eliminated Final Model


Variables
Distribution
pH X
total chlorine——————————
free chlorine X
turbidity X
temperature X
true color X
Effluent
pn ____________________
rjj
free chlorine X
turbidity————————————
temperature X
true color X
-——— V

Influent
pH
turbidity-
temperature X
true color X
MFTC X
Independent Regression Sequential F Value Prob > F
Variable Coefficient Sum of Squares
Effluent MFTC 0.589** 5.46 8.56 0.006
Effluent Turbidity 0.347 2.10 3.29 0.078
Effluent pH -0.527 10.62 16.65 0.000
Distribution Total
Chlorine 0.338 3.82 5.99 0.019
Influent Turbidity 0.288 2.92 4.59 0.039

Model R-sguared = 0 .521, Model F Value = 7.82, Prob > F = 0.0001


Model Intercept = 0 .876

** All regression coefficients are significant to at least the 0.04


level, including the intercept.

33
Components Analysis, including interpretation of the components, multiple
linear regression on the components, and discriminant analysis can be
found in Appendix A. 7.
Configuration of the data set. A principal components analysis was
performed on all 18 variables included in the data set. The results of
this analysis are given in Table 2.5. Our intention for completing the
analysis was to gain an understanding of the variance of the data set in
terms of the variables which vary together and which contribute most to
the total variance. The first six principal components accounted for 83.5%
of the variance. We assigned the remaining 16.5% of the variance to
uninterpretable noise (=variance as a result of variables that were not
considered in the analysis) and focused the analysis on the first six
components.
The variables weighted most heavily in each component vary together
(denoted by asterisks in Table 2.6), either positively or negatively
depending on the signs of their coefficients. Variables weighted heavily
in the components accounting for most of the variance normally are
strongly correlated.
Overall, only component 2 showed promise of revealing a relation between
distribution MFTC and other variables, namely a negative relation with
distribution free chlorine and color.
Distribution MFTC varies inversely with distribution free chlorine
and color according to the Principal Components Analysis.
Other aspects of the pattern resolved by the principal component analysis
did not involve distribution MFTC in an obviously interpretable way.
Multiple linear regression on principal components. The mutual
independence of principal components makes them favorable for regression
analyses. Furthermore, multiple regression on principal components does
not conceal variables which may have been eliminated from the model by
selection techniques, such as backward elimination, due to
multicollinearities. In our analysis, we assumed that components
describing small fractions of the variance represent measurement error and
other types of noise, so these higher order components (which generally do
not lend themselves to interpretations) were eliminated from the
regression.
A multiple regression analysis of distribution MFTC on principal
components was conducted. The components were determined from weekly
averages of all variables except distribution MFTC. In the first
regression model, components 1 through 6 were included (these accounted
for 85.6% of the variance). Components 1, 5, and 6 were not significant
for regression in this model, prompting us to rerun the regression using
only components 2, 3, and 4. The results of this analysis are provided in
Tables 2.6 (components) and 2.7 (regression).

34
TABLE 2.5

Principal Components Analysis

Varible Codes
Distribution Systems Raw Influent Treated Effluent
CMFTC MFTC RMFTC MFTC EMFTC MFTC
DCOIR Color RCOIR Color ECOIR Color
DPCL Free Chlorine FTURB Turbidity EFCL Free Chlorine
DTCL Total Chlorine RPH pH ETURB Turbidity
DTURB Turbidity RTEMP Tenperature EEH pH
DPH pH ETEMP Tenperature
DTEMP Tenperature

Principle Percent Variance Cumraulative


Conponent Accounted For Percent
1 30.2 30.2
2 . 16.9 47..1
3 14.2 61.,3
4 10.4 71.7
5 6.8 78.3
6 5.1 83.4
7 3.9 87..3
8 3.2 90..5
9 2.4 93.0
10 2.0 95.0
11 1.6 96.6
12 1.1 97.7
13 .9 98.6
14 .5 99..1
15 .5 99..6
16 .3 99.9
17 .0 99.9
18 .0 100.0

35
TABLE 2.6
Principal Components 2, 3, and 4

Effluent Color 0.193 -0.295 -0.121


Effluent MFTC -0.011 0.098 -0.568*
Effluent Turbidity 0.214 0.447* -0.106
Effluent Temperature -0.152 0.093 0.017
Effluent pH 0.363* 0.167 0.090
Effluent Chlorine -0.096 0.066 0.218
Distribution Color 0.277 -0.382* 0.243
Distribution Free Chlorine 0.308* -0.351* -0.236
Distribution Total Chlorine -0.144 -0.037 0.630*
Distribution Turbidity 0.238 0.368* 0.228
Distribution pH 0.386* 0.167 0.042
Distribution Terrperature -0.168 0.092 0.012
Influent Color 0.389* -0.046 0.102
Influent MFTC -0.117 0.111 0.027
Influent Temperature -0.146 0.076 0.071
Influent Turbidity -0.167 0.349* -0.110
Influent pH 0.334* 0.280 0.041

Regression Coefficients -.232 0.209 -.255

36
TABLE 2.7

Multiple Linear Regression of Distribution MFTC on Principal Components


2, 3, and 4.

Principal Regression Sequential F Value Prob > F


Component Coefficient Sum of Squares
2 -0.232 (a) 6.14 7.16 0.011
3 0.209 4.44 5.18 0.029
4 -0.255 4.69 5.46 0.025

Model R-squared = 0.319, Model F Value = 5.93, Prob > F = 0.002


Model Intercept = 0.8762

(a) All regression coefficients including the intercept were


significant to at least the 0.03 level.

37
The regression accounts for 31.9% (R-squared) of the total variance of
distribution MFTC and is significant to the 0.002 level. The regression
coefficients are similar in magnitude but components 2 and 4 are negative,
whereas component 3 is positive.
The regression on principal components addresses two questions: 1) which
components of variance have predictive value and 2) which original
variables influence this variance. The regression coefficients are
essentially equal in magnitude indicating that unit changes in each
component, while holding the other components fixed, affects distribution
MFTC by the same amount. Component 2 has the largest sequential sum of
squares indicating that it contributes most to the model's predictive
power.
Component 2 has a negative regression coefficient and is dominated by
positive weightings from pH (raw, effluent and distribution), distribution
free chlorine, and raw water color. This combination of variables (as a
group), which correlate positively among themselves, functions as a
predictor (negative correlation) with distribution MFTC.
Component 3 has a positive regression coefficient and is dominated by
positive weightings from turbidity (raw, effluent, and distribution) and
negative weightings from distribution color and distribution free
chlorine. High values for this component (high turbidity, low color and
low distribution free-chlorine) are associated with high distribution
MFTC.
Component 4 has a negative regression coefficient and is dominated by a
positive weighting for distribution total chlorine and a negative
weighting for effluent MFTC. Thus, high values for distribution MFTC are
predicted when distribution total chlorine is low and effluent MFTC is
high.
Three circumstances defined by certain sets of variables are useful
predictors of high MFTC in the distribution system: 1) high pH
(raw, effluent and distribution), low distribution free chlorine,
and low raw water color, 2) high turbidity (raw, effluent, and
distribution), low distribution color and low distribution free
chlorine, and 3) low distribution total chlorine and high effluent
MFTC.
Discriminant Analysis. Discriminant analysis is a form of multiple linear
regression where the response variable takes on only discrete values. In
this analysis, the response variable was distribution MFTC. The
observations of the independent variable distribution MFTC, were separated
into two groups: l) those corresponding to distribution MFTC positive and
2) zero. The analysis, for the case of two groups, determines one linear
function which attempts to fit the observations into their respective
group. The fitting procedure maximizes the ratio of between-group variance
to within-group variance. In the discriminant function, variables are
weighted according to their ability to predict the correct group. Those
that are effective at group prediction are given heavy weightings, whereas
variables with little input to the prediction will have weightings close

38
to zero. (Subject to the same confounding effect of co-linearities in
predictor variables, as in multiple regression).
The analysis was performed on weekly averages over all systems and
treatment stations and the results are provided in Table 2.8. The analysis
presented here does not include effluent or influent MFTC. These
variables were included in a previous analysis which was less significant,
and were eliminated from the present analysis. The total number of
observations was 42. Ten observations fit into the group of MFTC equal 0
and 32 into the group of MFTC > 0. The best predictors of these groups
are temperature, and color. The standardized discriminant function gives
strong weightings to influent, effluent, and distribution temperature. All
other variables are given weightings close to zero with the exception of
influent and effluent color, which received moderate weightings.
The usefulness of the discriminant function is its ability to predict the
correct group. The correlation of the discriminant function scores (values
produced by the discriminant function which determine the group
classification) with the response variable indicates the success of the
prediction. This correlation is not the conventional correlation, but one
for which the values are first parameterized (canonical correlation), in
this case to 0 and 1. The canonical correlation and the squared canonical
correlation are 0.711 and 0.506 respectively for this analysis. The
squared canonical correlation is identical to the R-squared of multiple
linear regression, and indicates the fraction of the variance accounted
for by the discriminant function. Thus, 35.4% of the variance was
accounted for in the discretized MFTC score.
The ratio of between-group variance to within-group variance also
indicates the quality of group prediction. This measure is given by the
eigenvalue of 1.02. To interpret the eigenvalue, it is helpful to
consider a plot of distribution MFTC versus the discriminant function
scores (Figure 2.8). The eigenvalue of 1.02 is represented geometrically
by the distance between groups relative to the average width of a group.
From Figure 2.8 it appears that the distance between group means is
approximately equal to the width of a group, corresponding to an
eigenvalue near unity.
The significance of the analysis is determined by a conventional F
statistic. This analysis was significant to only the 0.096 level, which
is poor indicating that there is a 9.6% chance that the correlation
coefficients are actually zero.
Statistical analysis of available historical data for 1985 did not
result in a satisfying predictive model for MFTC as a function of
environmental and operating variables.

39
DMFTC

O
O

O O

O O
O O
O O oo i i i i i I i i i i
-2 -1

SCORES

FIGUBE 2.8 Distribution MFTC Versus Discriminant Function Scores (1985)


Analysis was Performed on Weekly Averages.

40
TABLE 2.8
Results of Discriminant Analysis

Variable Standardized Coefficient


Effluent Color 1.077
Effluent Turbidity 0.650
Effluent Temperature -3.426
Effluent pH -.426
Effluent Free Chlorine -.489
Distribution Color -.272
Distribution Free Chlorine -.491
Distribution Total Chlorine -.041
Distribution Turbidity 0.421
Distribution pH -.005
Distribution Temperature -4.360
Influent Color -1.89
Influent Temperature 7.096
Influent Turbidity 0.335
Influent pH 0.052
Canonical Correlation = 0.711
Squared Canonical Correlation = 0.506
Eigenvalue =1.02
F value = 1.776, Prob > F = 0.0964

41
2.7 CONCLUSIONS

The results of the statistical analysis of data from SCCFWA for 1985
indicate the following:
The format for a water utility data base should be organized to
permit diagnostic analyses as well as satisfy regulatory
requirements.
The effluent MFTC percent positive for groundwater supplies was about
three times greater than that for surface water supplies. Thus in
terms of the frequency of positive MFTC, groundwater entering the
distribution system contained more coliforms than surface water
entering the pipe system. (A partial explanation for the higher
counts in groundwater effluents may be related to sampling of the
treated effluent. Another contributing factor may be the use of
return distribution water for lubrication of water-cooled pump
bearings.)
A day-of-the-week pattern exists for MFTC in distribution water.
Increased distribution MFTC occurred on Thursday, Friday, and
Saturday for seven months in 1985. However, no similar pattern exists
for raw water or treated effluents.
Coliform episodes in the distribution systems are partly caused by a
(external) factor that effects systems simultaneously.
The most important predictors of distribution MFTC, based on
regression analysis were (in order of importance) pH, treatment
effluent MFTC, and raw water turbidity.
Distribution MFTC varies inversely with distribution free chlorine
and color according to the principal components analysis.
Three circumstances, defined by certain sets of variables, revealed
in the regression on principal components, are useful predictors of
high MFTC in the distribution system: 1) high pH (raw, effluent and
distribution), low distribution free chlorine, and low raw water
color, 2) high turbidity (raw, effluent, and distribution), low
distribution color and low distribution free chlorine, and 3) low
distribution total chlorine and high effluent MFTC.

42
3.0 DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM MODELLING

W.A. Hunt

3.1
The ability to predict chlorine residuals in the distribution systems
should aid in understanding bacterial growth. It should also provide a tool
for examining potential effectiveness of operational alternatives for
suppressing bacterial growth. This effort involved adaptation of a
distribution system hydraulic model to predict chlorine residuals and
examination of system and process parameters affecting the calibration and
verification of the chlorine prediction model.
The reaction of chlorine with solutes or particulates in water, including
total organic carbon (TOC) , is the net result of many complex reactions.
Nevertheless, the overall rate of chlorine decay may be formulated as first
order (with respect to chlorine concentration) rate equation. There may also
be a significant reaction of chlorine with the pipe walls (or biofilms) in
the distribution system (Brazos, et al., 1985). The rate expression for the
pipe wall reaction may be significantly more complex than that for the water
phase and, thus, the initial effort to predict chlorine residuals has
focused on the water phase reaction. Coupling the aqueous phase reaction
rate equations with the flow equations for the distribution system produces
a similation model for predicting chlorine residual as a function of time
and location in the distribution system.
3.2 PROGRAM FOR MODELLING CHIDRINE

The computer program for predicting chlorine residuals in a distribution


system consists of two programs linked together: 1) a hydraulic network
model and 2) a chlorine reaction rate model.
3.2.1 Hydraulic Network Model
The hydraulic network model calculates the flow rate in each pipe, pump or
valve and the pressure at each pipe junction (or node) in the system.
Algorithms for analyzing the flow in pipe networks are based on a loop or a
node method. The latter was used in this study.
The node method is based on two fundamental equations:
Qi + 2 Qij = 0 [3.1]
j=l,n
and
Qij = Kij(Hi - Hj) x [3.2]

where
j = the volumetric flow rate in the pipe from node i to node j
i = the volumetric flow rate into or out of the system at node i

43
H = the elevation of the hydraulic gradeline at the node
indicated by the subscript
KJ-J = the transmission coefficient for flow in the pipe from i to
j
n = the number of elements (pipes, valves, etc.) connected to
node i
x =0.54, the exponent relating volumetric flow rate to the
headloss, (H^ - Hj), in the Hazen-Williams pipe flow
equation.
Equation [3.1] is the continuity equation and is applied at each node in
the system. Equation [3.2] is the flow equation for each pipe connected to
the node j. A solution for a particular flow condition is reached when
Equation [3.1] is satisfied simultaneously for all the nodes in the system.

3.2.2 Chemical Reaction Rate Model


As the chlorine in the water flows through the pipes, it reacts with
solutes, particulates and the pipe walls, reducing the chlorine
concentration. The reaction rate equation is characterized by a first
order reaction rate equation:
Ck = Ci [exp(-kij t)] [3.3]
where
Ck = concentration of chlorine at the downstream end of the pipe just
upstream from the node,
GI = concentration of chlorine at the upstream end of the pipe(and at
the upstream node),
kj-j= first order reaction rate coefficient, and
t = travel time of the flow in the pipe from i to j.
The chlorine concentration at the upstream end of a pipe and in the
upstream node is calculated from the mass balance equation at the junction:
q = S (Qy Cij)/ S Qij [3.4]
where
C^j = concentration of chlorine at downstream end of the pipe from i to
j-
The steady state chlorine prediction model used in this study was developed
by Murphy (1985) using Equations (3.3) and (3.4) and the existing Montana
State University (MSU) hydraulic network computer program.

44
3.3 STEADY STATE MODELLING

Initially the procedures for verifying and calibrating the chlorine


prediction model were to be conducted using data from the Saltonstall and
Cheshire service areas of the SCCRWA. Of the 15 service areas of the
SCCEWA, these two are self-contained. The Cheshire system is supplied by
well fields with chlorination units and the Saltonstall system is supplied
from a filtered surface water source, Lake Saltonstall.
The data on the distribution system and the design flows used by Malcolm-
Pirnie in a 1982 study of the SCCRWA facilities were obtained for these
areas. These data were augmented by maps of the two systems provided by
SCCRWA. The MSU distribution system and chlorine prediction models were
run using the data on the pumping rates and flow demands provided by
Malcolm-Pirnie. The results of the hydraulic analysis were within 0.5
percent of those obtained by Malcolm-Pirnie for identical conditions.
Chlorine residuals were predicted using an assumed global value of the
first-order reaction rate coefficient, kj-;.
A review of data on water quality parameters, including chlorine residuals
at five points in each of the service areas, and daily average flow rates
(i.e., volume pumped every 24-hr period), for 1984 and 1985 indicated
discrepancies between the predicted and observed chlorine residuals at
sampling points ranging from 25 to 100 percent.
Discrepancies between model predictions and measurements changed the focus
to factors affecting the prediction of chlorine residuals by computer
simulation. These factors include both system and process parameters
involved in the simulation models. A study of five important factors in
the verification and calibration of chlorine prediction models for
distribution systems was undertaken on the Saltonstall system. The analysis
was based on the data available from the 1982 design studies by Malcolm-
Pirnie and the 1984 and 1985 water quality records from SCCRWAA. The
Cheshire system would not provide any additional insight to the refocused
objectives so further analysis was not performed on it.
3.3.1 System and Process Parameters
The primary system and process parameters examined include: (a)
skeletonization (=minor mains are not regarded in model) effects; (b)
magnitude of flow demands; (c) chlorine dosage rates; (d) reaction rate
coefficients; and (e) changes in location of demands. The effects of these
parameters were determined by examining the pressure and chlorine residuals
at 20 of the 115 representative junctions in the 180-pipe system.
"Representative" refers to a good mix of the hydraulic distances from the
source as determined by the travel time from the source.
The junctions selected are listed in Table 3.1 with elevations of their
energy grade lines (EGL) and mean and maximum travel times for system
demands of 1.24 and 8.25 MGD. The elevations of the energy grade lines
incorporate both the hydraulic pressure and the elevation of the junctions.
The mean travel time is the flow-weighted mean time it takes for a change in
the chlorine concentration at the source to reach the indicated junction.

45
The maximum travel time is the time it takes for a change at the source to
reach final steady state conditions at the indicated junction.
Pipe distribution system. The Lake Saltonstall service area covers an area
6.25 miles east-west by 4 miles north-south (approximately 25 square miles)
and contains approximately 900 pipes ranging from 6 to 30 inches in
diameter. Water is supplied from Lake Saltonstall through a water
treatment plant containing one 4 mgd and two 8 mgd finished water pumps.
The system contains one 2 million gallon treated water reservoir and one
booster pump station which pumps to a higher service area outside the
Saltonstall service area.
The 1982 design study for updating the main transmission facilities
modelled the system with a 74-pipe network and demand loads located at 20
nodes. Simulations were performed with the 73-,103- and 180-pipe systems
representing the Saltonstall system to determine the effects of
skeletonization. The 74-pipe system is shown in Figure 3.1; the 103- pipe
system in Figure 3.2; the pipes added to the 103-pipe system in the cross-
hatched area of Figure 3.2 are shown in Figure 3.3. The 900-pipe system
was not used until the effects of the parameters listed above were
examined.
The effect of skeletonization on the pressure and chlorine residuals is
shown in Table 3.2 for seven of the 20 junctions selected for analysis.
Increasing the number of pipes from 74 to 180 (a factor of 2.4) has the
following effects:
(a) Pressure is increased by a maximum of 2 per cent and chlorine
residual is decreased by a maximum of 16 per cent for a system
demand of 8.25 mgd, as shown in the upper part of the table.
(b) Pressure is increased by a maximum of 2 per cent and chlorine
residual decreased by a maximum of 28 percent for a system demand
of 1.24 mgd, as shown in the lower part of the table.
The maximum reduction in chlorine residuals for both demands is about 0.32
to 0.35 ppm.
The changes in pressure and chlorine residuals caused by skeletonization
cannot be given as average values for the system. The change in pressure
at a given location is a function of distance from the location of the
maximum elevation of the energy grade line (EGL) controlling the EGL of the
junctions under consideration. The change in chlorine residual is a
function of travel time from the source. The changes in both pressure and

46
TABIE 3.1

Representative Junctions for Parametric Analysis of Modelling Qilorine


Residuals

Jet Travel time Elev. Travel time Elev.


No. (minutes) Of BGL (minutes) of EGL
(mean) (max) (ft) (mean) (max) (ft)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
Demand = 1.24 MGD Demand = 8.25 MGD
3* 807. 6 7984. 7 237. 92 409.6 1017. 4 227 .61
5* 37. 7 299. 0 238. 04 93.8 595. 2 229 .92
9 524. 2 7701. 3 237. 92 232.5 840. 4 227 .63
14 19. 8 493. 2 239. 75 21.5 21. 5 230 .87
15* 2083. 5 12997. 6 237. 90 397.7 1085. 9 220 .97
16* 1722. 2 5890. 6 238. 23 444.7 1385. 5 220 .52
18 1868. 2 6553. 7 237. 92 450.6 1628. 9 217 .02
21 13. 0 13. 4 242. 51 8.9 8. 9 232 .07
27* 760. 6 5107. 6 238. 25 176.4 111. 8 226 .06
29 709. 3 5037. 7 238. 34 192.6 977. 7 225 .53
30 759. 4 4983. 4 238. 49 184.4 1010. 0 225 .12
33* 662. 3 4776. 3 239. 61 708.5 1625. 1 224 .64
36 541. 0 4995. 7 240. 55 398.5 1062. 8 223 .16
39* 1109. 7 1376. 6 240. 61 747.2 1542. 9 223 .22
43 246. 1 307. 3 241. 54 121.4 140. 8 227 .90
52 211. 4 233. 1 251. 63 106.4 199. 0 228 .39
68 1008. 4 5210. 2 238. 08 311.2 1050. 0 225 .74
69 864. 4 5249. 6 238. 18 149.2 750. 7 227 .38
70 178. 2 552. 6 238. 45 125.7 692. 5 227 .70
71 69. 9 70. 9 238. 70 77.7 146. 6 227 .72

* - junctions used in subsequent tables to indicate typical results

47
00

North
1" » 4000'

Q System pipe numbers


/\ Water treatment plant
Reservoir
System junctions
System pipes

FIGURE 3.1 Saltonstall Service Area 74 Pipe System.


CD
North.
1" « 4000'

Key
__ System pipes
D Pipe numbers
fe Water treatment plant
Q Reservoir
(3 System junction
m /~S Sampling site

FIGURE 3.2 Saltonstall Service Area 103 Pipe System. (Hatched Zone is Location of 77 Additional Pipes
Conprising the 180 Pipe Systems).
en
O

System junctions North


1" = 1000'
I I System pipe numbers

/\ Water treatment plant

-———• System pipes

FIGURE 3.3 Saltonstall Service Area. Enlargement of 103 Pipe System Hatched Zone.
chlorine residual indicated in skeletonizations are both affected by the
proximity of pipes added or deleted in the analysis.

The degree of skeletonization allowable in the predictive


modelling of chlorine residuals is site specific.

Demand flows. Simulations were conducted using three representative demands


flows of 1.24, 6.84, and 8.25 mgd. The 6.84 mgd was the maximum demand
listed on the 1984-1985 records; the 8.25 mgd, the design flow used in the
1982 study; the 1.24 mgd is an estimated minimum demand. The demand loading
was located at the junctions given in the 1982 study throughout the steady
state analysis; the ratio of the demand at the individual junction to the
total system demand was not changed except for considering the effects of
the change in location of the demand as presented below.
The effects of changes in system demand flows are also noted in Table 3.2
by comparing the strength of the chlorine residual at any junction in one
of the pipe systems for the 8.25 mgd demand with the residual at the same
junction for the same pipe system with the 1.24 mgd demand. A reduction of
as much as 91 per cent in chlorine residual is noted when flow is reduced
from 8.25 to 1.24 mgd. Reduction in chlorine residual is caused by
increased retention time in the system as evidenced in the difference
between the mean travel times for 8.25 and 1.24 mgd demands. The
differences are noted by comparing the times in col. (2) with those in col.
(5) and the times in col. (3) with those in col. (6) in Table 3.1.
In some instances, chlorine residual at some locations may increase when
demand is decreased due to a change in the local flow pattern in the
vicinity of some junctions. Examples of this are noted when chlorine
residual at junctions 5 and 33 in Table 3.2 for the 8.25 mgd are compared
with those for the 1.24 mgd. The increase at junction 5 occurs because it
is connected directly to the reservoir (designated as junction 12) and the
flow is 4090 gpm going to reservoir for the 1.24 mgd demand. For the 8.25
mgd demand, flow is 240 gpm from the reservoir back toward junction 5.
This flow reversal changes mean travel time from the source from 93.8
minutes for 8.25 mgd demand to 37.7 minutes for 1.24 mgd demand.
Records of daily flows for the Saltonstall system showing diurnal demand
fluctuations commonly range from 1.24 MGD to 8.25 MGD or more. Mean travel
times to the extremities of the system in excess of 30 hours require that
variation of chlorine residuals in the distribution system be examined
continuously. Repeated observation of unacceptably low chlorine residuals
in diurnal cycles mandate development of a chlorine prediction model.
Ranges of chlorine residuals can be determined for the
and minimum flows using the steady state
modelling.

51
TABLE 3.2
Effect of Skeletonization on Pressure and Chlorine Residuals

Jet 3 5 15 16 27 33 39

Demand = 8.25 MGD, C0 = 3.9 ppm, k = 0.0020 min."1

System (a) Pressure (psi)


74-pipe 63.48 86.58 42.87 87.48 92.01 86.31 61.93
103-pipe 63.90 86.57 43.65 87.61 92.16 86.39 62.02
180-pipe 63.90 86.55 43.71 87.67 92.23 86.42 62.00

(b) Chlorine residual (ppm)


74-pipe 1.76 3.54 2.12 1.72 3.08 1.30 1.00
103-pipe 1.80 3.47 1.91 1.69 2.97 1.19 .97
180-pipe 1.73 3.25 1.78 1.63 2.76 1.13 .95

Demand = 1.24 MGD, C0 = 3.9 ppm, k = 0.0020 min."1


System (a) Pressure (psi)
74-pipe 69.35 91.05 52.03 96.36 98.48 94.01 70.91
103-pipe 69.32 91.01 52.00 96.33 98.45 94.02 70.73
180-pipe 63.90 89.68 50.61 94.92 97.10 92.52 69.17

(b) Chlorine residual (ppm)


74-pipe .74 3.63 .36 .21 1.40 1.51 .50
103-pipe .73 3.63 .33 .18 1.17 1.27 .47
180-pipe .64 3.62 .28 .15 1.03 1.16 .38

52
Chlorine dosages and reaction rate coefficients. Chlorine dosages ranged
from 1.0 to 8.0 ppm to be consistent with the data in the 1984-1985 records
of the Saltonstall monitoring program. The estimated first order reaction
rate coefficients varied from 0.08 to 0.0003 min."1 .
Chlorine residuals at all points in the system vary directly with dosage at
the source (Eq. 3.3) as indicated by comparing chlorine residuals at the
same junctions and for the same reaction rates in parts (a) and (b) of
Table 3.3. The dosage for part (a) is 3.9 ppm, for part (b) 10.0 ppm.
The control of chlorine residual decay by the reaction rate coefficients is
shown in Equation 3.3 and by comparing the residuals at any junction for the
different reaction rate coefficients within each of the three parts of
Table 3.3.
Reaction rate coefficients mist be determined accurately
to effectively calibrate the chlorine prediction model for
a distribution system.
Changes in location of demands. When the total system demand (referred to
as the global demand) was held constant while localized demands fluctuated,
both pressure and flows in the vicinity of the altered demands were
affected. The effect of a redistribution of the flow demands on chlorine
residuals was examined by interchanging the demands at the pairs of
junctions (refer to Figures 3.2 and 3.3) given in Table 3.4 for total
system demands of 1.24 and 6.84 MGD and for reaction rate coefficients of
0.002 and 0.0003 min.'1 .
The effect of relocating local demands is shown in Table 3.5. Changing
local demands without altering global system demands generally causes a
slight increase in chlorine residual and a minor depression of pressure at
the junctions where the external demand is increased. The opposite effect
is generally noted at junctions where external demand is decreased. The
magnitude of the changes appears to be a weak function of the ratio of the
external demand at the junction to the flow rate in the pipe leading to the
junction. The effects at junctions for which the flow is not altered
appears to depend on the magnitude of the change in flow pattern leading
to these junctions.
The magnitude of changes in chlorine residuals in the 20 junctions
monitored ranges from 0 to 0.35 ppm for flow changes ranging from 0 to 85
gpm per junction. The effects of demand changes of larger magnitudes,
such as fire flows for two to four hours, have the potential for causing
changes of a much larger magnitude in chlorine residuals and can be
predicted by steady state modelling. Predicting the chlorine residuals
when wide variations in the diurnal demand patterns occur requires a
dynamic model.
3.4 SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

The sensitivity of chlorine residual at a junction is termed the


sensitivity index, SI, defined as the ratio of the percent change in the
residuals to the percent change in the parameter causing the change. The
relative effects of skeletonization, changes in global flow demands, and

53
reaction rates on chlorine residuals were examined by comparing SI at
several junctions. The results (Table 3.6), are based on data presented in
Tables 3.2 and 3.3. The method for calculating SI for each of the three
parts of Table 3.6 are presented in more detail in Appendix B.I.
The greater the absolute value of SI, the greater the effect of the
particular parameter on chlorine residual. Negative values indicate that
as the value of the parameter increases, chlorine residual decreases.
The results in Table 3.6 indicate that (1) skeletonization has a greater
effect on chlorine residuals for 1.24 MGD demand than for 8.25 MGD flow,
(2) SI is a function of location within the system, (3) SI values are the
same for the same relative changes in the reaction rates for flow of 8.25
MGD and 1.24 MGD, (4) SI for the skeletonization and the reaction rates are
of the same order of magnitude, and (5) SI for changes in the global flow
rates are significantly greater than those for degree of skeletonization and
reaction rates.
Global demands change significantly in a diurnal demand cycle, suggesting
the need for a dynamic chlorine prediction model. The sensitivity of the
chlorine residuals to the reaction rates demands an effective method for
determining values of the reaction rate coefficients from field
measurements. The sensitivity to the degree of skeletonization suggests
that a higher percentage of pipes may be required for chlorine prediction
models than have been acceptable for the hydraulic design of water systems.
Predicted chlorine residuals are most sensitive to changes
in the global flow demands.

3.5 CALIBRATION OF THE CHLORINE PREDICTION MODEL

Calibration of a computer model is the determination of the system and


process parameters necessary for predicted results to agree with in-situ
values measured in the field. The model for predicting chlorine residuals
in a water distribution system is a two-step process in which the hydraulic
and chlorine reaction models are calibrated sequentially.
3.5.1 Calibration of Hydraulics
The calibration of the hydraulic model, as discussed by Walski [1984], is
performed by assigning pipe flow coefficients (Hazen-Williams C factors)
and junction demand flows and using the model to compute the junction
pressures. The calculated pressures are compared with actual measured
pressures. The pipe flow coefficients are adjusted if significant
differences occur. The process is repeated until agreement between the
calculated and measured values of pressure are within a predetermined limit
of accuracy.

54
TABLE 3.3

Effect of Reaction Rate Coefficients and Dosage Rates on Chlorine


Residuals, 180-pipe System

Jet 15 16 27 33 39

Reaction
rate Chlorine residual (ppm)
coef.
(min."1)

(a) C0 = 3.9 ppm, demand = 1.24 M3D


0.0020 .85 3.62 .21 .14 1.08 1.18 .43
0.0007 2.26 3.80 1.08 1.20 2.38 2.52 1.80
0.0003 3.07 3.86 2.16 2.34 3.13 3.22 2.80

(b) = 10.0 ppn, demand = 1.24 MSD


0.0080 .03 7.50 .01 .00 .22 .11 .00
0.0020 2.19 9.28 .54 .37 2.78 3.03 1.09
0.0007 5.78 9.74 2.78 3.08 6.10 6.46 4.60
0.0003 7.88 9.89 5.54 6.01 8.02 8.25 7.17

(c) = 10.0 ppm, demand = 8.25 MSD


0.0080 .53 6.58 .62 .38 3.34 .30 .06
0.0020 4.45 8.37 4.58 4.18 7.09 2.91 2.45

55
Redistribution of System Demand Flows

Scenario A Scenario B
Jet Original Modified Jet Original Modified
No. Demand Demand No. Demand Demand
(gpn) (gpn) (gpn) (gpn)
15 84.4 25.0 2 0.0 39.6
27 25.0 84.4 11 39..6 0.0
32 0.0 15.0 13 24..0 0.0
33 44.8 15.0 14 0.0 24.0
34 20.8 35.8 15 84.4 0.0
21 0.0 84.4
36 39.6 15.6
39 20.8 0.0
41 15.6 39.6
43 20.8 0.0
76 0.0 20.8
80 0.0 20.8

56
TABI£ 3.5

Effect of Demand Relocation on Pressure and Chlorine Residuals, 180-pipe


System, C0 =3.9 ppm

Jet 3 5 15 16 27 33 39

1. Relocation scenario A , demand =6.84 MSD


(a) Pressure (psi)
Original 64.13 86.62 44.96 89.05 92.89 87.34 63.17
After 64.2 86.63 46.02 89.29 92.73 87.31 63.14

(b) Chlorine residual (ppm), k = 0.0020 min."1


Original 1.96 3.62 1.77 1.45 2.89 1.07 .77
After 1.91 3.62 1.41 1.32 2.90 1.26 .80

2. Relocation scenarios A and B, demand =1.24 MGD


(a) Pressure (psi)
Original 67.94 89.68 50.61 94.92 97.10 92.52 69.17
After (A) 67.77 89.50 50.45 94.71 96.88 92.27 69.88
After (B) 67.69 89.40 50.39 94.63 96.81 92.15 68.77

(b) Chlorine residual (ppm), k =0.0020 min."1


Original .85 3.62 .21 .14 1.08 1.18 .43
After (A) .82 3.62 .36 .13 1.12 1.18 .41
After (B) .52 3.62 .28 .12 .98 1.11 .34

57
TABLE 3.6

Sensitivity Index of Chlorine Residuals at Junctions to System and Process


Parameters

Jet 3 5 15 16 27 33 39
Parameter Sensitivity index, SI
1. Skeletonization: base system/modified system
(a). Flow = 8.25 MGD, C0 = 3.9 ppm, k = 0.0020 min."1
180/103 -.09 -.16 -.17 -.09 -.18 -.12 -.05
180/74 -.03 -.15 -.32 -.09 -.20 -.26 -.09

(b). Flow = 1.24 M3D, CQ = 3.9 ppm, k = 0.0020 min."1


180/103 -.33 -.01 -.42 -.47 -.32 -.22 -.55
180/74 -.27 -.01 -.49 -.37 -.61 -.51 -.54

2. Global flow demands: max. flow/nun flow


(b). 180-pipes, CQ = 10.0 ppm. k =0.0020 min."1
8.25/1.24
.60 -.12 1.04 1.07 .71 -.05 .65

3. Reaction rates: low rate-high rate


(a). C0 =3.9 ppm, 180 pipes, 1.24 MGD
.0003- -.13 -.01 -.16 -.16 -.11 -.11 -.15 .002

.0003- -.20 -.01 -.38 -.37 -.18 -.16 -.27

.0007

.0007- -.33 -.03 -.43 -.47 -.29 -.29 -.41


.002

(b). C0 = 10.0 ppm, 180 pipes, 1.24 MGD


.002- -.33 -.06 -.33 -.33 -.31 -.32 -.36
.008

(c). CQ = 10.0 ppm, 180 pipes, 8.25 MGD


.002- -.29 -.07 -.29 -.30 -.18 -.30 -.33
.008

58
As the necessary detailed specific data were not available for the
Saltonstall service area during the steady state analysis, the hydraulic
data (demand flows, junction elevations and Hazen-Williams C factors)
obtained from the 1982 Malcolm-Pirnie studies were used. The Malcolm-
Pirnie flow coefficients were based on a study of the types of pipe found
in the system and a limited flow testing program conducted in 1972. The
data were assumed to be of sufficient accuracy for the principal purpose of
this phase of the study: to develop a method for calibrating a model for
predicting the chlorine residuals in a water distribution system. Although
the Malcolm-Pirnie data were given for a 74-pipe system, the data were also
assumed to be valid for the 180-pipe system used in developing the
calibration method. As previously indicated in Sec. 3.3, the results of the
hydraulic analysis using the MSU model were within 0.5 per cent of the
Malcolm-Pirnie results.
3.5.2 Calibration for Chlorine Residuals
The steady state calibration for the chlorine reactions and subsequent
calculation of the residuals at the junctions is based on the travel times
of the water and the first order reaction rates for the individual pipes in
the system, as indicated in Eq. (3.3.). The travel time for each pipe is
fixed from the steady state hydraulic analysis as:
t = i/v = IA/Q [3.5]
where t = travel time in the pipe,
V = velocity of flow in the pipe,
A = cross-sectional area of the pipe, and
Q = volumetric flow rate within the pipe.
L = length of pipe, or distance between sampling points on a
single pipe.

Theoretically, the first order reaction coefficient for a pipe may be


calculated by monitoring the strength of the chlorine residual at two
points along the pipe with a distance L between them and solving Eq.(3.3):
kij = (-l/t)ln(Cj/Ci) [3.6]
where Cj_ = strength of chlorine residual upstream, and
Cj = strength of chlorine residual downstream.
However, for the non-branching lengths of pipes and for the flow velocities
found in distribution systems, the accuracy with which chlorine residuals
are determined using standard laboratory instrumentation is not precise
enough to obtain meaningful values of the reaction coefficients. For this
reason, data obtained from the SCCFWA water quality monitoring for the five
sampling stations (refer to Figs. 3.1 and 3.2) in the Saltonstall service
area were used to develop a method for estimating the first order reaction
coefficients.
The 1984 and 1985 water quality data from SCCKWA contained (a) water
discharge from the water treatment plant totaled on a 24-hr basis (i.e.,

59
average daily flows), and (b) chlorine residuals recorded three times per
week at most sampling points but not all on the same days. The flows were
recorded between 8:00 and 8:15 a.m.; the chlorine residuals were recorded
during the morning and the early afternoon. Because the average daily
flows are for the 24 hours preceding the recording of the chlorine
residuals, the calibration data and results cited in the following sections
are presented to indicate the procedure for finding general global and
obvious local values of the first order reaction rate coefficients.
The data from the Saltonstall service area for the 239th day of 1984
(August 26) were selected for the calibration development as chlorine data
were recorded for four of the five sites and the chlorine residual in the
effluent from the water treatment plant was elevated to 3.9 ppm following a
period of several days when the chlorine residual was less than 1.0 ppm.
The average daily flow recorded at 8:00 a.m. was 6.84 MSB.
The calibration procedure is summarized in Table 3.7. The chlorine
residuals recorded at the sampling stations for August 26 are given in col.
(3), (the value given for station 083 is for August 28 as a reading was not
taken on the 26th). The total travel time listed in col. (2) is the time
from the chlorine source (the water treatment plant) until the residual at
the indicated sampling station reaches a final steady state value.
Calculation procedure for sampling stations not located at junctions are
given in Appendix B.2.
The values of the residuals indicated in col. (4) were calculated with
0.0020 min."1 as a first approximation of a global value for the first
order reaction rate coefficient. This value was determined by listing out
the strength of the chlorine residuals calculated for the junctions in the
vicinity of the sampling stations in the previous phases and comparing them
with those recorded in the SCCFWA data.
The ratio of the chlorine residual predicted by the model to the observed
value, given in col. (5), is used to calculate a better approximation of a
global value of the first order reaction coefficient. The calculation
procedure is based on the application of Eq. (3).
In addition to determining the rate of decay of chlorine in the flow
through a pipe, Eq. (3.3) also gives the relation between the residual
strength of chlorine at any point i in the distribution system and that at
the source. Application of Eq. (3.3) both to the predicted and observed
residual strengths yields a pair of equations which may be solved to obtain
an improved value of the global first order reaction coefficient. In Eq.
(3.7) the residual strength, (C^) c , at point i is predicted as a function
of the assumed value of the first order reaction rate, k, the total travel
time to reach steady state, t, and the initial residual strength at the
source, Co . In Eq. (3.8) the observed residual strength, (C^) 0b' is a
function of the improved value of the first order reaction rate, k^

60
TABIE 3.7
Results of Model Calibration

Sample Total Obser Calc Co/Cobs Mod. Calc


site travel C12 C12 react. Cl2
no. time res. res. coeff. res.
(min.) (ppm) (ppm) (min.'1) (ppm)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
(k = .0020) (k = .0015)

067S 392.6 3, 00 .48 .826 .001513 2.78 .927


081S 507.9 0, 75 .97 2.627 ** 0.67 .893
083S 749..7 1. 70 .45 .853 .001788 1.85 1.088
106S 1360..5 2. 50 .91 .764 .001802 2.22 .888
128S 870.4 2.20 1.02 .463 .001115 1.42 .646

Ave. = .001554

** Sampling station 081S is in an area with a reaction coefficient not


conforming to the global average.

61
(ci)c = C0 [exp(-kt)] [3.7]
(ci)ob = cyexpf-kit)] [3.8]
A new approximation for k]_ is obtained by combining Eqs. (3.7) and (3.8) :
^ = k + (VtOlntfCjJo/fCiJob] [3.9]
The total travel time, t, for each sampling point given in col. (2) is used
in both equations. Modified values for the global values of the reaction
coefficient are given in col. (6) . A global value based on the residual
strength at station 081S is omitted because the observed residual is much
lower than those from the other stations. Ihe low value at 08 IS may
indicate a zone of decreased chlorine residual caused by low flow
velocities and periods of stagnation. Ihe reaction rates for two pipes
leading directly to 081S were recalculated to be 0.0120 min."1 by an
adaptation of Eqs. (3.7), (3.8), and (3.9) as shown in Appendix B.2.
Ihe predicted chlorine residual strengths at the sampling sites using an
average global value of 0.0015 min."1 for all the pipes in the system
except the two leading to station 081S are given in col. (7) and the ratios
of the predicted to the observed values are shown in col. (8) . The
improvement in the prediction of the residual strengths at the monitoring
stations is determined by comparing the sums of the squares of the residual
of the ratio of the chlorine strengths at the sampling points using reaction
rates of (a) 0.0020 and (b) 0.0015. The latter also had two pipes with k
equal to 0.0120.
k = .0020: (1-Cr) 2 = 3.043 [3.10]

kl= .0015; (1-Cj-) 2 = 0.162 [3.11]


In Eqs. (3.10) and (3.11) Cj. is the ratio of the predicted residual
strength to the observed value. The smaller the value of (l-C^) 2 , the
better the global value of the reaction rate coefficient predicts the
strength of the chlorine residuals. The marked improvement in the sums of
the residuals indicates the proposed calibration method is appropriate.
3.6 GRAPHIC EESUUTS

A graph of the results of modelling the strength of the chlorine residuals


in a water distribution system provides an operational tool for examining
the effectiveness of the disinfection program. The schematic diagram in
Fig. 3.4 shows the distribution of the chlorine residuals in the
Saltonstall service area predicted by the steady state model for a demand
6.84 MGD in the 180-pipe system when the dosage at the water treatment
plant is 3.9 ppm.
3.7 DYNAMIC MODELLING

The sensitivity of chlorine residuals to (1) the variations of total system


flow demand similar to those noted in a diurnal cycle and (2) travel time

62
X
a>
co
North
?, V<U 1" = 4000'

O0

Key
—— System pipes
D Pipe numbers
/^ Water treatment plant.
^ Reservoir
(_) System junction
(~\ Sampling site

FIGURE 3.4 Saltonstall Service Area 103 Pipe System. (Hatched Zone is Location of 77 Additional Pipes
Comprising the 180 Pipe Systems).
through the Saltonstall system indicate the need for a dynamic model to
depict more accurately the variation in the chlorine residuals throughout
the service area. In July, 1986 dynamic modelling of the project was
initiated in three coordinated phases: (1) revised hydraulic modelling, (2)
more intensive field data acquisition, and (3) adaptation of a dynamic model
developed by Stoner Associates, Inc. (SAI) for tracking inert trace
materials in water distribution systems to predicting the fate of substances
subject to first-order decay reactions.
The following is a progress report discussing the significant factors and
processes affecting the verification and calibration of the modelling
algorithm. Verification of the SAI dynamic model predicting chlorine
residuals is in the final stages. Initial data acquisition for adapting or
revising calibration techniques to dynamic models has been completed.
3.7.1 Hydraulic Modelling
Sensitivity of chlorine residuals to effects of skeletonization,
particularly at low demand flows, requires a significantly larger number of
pipes in the distribution system than is necessary for modelling only
system hydraulics. The pipe network was expanded to include 659 pipes and
pumps and 426 nodes (junctions), essentially all but the dead-end pipes in
the system shown in Fig. 3.5.
The distribution of demand loading was generated from the quarterly
customer billing records processed for the period 7/19/85 - 9/19/85 and a
map of the Saltonstall system. The loads determined for the individual
service connections were aggregated at the nodes at the end of each block.
The loads were classified as residential, industrial, commercial and public
uses. The industrial and commercial demands were considered the base load;
the public and residential demands were considered to have a diurnal
fluctuation. The composition of users by volume billed is:
Residential 71.5%
Industrial 17.7
Commercial 9.2
Public 1.6
The diurnal demand curve for calibrating the model is shown in Fig. 3.6.
This was generated from continuous records of (1) flow from the finished
pumps at the water treatment plant, (2) flow pumped out of the Saltonstall
system at the Cherry Hill pump station, and (3) the water level in the
Saltonstall Ridge storage tank for the three-day period 4/20-22/86.
The SAI extended time simulation program, LTQVARSR, was used to model the
time-varying flow conditions in the system. The model was calibrated by
adjusting the hydraulic flow resistances of the pipes so the model would
predict values in (1) the pressure the pump discharge line at the water
treatment plant and (2) the water level in the Saltonstall Ridge storage
tank the same as recorded on strip charts for the 72-hour calibration
period. The average daily demand during the calibration period was 4.088
MGD.

64
FIGURE 3.5 Saltonstall Service Area.
DIURNAL DEMAND

HH ™

RESERVOIR OUTFLOW
o
LL.

I 1 I t I 1 t I I 1 ! 1 > i 1 I I I I I 1 I I i

TIME IN MRS
FIGURE 3.6 Diurnal Demand Flows and Reservoir Outflow.
The agreement between the predicted and the recorded levels in the storage
tank was used to determine the accuracy of the calibration. The model was
considered calibrated when the difference between the predicted and the
recorded tank level was 1.1 ft at the end of 72 hours (a difference of
110,000 gallons over 72 hrs). This is an average of 26 gpm in a system
where the main pumps operate at an minimum of 2500 gpm).
The increased number of pipes and the broader distribution of demand
loadings cause a significant reduction in the flow velocities in the
system. Over 80 per cent of the velocities are less than 0.3 fps when the
total demand flow in the system is 3.66 mgd.
3.7.2 Data Acquisition
The analysis of the sensitivity of the chlorine residuals to changes in
flow conditions coupled with the time required for variations in the dosage
rate to reach the points of the distribution system furthest from the water
treatment plant require more intensive data gathering with readings taken
more frequently than that available from existing monitoring records.
After reviewing minimum data requirements with the SCCRWA it provided
personnel to obtain the following data for a minimum of eight consecutive
days between July 7 and August 10:
1. chlorine residuals recorded twice a day at the five
monitoring stations in the distribution system and water
the treatment plant,
2. continuous records of the pumping rates in the water
treatment plant and the Cherry Hill pumping station and
of the water surface levels in the Saltonstall Ridge tank
from 7/15-8/05,
3. continuous records of pressure at two locations within
the distribution system from 7/15-7/23 and at four
additional locations from 7/28-8/05,
4. continuous 24-, or 48-, hr monitoring records of chlorine
residuals at the five existing sampling stations, and
5. four "simultaneous" samples of chlorine residuals at
different points along a main with minimal inflow or
outflow between consecutive pairs of points.
These data will not be used for developing calibration methods for the
dynamic model until the required computational algorithm is completely
developed and verified. A review of the data presents some additional
insight into the complexity of the dynamic modelling of reactive
substances in a distribution system where the flow is varying with time.
Chlorine data. The 2/day chlorine residuals recorded for July 29-August 8,
1986 are given in Appendix B.3. These data indicate diurnal variations
occur in chlorine residual at all sampling points; the variation is more

67
pronounced at some points than at others. Chlorine residual at 08IS (refer
to Fig. 3.4) is significantly less than at 067S and 106S, as noted in the
data used in the steady state analysis. This may indicate the effect of
small diameter pipes in the vicinity of 08IS.
Strip chart records of continuous chlorine sanpling were received from
sanpling points 067S (actually taken 90 feet south of the regular sampling
point in a 10-inch main), 083S, 106S and 128S (refer to Appendix B.4) . The
chart traces for 067S and 106S are characterized by undulations of 0.25-0.50
ppm occurring over periods greater than 12 hours. The trace for 08IS shows
an increase from 0.75 ppm to 1.5 ppm occurring during a 1.5-hour period late
in the afternoon. The chlorine residual then decreases gradually for 9
hours, decreases more rapidly for another 6 hours, then a build up followed
by a sudden decrease. The trace at 128S is also characterized by two points
where the chlorine residual changes rapidly (more than 25-30 percent in less
than two hours). The patterns of the traces at 081S and 128S suggest there
may be some local changes in flow demands which have a significant influence
on the chlorine residuals at the respective locations. The diurnal demand
fluctuations developed for the Saltonstall system are global and may not
have the degree of refinement necessary to predict this level of detail in
the fluctuation of the residuals. Considerably more detailed flow and
pressure data than are currently available would be required for this degree
of refinement.
The chlorine residuals from the 8-day test periods were plotted on the
strip charts for the continuous records (where possible). A comparison of
the values of the point and the continuous samples are shown in Table 3.8
for those sampling stations for which data were available at common times.
The data for 067S are known to be different because of sampling from two
different mains in two locations approximately one block apart. The data
from 106S indicate a possible difference in sampling locations although it
is not as pronounced as that for 067S. The data from 083S show the best
agreement between the continuous monitoring and the 2/day samples in this
very limited range. They also show that sampling twice a day, or less
frequently, may miss significant changes in the chlorine residuals.
The difference between the strength of the chlorine residuals in the
vicinity of 067S (1.40 ppm in the 16-in. main and 0.40 ppm in a 10-in. main
90 ft south) prompted the SCCPWA to take 16 samples in pipes with diameters
ranging from 6 to 12 inches in the vicinity of 067S and 08IS. The strength
of the residuals varied from 0.12 to 1.35 ppm in the locations indicated in
Fig. 3.7. These variations in the strength of the chlorine residuals within
a given area of the distribution system may be caused by a combination of
low velocities and small pipe diameters. The range of values of the
residuals within localized areas indicates that (1) first order reaction
rate coefficients will have to be specified for the individual pipes in the

68
0673 Sample
point resid.
(ppm)

July 16,1986

51 1.32
52 1.24
53 1.32
34 1.65
55 1.54
56 1.86

0815 July 25, 1986

1 0.39
co 2 0.31
3 0.95
4 0. 15
5 O.69
6 0. 15
9 0..21
10 1..35
11 O. 12
12 O.90
13 ». 74
14 1. 19
15 O.B5
16 1.3O

FIGURE 3.7 Spatial Variation of Chlorine Residuals.


TABI£ 3.8
Chlorine Residuals

location Date Time Continuous 2/day

106S 7/17 1540 1.35 1.60


7/18 0940 1.15 1.70
7/18 1400 1.15 1.65
7/19 0830 1.00 1.35
083S 7/29 1630 1.35 1.30
7/30 0930 0.85 0.80
7/30 1630 1.35 1.20
7/31 1015 1.00 1.10

067S 7/24 0900 0.40* 1.40

* taken in 10-in. main 90 ft south of 067S

70
distribution system, and (2) laboratory and field testing methods for
determining the first order reaction rate coefficients will have to be
developed.
Chlorine residuals were recorded at the four sites (Fig. 3.5) along a major
16-inch diameter main between 10:15 a.m. and 11:40 a.m. on July 16 to
determine whether approximate values of the first order reaction rate
coefficients could be checked by simple field measurements.
An additional set of data at the same locations was taken on July 17.
Using the travel times and flow velocities in pipes obtained from the
results of the hydraulic computations, only one of the six possible data
pair combinations gave a meaningful value of the first order reaction rate,
k = 0.00114, which was of the same order of magnitude as indicated in the
steady state analysis. In the two sections of the main, flow conditions
indicated that determination of the reaction rates is possible because flow
velocities varied less than 0.05 fps between the two sample sites.
Chlorine residual at the downstream end was greater than that at the
upstream end. This may reflect on the accuracy of chlorine residual
measurement or on the confounding effect of the flow patterns and indicate
the need for more detail on consumptive use patterns and improved methods
for determining the first order reaction rate coefficients.
3.7.3 Dynamic Model Adaptation
When the results of the steady state analysis indicated that dynamic
modelling could provide a more realistic prediction of chlorine residuals
in water distribution systems, Stoner Associates, Inc. of Carlisle,
Pennsylvania offered the use of its extended time simulation program,
LIQVARS^. The calibration methods have been developed using the data from
the Saltonstall service area. The results of this study have been made
available to Stoner Associates but are not included in this report.
The dynamic modelling of chlorine in the reservoir storage tanks of a
distribution system has not been fully addressed in this project. The
reactions of the chlorine residuals, the effect of residence time in the
tank and the inflow and outflow rates have a significant effect on the
strength of the residuals in the distribution system. The steady state
modelling used a conservative approach and assigned a zero residual
strength to the flow from the storage tank into the distribution system.
The SAI extended flow model for inert substances used a dilution process in
which the mass inflow rate of the substance is divided by the total mass in
the tank at any time to determine the concentration. The SAI model for
inert substances shows low residual concentrations in the flow from the
storage tanks into the systems propagate through a large area of the
distribution system. In addition to developing an improved algorithm for
the chlorine reaction in the tank, suitable field tests for verifying the
model were necessaary.

71
3.8 CONCLUSIONS

The degree of skeletonization allowable in the predictive modelling of


chlorine residuals in a distribution system is site specific.
Ranges of chlorine residuals can be determined for the maximum and minimum
flows using the steady state modelling.
Chlorine demand rate of the pipe walls is greater than the chlorine demand
of the water. The reaction rate coefficients must be determined accurately
to effectively calibrate the chlorine prediction model for a distribution
system.
Predicted chlorine residuals are most sensitive to changes in the global
flow demands.

72
4.0 MICROBIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS AND TESTING

G.A. McFeters and A.K. Camper


4.1 INTRODUCTION

Episodes of coliforms in distribution systems could be attributed to several


causes. Perhaps inadequate treatment procedures allow coliforms to enter
the system in an injured and therefore undetected form. Under conducive
conditions, these organisms could repair their injury and be retrieved
during routine system monitoring. There is no indication at this point that
injured coliforms are a major contributing factor to coliform occurrences in
the SCCRWA system. Another possibility would be that coliform organisms are
capable of reproduction in a planktonic state in dead end areas of the
distribution system. Yet another is that coliforms are capable of
colonizing surfaces of the pipes and are released into the drinking water
during undetermined opportune conditions for coliform proliferation and/or
biofilm sloughing. The work described here was undertaken to characterize a
few of the growth characteristics of the coliforms isolated from the
SCCRWA's distribution system. An understanding of these parameters could be
of use in determining where the organisms were originating in addition to
providing clues to controlling their presence.
The survival of coliform bacteria in tubercle material removed from the
surface of pipes has been documented (Alien and Geldreich, 1977). Other
bacteria have also been identified in this material. Tubercle material,
other pipe scrapings and distribution sediment samples collected from the
SCCKWA, Muncie, Indiana, Belleville, Illinois and Monmouth, New Jersey
distribution systems were examined to determine the numbers of certain
classes of bacteria. It was hoped that this information would give some
indication as to whether coliforms were found or could be cross fed by other
bacteria in SCCRWA tubercles.
The method of van der Kooij et al (1982) was employed to determine if a
sufficient fraction of TOG detected in the SCCRWA distribution system water
could be used to produce bacterial biomass. If adequate amounts of
assimilable organic carbon (AOC) could be detected in some pattern, it could
serve as a partial explanation for the seasonality and patchiness of
coliform episodes.
4.2 COLIPORM NUTRITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

Initial experiments revealed that coliforms isolated from the New Haven
system during coliform growth episodes were capable of growth at 25°C in
Milli-Q reagent grade water which contained ca. 4 mg/L TOG. The organisms
tested were KLebsiella pneumoniae. Enterobacter aerogenes. Enterobacter
cloacae and Escherichia coli. After 6 days, cell counts increased from 102
to 105 cfu/mL. When Milli-Q water was supplemented with 5 mg/L acetate,
glutamate, or yeast extract in a mineral salts medium, ca. 10' cfu/mL were
observed after 24 hours. If reduced concentrations of yeast extract were
used (0.1, 0.25, 0.5, 1.0 mg/L), maximum cell numbers of 105 to 106 cfu/mL

73
were observed after 48 hours incubation at 25°C. Results suggest that these
coliforms were adapted to growth in very low organic carbon concentrations.
4.3 TESTS FOR OLIGOTROFHY

The use of Milli-Q water was discontinued and double glass distilled water
(0.2-0.8 mg/L TOC) was used in the formulation of the mineral salts medium.
As an additional test for the adaptive capability of the New Haven isolates,
clinical counterparts of the KLebsiella pneumoniae. Escherichia coli and a
waterborne enterotoxigenic E. coli were also examined. Comparisons of
growth rates and maximum cell counts of the clinical and environmental
isolates obtained under varying nutrient concentrations were made.
4.3.1 Methods
The test procedure used acid washed oven sterilized glassware. Mineral
salts medium (7.0 g K2HP04 , 3.0 g KH2P04 , 1.0 g (NH3 ) 2S04, and 0.1 g
MgSO4.7H2O in 1 liter double glass distilled water) was prepared, autoclaved
and aseptically dispensed in 100 mL quantities into 250 mL Erlenmeyer
flasks. A sterile stock solution of yeast extract was introduced to provide
final concentrations of O, 0.1, 0.25, 0.5 and 1.0 mg/L yeast extract. Yeast
extract was used as the nutrient as it provides a mixed source of carbon
compounds. The yeast extract used was found to contain ca 60% TOC.
The New Haven isolates (K. pneumoniae. E.. aeroqenes. E. cloacae and £_.. coli)
were received on slants from the SCCRWA facility. A clinical strain of K..
pneumoniae was selected from the MSU stock culture collection. The clinical
E. coli isolate was provided by Bozeman Deaconess Hospital and had been
recently isolated from a urine sample. The enterotoxigenic E. coli (ETEC)
1047 was an important waterborne pathogen isolated during an outbreak in
Bangladesh and has shown a marked ability to maintain viability for extended
periods in water (this lab, unpublished data).
Stock cultures of the test organisms were stored at -70°C in 2% peptone and
40% glycerol. Each organism was individually inoculated into flasks
containing 10 mg/L yeast extract and incubated at 25°C. After 24 hr, 0.1 mL
was transferred to fresh medium containing 5.0 mg/L yeast extract and again
incubated for 24 hr at 25°C. A dilution of this final culture was made to
provide a final concentration of ca. 102 cfu/mL in the test flasks. The
incubation temperature of 25°C is approximately the maximum water
temperature observed at New Haven during the summer. All treatments were in
triplicate, and all enumerations from each flask were also done in
triplicate. All cell counts were determined by the spread plate technique
on tenth strength plate count agar incubated for 24 hours at 35°C.
Enumerations were performed every 24 hours until stationary phase was
attained.
Maximum growth rates were determined by the formula u = (Iogion2~1°5l0nl)
(2.302)/T where n^ and n2 are cell counts before and after the steepest
slope and T was the time interval in hours. Maximum cell count was
computed by subtracting the initial (zero time) cell count from the maximum
number of cells produced.

74
4.3.2 Results
The K.. pneumoniae environmental isolate was capable of more rapid and
greater growth than its clinical counterpart (Fig.4.1). Similar results
were obtained with E.. coli strains (Fig 4.2). However, ETEC also exhibited
a capacity to proliferate under these conditions.
Calculations were made to determine the maximum increase in cell numbers for
each organism and nutrient concentration. The results for the two K..
pneumoniae are given in Fig. 4.3. At each nutrient level, including 0 mg/L
yeast extract, both organisms increased in numbers. However, the New Haven
isolate reached higher maximum numbers in all cases. A comparison of the
bar heights for the two organisms at the same concentration in Fig. 4.3 are
given in Table 4.1. As concentration of nutrient increased, the difference
between the two strains changed from a 20 fold to a 7.6 fold suggesting
that the New Haven isolate was better able to proliferate under the test
conditions than the clinical strain, particularly at the lowest nutrient
levels.
Cell number increases for the three E.. coli strains are illustrated in Fig.
4.4. In this case, the clinical strain was incapable of replication in the
0 mg/L situation. As the amount of yeast extract increased, the clinical
isolate cell production more closely approached that of the environmental
strain, and at 1.0 mg/L was nearly equal (Table 4.1). The differences in
maximum cell production between the clinical and New Haven E. coli was
>1.9xl04 fold at 0 mg/L and decreased to 2.4 fold at 1.0 mg/L. The ETEC
production was comparable to the SCCRWA isolate at all yeast extract
concentrations.
Comparison of growth rates of the two K. pneumoniae indicated that the New
Haven isolate had the optimal growth rate in the first 24 hours for all
yeast extract concentrations except at 0 mg/L. Two of the three 0 mg/L
replicates grew most rapidly in the 24-48 hour interval. The clinical
isolate also had maximum growth from 24-48 hours at 0 mg/L. All others had
their highest replication during the first 24 hours (Fig. 4.5). Growth
rate for the New Haven isolate increased from near O.lOh"1 at 0 mg/L yeast
extract to 0.3Oh"1 at 1.0 mg/L with similar values observed for the pairs
0.1/0.25 and 0.5/1.0 mg/L. The u value for the clinical strain was similar
for the 0, 0.1, and 0.25 mg/L situations (ca. O.e-O.VSh"1). The highest
value at 1.0 mg/L yeast extract was 0.12h-1 , which was less than half of
that for the New Haven cells at the same concentration (Table 4.1).
New Haven E_. coli isolate had the highest growth rate between 48-72 hours at
0 mg/L yeast extract. This was indicative of a longer lag period. For 0.1,
0.25, and 0.5 mg/L, maximum growth rate was seen between 24-48 hours.

75
( O ) clinical, 0 mg/1 (
environmental, 0 mg/1 ( £- - -£) ETEC, 0 mg/1 (
clinical, 1.0 mg/1 (•) environmental, 1.0 mg/1
ETEC, 1.0 mg/1

10
0 48 72 96

TIME (HR)

FIGURE 4.1 Growth of Clinical, Environmental and Enterotoxigenic (ETEC)


Escherichia coli in Various Levels of Yeast Extract.

76
( O> clinical, 0 mg/1. ( Q) clinical, 1.0 mg/1.
( • ) environmental, 0 mg/1 ( £) environmental, 1.0
mg/1.

0 24 48 72
TIME (HR)

FIGURE 4.2 Growth of Clinical and New Haven KLebsiella pneumoniae in


Various Levels of Yeast Extract.

77
[ '•••'•['• ] clinical [ ; : X ] environmental.

% 6.0- x7
l~*~
:^ :
rf-
>*r !•• r*"
•X'-'-
_J
r*i •| ....
UJ 5.0- -t~
^ '• >'•> S--
0
!'*•'•'
1: .xx
rlr y.: x
* x<
.^X'
.;•-;,-.
.-.v
:•:< ;^-
LU 4.0-
>X\
rrfr : :' : x
.\',-

rf-
X-'-
. •:-;•;• ; ;|.
•-•v. :-:•;•:
-.••:•: 'X.
CO •-*.',;
: X-' : ;•;? •.'.v
X:X I'.;';';
< Sx :§?
m
.•,•/
>:•:•
LIJ 3.0-
•x';' :•:-:•• •??
•:•;••.• S:
CC x:::: :^': -
•.•.-•.-

.#:
.%:; X
•»:• ' V*''

0 ;:j$i X; .•„•.
."'.*'/ wi :; S:
:;•:••
2 2.0-
i •.-.-. : ; :'x
.-:<'.

:x :; : :
1 •.•.

0
1

t: $•: A<x
o 1" 1 -°- X; ;:
-f'X
;<;:
';

1
;X;

i f S;;;
•.-.-.
i# '
•xx
0
1
:' |x :' :«:
-> 1 ;%
0 0.1 0.25 0.5 1.0

MG/L YEAST EXTRACT

FIGURE 4_.3 Maximal Increase in Cell Numbers of Clinical and Environmental


Klebsiella pneumoniae Grown in Various Levels of Yeast Extract.

78
clinical [ ^-:>"v ] environmental [ ] ETEC.

—TT
^ 6.0- -4-1
* <^*^<*

_J w
.?;•
-h
^v
^s
^M
X^*

-h CyX-

ji^^
•J
-t- 'V •

LJJ 5.0-
O f;; //X

4i 1
'xC<

i
T y
;
v;X;
£ 4.0- i i *-V<]>x
<X"s^" ;
^•::
II
it
LU
QC 3.0- r-f- II
O Xv\

Z
2.0- Xvv

I
O ^v

v.X •X".

_J • •
xt
§
n • ' ' ' "

0 0.1 0.25 0.5 1.0


MG/L YEAST EXTRACT

FIGURE 4.4 Maximal Increase in Cell Numbers of Clinical, Environmental and


Enterotoxigenic (ETEC) Escherichia coli Grown in Various Levels of Yeast
Extract.

79
t :::::: J clinical [ $%$; ] environ*•ental.

0.30- F*~
x-x
FT
>^'
*X'
;' ;'

:<•>'
3 0.25- ->»
'C<>
; <
•xV.'
v<y

1
CO ^>
, ->V%

LU
h- 0.20-
^
','.">•'•

< •••X'

tr rfr •:.<•>;
•!*-.'•"'

1
i
I 0.15- P .|
^vS^.' !\ '.•'

h- ">i:
1 T«r- ^
o °- 1 °-
vV'x*-

^r § :^<
xl
;-x-

i
:=i'
'^ :

QC :| /x •'•>;: v<;
;>:<•
CD $& •*• •Xv

[t :^:
\\

0.05-
::::
;'\>

0 0.1 0.25 0.5 1.0

MG/L YEAST EXTRACT

FIGURE 4.5 Maximal Growth Rates (u) for Clinical and Environmental
KLebsiella pneumoniae Grown in Various Levels of Yeast Extract.

80
TABLE 4.1

Conparison of Maximum Cell Count Values and Growth Rates for Coliform
Isolated in New Haven System and Clinical Coliforras. The Data are the
Ratios of the New Haven Isolate to the Clinical Isolate. The New Haven
Isolate Always Grew Better.

mg/L yeast extract


Organism 0 0. 1 0.25 0. 5 1 .0

K. pneumoniae3 max.. no. b 20.0 13. 2 14. 1 10. 6 7 .6


max.. uc 1.6 2. 8 2. 4 2. 3 2 .1

E. colia max no b > 1.9X104 245. 5 17. 0 4. 9 2 .5


max yield uc — 1. 7 1. 2 1. 0 1 .1

a New Haven divided by clinical values


" Maxiitium cell counts
c u = (Iog10n2 - log loni) (2.303) - T (h)

81
Cells in the presence of 1.0 mg/L yeast extract had their optimum
proliferation in the first 24 hours. All of the ETEC growth rates were
greatest during the initial day. There was no growth of the clinical
isolate at 0 mg/L. Maximum growth rates at 0.1 and 0.25 mg/L occurred from
48-72 hours. The 0.5 mg/L concentration grown cells had optimum growth from
24-48 hr, and at 1.0 mg/L this was observed in the first 24 hours.
The averaged u values are given in Fig. 4.6. Except at 0 mg/L where no
growth of the clinical isolate occurred, the difference in growth rate
between the clinical and New Haven isolate remained fairly constant. This
is substantiated by the comparison presented in Table 4.1. The ETEC grew as
fast or slightly faster than the New Haven isolate.
The New Haven K. pneumoniae and E. coli isolates are capable of
significant growth under low nutrient conditions. Their
reproductive capabilities exceed that of their clinical counterparts
indicating that the environnental strains are adapted to replication
in oligotrophic conditions.
The SCCRWA isolates of E.. aerogenes and E.. cloacae were also tested under
the same conditions. Maximum cell production data for these two bacteria
are given in Fig. 4.7. A comparison with the graphs of K.. pneumoniae and E._
coli (Fig. 4.3 and 4.4) shows that all four organisms have a similar
capacity for growth under low nutrient conditions (Fig. 4.8). When compared
with the other two test organisms (Fig. 4.5 and 4.6) the growth rate of the
two Enterobacter spp. (Fig. 4.8) is slightly lower at more dilute nutrient
concentrations but similar at 1.0 mg/L yeast extract.
Each of the four coliforms isolated from the SCCRWA system has slightly
different growth characteristics. However, all are capable of significant
replication under very low nutrient conditions. If utilizable carbon in the
distribution system is similar to that used in these experiments, organisms
released from the treatment facility or sloughed from pipe surfaces are
capable of cell proliferation in the planktonic form. Similarly, biofilm
coliforms would be exposed to an adequate carbon supply for growth even when
the distribution water contained relatively low levels of utilizable carbon.
An enteropathogenic coliform responded to low nutrient growth very similarly
to an E.. coli isolated from the distribution system.
4.4 ASSTMIIABLE ORGANIC CARBON DETERMINATIONS

The method of van der Kboij et al, (1982) was adapted for measuring the
utilizable fraction of the TOC in New Haven drinking water. Four coliforms
were individually inoculated into sterile distribution water and their
growth monitored.

82
clinical f':•:". :/;'] environmental [[ '"]] ETEC.

0.25-
CO
0.20-
CC
0.15-
X
h-
0.10H
O
CC
O 0.05 H

0
0 0.1 0.25 0.5 1.0
MG/L YEAST EXTRACT

FIGURE 4.6 Maximal Growth Rates (u) for Clinical, Environmental and
Enterotoxigenic (ETEC) Escherichia coli Grown in Various Levels of Yeast
Extract.

83
E. aerogenes E. cloacae

0.30H

0.25H
LLJ
0.2CH
o:
0.1 5H

O 0.10-1
O
0.05H

0
0 0.25 1.0 0 0.25 1.0
0.1 0.5 0.1 0.5

MG/L YEAST EXTRACT

FIGURE 4.7 Maximal Increase in Cell Numbers of Enterobacter aerogenes and


Enterobacter cloacae Growth in Various Levels of Yeast Extract.

84
E. c1C jrc)CjerH3S E. c:lo a ca e

6 .0— rh
/"\

r*i
r*i
Vv£
*k •.•X
IP
nfr
_i ^n r*~ Ff? .'A

LLJ * .-.<<,
.'X*.

o
." '.N
/ •'•"
'' 'X
40- T?71 <%
\ $y. '•&:••
LU ^•:
•I X1-'
'•" V')"

*
CO
< on
:f: \ •\~l.

m
i
yj CJ.U-
W'
cc '.'•-•'<"•
>•§;:
•A-V,
• '.-'\
o
"*\\"-
X•X
.'.\V
:|? X-.;-:
X* "
Z
\V\'!

2.0- •'•X'
v^.-.
. V-. ' -

X\v
O '\\v'
;.\\- • vl

o 1.0
'vX

. \".
• 0'.'
O -x•'-
_J ;: ::::
.-,\".

0 0.25 1.0 0 0.25 1.0


0.1 0.5 0.1 0.5

MG/L YEAST EXTRACT

FIGURE 4.8 Maximal Growth Rates (u) for Enterobacter aeroqenes and
Enterobacter cloacae Grown in Various Levels of Yeast Extract.

85
4.4.1 Methods
Water samples were collected in Nalgene bottles, tested for chlorine and
frozen. Upon thawing, the samples were pasteurized at 63-65°C for 30 min.
After cooling, 100 mL aliquots were transferred to oven-sterilized, acid-
washed 250 mL erlenmeyer flasks. Chlorine concentration, in all cases, was
negligible. The test flasks were inoculated with 50 to 500 cfu (final
concentration) of Pseudomonas fluorescens (P17) or coliform stock culture.
A stock culture of P17 was prepared by inoculating a small amount of the
slant culture provided by van der Kboij into a flask containing mineral
salts medium with 1 mg/L acetate. After ca. one week incubation at 25°C,
stationary phase was attained. This same technique was used to create stock
cultures of the four coliforms. After inoculation, the test flasks
containing distribution water and the P17 were incubated at 15°C (van der
Kooij, et al., 1982). Coliform flasks were incubated at 25°C. Samples were
removed routinely to enumerate the cells in each flask. Cell counts were
done in triplicate by the spread plate technique on one-tenth strength plate
count agar. Coliform plates were incubated at 35°C for 24 hours and P17
plates at 25°C for 48 hours. Enumerations continued until the stationary
phase was reached.
Conversion of P17 cell counts to mg acetate equivalents (AOC) was done by
dividing the maximum number of P17 cells/mL by 2.9 xlO6 cfu/mL. The
conversion number was determined by enumerating P17 cells at stationary
phase grown in mineral salts medium made from double glass distilled water
and containing 1 mg/L acetate. The number given is the mean of five
replicates.
4.4.2 Results
A total of twelve distribution samples representing triplicates of four
sites were received. The sites included two that have routinely been found
to be free of coliforms (110 and 113) and two that have had coliforms (073
and 129) 1 (Table 4.2). When growth of P17 occurred, between 6.3xl05 and
l.lxlO6 cfu/mL were observed. No association was found between high P17
values and water from sites where coliforms have been found. The New Haven
coliforms were also grown in these water samples. There was more
variability in counts with the coliforms (range of 4.7xl03 to 3.0xl05
cfu/mL) but no relation between distribution sample sites and increased
production of coliforms in the experimental system. It should be noted,
however, that these water samples were collected when no coliforms were
observed during routine monitoring of the SCCFWA system. Because of the
greater variability in coliform counts in the experimental system, perhaps
the indicator bacteria are a better measure of growth potential of the
water. This is supported by the prior observation that even 0.1 mg/L yeast
extract supported the growth of coliforms in laboratory experiments. In

1sampling codes routinely used by SCCFWA

86
TABLE 4.2

Bacterial Growth in New Haven Distribution Water Samples. Organic Carbon


Concentrate is Reported as mg/L and Cell Counts as CHJ/mL

Sairple site 110 073 113 129


Collected 6/2/86
TOG3 i. 27+0.10 1.77±0.26 2.64+0.75 0.28+0.08

P17 7.9X105 cfu/mL 9.9X105 6.6xl05 0

K.. pneumoniae 0 1.5X105 0 0

E.. aerogenes 0 0 0 0

E. cloacae 0 0 0 0

E±. coli 0 0 0 0

Repeat of sample 6/2/86 collected at same sites


TOC 1. 41+0.28 3.02+0.72 2.95+0.05 0.30+0.08

P17 6 . 3xl05 7.4X105 l.lxlO6 0

K. pneumoniae 0 1.9X105 0 0

E. aerogenes 7 . 2X103 1.5x105 0 0

E. cloacae 0 0 0 0

E. coli 0 4.7X103 0 0

6/25/86

TOC 5. 44+0.74 5.24+0.42 4.12+0.25 3.53+0.36

P17 " 9 .4xl05 6.3X105 0 0

K. pneumoniae 1 . OxlO4 0 0 0

E. aerogenes 1 .5xl05 0 0 0

Ej. cloacae 3 . OxlO5 0 0 0

E. coli 2 . OxlO5 0 0 0

^IDC values are mg/L

87
each case when growth of P17 occurred at all, the upper levels of detection
were approached, e.g., the counts were not appreciably different from the
optimal counts.
Conversion of the P17 cell counts to AOC (mg/L acetate equivalents) are
given in Table 4.3. These ranged from none detected to 0.38 mg/L
equivalents. When values were obtained, they were quite high when compared
with results reported by van der Kboij. The percent of TOC as ADC was from
4% to 21%. The maximum percentage observed by van der Kooij was ca. 10%,
with most values much lower. A further assumption may also be that carbon
may not be the most important limiting nutrient. When detected, adequate
amounts of AOC were present to allow for the growth of at least one coliform
in distribution water in four of the eight samples where P17 proliferated.
The levels of AOC present were comparable with the yeast extract
concentrations that produced considerable coliform growth in earlier
experiments.
The results indicate that the utilizable fraction of the TOC at New
Haven is considerable (at least for the month of June).
4.5 PIPELINE REACTOR

4.5.1 Purpose
The purpose of the pipeline reactor was to provide a full scale replication
of conditions in the water distribution pipeline for monitoring biofilm
accumulation. The pipeline reactor is also easily accessible for biofilm
sampling when coliform episodes occur in the distribution system. No
episodes occurred during the study period.
4.5.2 Design
The pipeline reactor consists of four parallel, once-through, pipe sections
(Figure 4.9). Each reactor consists of ten ft. (3.1 m) of new cement-lined
iron pipe 6 in. ID (0.15 m) which serves as a hydrodynamic entrance length
and 11.7 ft. (3.57 m) of removable pipe sections. Each removable pipe
section is 14 in. (0.36 m) in length. There are ten (10) removable pipe
sections in each reactor. Two of the reactors contain pipe sections cut
from new pipe. The other two reactors contain pipe sections cut from old
pipe, i.e., pipe which has seen service in the distribution system. The
pipeline reactors simulate flow in the distribution system and carry
treated, chlorinated effluent. One of the "new" and one of the "old"
pipeline reactors was operated at 1 fps (0.15 m s'1) and the others at 0.2
fps (0.06 m s"1 ). The influence of hydraulic transients was assessed in this
experimental system.
4.5.3 Results
The pipeline reactor was only sampled once during this project. The analyses
of biofilm and wall deposit samples obtained in that sampling are presented
in Table 4.5. Table 4.4 indicates the analyses conducted on the water and
the wall deposits from the pipeline reactor.

88
CO
co

ELBOW

COHPBESSIOH COUPLING
PIPE SECT IONS

FIGURE 4.9 Pipeline Reactor


TABLE 4.3
AOC Conversions to mg Acetate Carbon Equivalents

Sample Sites 110 073 113


129
Date Collected
6/2/86 0.27 (21%) a 0.34 (19%) 0.23 (9%)

6/2/86 rep 0.22 (16%) 0.26 (9%) 0.38 (13%)

6/25/86 0.32 (6%) 0.22 (4%)

a percents are portion of TOC as AOC

90
TABLE 4.4
Analyses Conducted in the Pipeline Reactor

SCCRWA IPA
bulk water _pipe surface
flow rate X
rotational speed
PH X
temperature X
color X
turbidity X
chlorine X
alkalinity X
NH3 X
NO2 X
N03 X
TKN X
TPhos X
TOC X X
AOC
MFTC X X
HPC X X
fixed and volatile solids

91
4.6 TUBERCLE SAMPLES

Tubercle material from the inside of distribution lines and sediment in


pipes would seem to be ideal locations for coliform and other bacteria to
proliferate. This possibility was investigated by determining the
presence of certain types of bacteria associated with this material.
4.6.1 Methods
Tubercle material was first pulverized in a mortar and pestle. All
tubercles and sediment samples were then homogenized with added sterile
water if necessary for three minutes at 16000 rpm on ice. Two coliform
analyses were done. One was a surface spread plate with mT7 agar.
Incubation was at 35°C for 24 hours. Due to the turbid nature of the
samples, an MPN was also used. This consisted of a three tube three
dilution test run with modified lauryl tryptose broth. The broth was
prepared without lauryl sulfate; this was added after 4 hours incubation
at 35°C. Heterotrophic plate count bacterial numbers were determined by
the surface spread plate technique in triplicate on R2A medium. The
plates were counted after 7 days incubation at 28°C. Sulfate reducer
populations were estimated by a three tube three dilution MFN. The medium
used was Postgate's E supplemented with acetate. The tubes were evaluated
for black coloring after three weeks incubation at 25°C. The presence of
iron bacteria was determined microscopically. Preparations of the sample
were treated with 10% nitric acid, air dried, and examined at lOOx. The
appearance of tubular metal encrusted sheathed filaments was considered
positive for iron bacteria. Carbon, hydrogen, and nitrogen analyses were
also done.
4.6.2 Results
A total of fifteen tubercle, sedijnent, and flush samples were received.
No coliforms were found associated with particles in any of these samples
by either the MPN or mT7 methods (Table 4.5). In all but one instance,
iron bacteria were found in association with tubercle samples.
Sulfate reducers occurred in varying numbers in all but one tubercle
sample (2.3/g dry weight to >3400/g dry weight). Sulfate reducers and
iron bacteria were not detected in flush or sediment samples. The number
of HPC bacteria per gram dry weight was highly variable (4.2xl03 to
1.4xl09 cfu/g), but in general the sediment samples were more heavily
populated with HPC bacteria than the iron tubercles. The highest carbon
(as detected by carbon-hydrogen-nitrogen (CHN) analysis) levels observed
were also associated with flush/sediment samples. When a pipe section was
flushed twice, more bacteria and a higher carbon content were found in the
first flush sediment than the sediment from the second flush.
Five samples were received from the pipeline reactor in the New Haven
distribution system. Sample 5 was from the old pipe in the pipeline
reactor. This old pipe was again sampled at the end of the summer
(Samples 8 and 9) (Table 4.5). It appears that the number of sulfate
bacteria and the HPC populations were elevated over the initial sampling.
Carbon and hydrogen content of the scrapings increased and nitrogen

92
decreased. There was little difference between the number of cells in
high and low flow situations except that sulfate reducers may have been
more abundant under the high flow condition. The pipeline reactor also
had two lines of new distribution pipe installed and operated under high
and low flow conditions. The deposit material from the low flow new pipe
seemed to be primarily cellular. The number of HPC bacteria and CHN
values were all high for this sample. The new pipe, high flow (sample 7)
values more closely resembled those of the old pipe material with the
exception that no sulfate reducers were isolated. No significant coliform
problems occurred during the summer study period. Therefore, the goal of
being able to monitor the reactor during an outbreak was not possible.
Sample 1 also received a detailed inorganic analysis. The composition of
this iron tubercle was found to be, as reported on a dry weight basis:
aluminum, not detected; iron, 56%; manganese, 0.02%; calcium, 0.004%;
magnesium, not detected; silicon, not detected, sulfate, not detected.
These data show that autotrophic and heterotrophic bacteria are associated
with tubercle and sediment materials from New Haven and other distribution
systems. Even though no coliforms were found in the materials received,
it is reasonable to assume that they could be detected if larger numbers
of samples were examined. The results do show, however, that coliforms
are not found evenly distributed or in considerable quantity within
distribution particulates.
4.7 CONCLUSIONS

Coliform organisms isolated from New Haven drinking water are better
adapted to proliferation under oligotrophic conditions than their clinical
counterparts. The four coliform species were all capable of some
replication in a mineral salts medium made with double glass distilled
water and no added carbon. In the presence of 1 mg/L yeast extract, ca.
106 cfu/mL were produced. These results indicate that the environmental
strains are adapted to growth under oligotrophic conditions.
The method of van der Kboij to determine assimilable organic carbon may
not be of value in the SCCFWA system. When counts with the P17
pseudomonad were obtained, they were near the numbers determined as
maximum for the mg/L acetate equivalent conversion value. The use of
coliforms from the system as test organisms may be a better analytical
tool as evidenced by the greater range in final counts obtained when these
organisms were grown in distribution water samples. It is also possible
that carbon is not the limiting nutrient, as assimilable carbon levels
were within the range of yeast extract concentrations which produced
significant coliform growth.
Tubercle and sediment material from the pipes contained high levels of
heterotrophic bacteria. Iron bacteria and sulfate reducing bacteria were
associated with iron tubercles. No coliforms were found in these samples,
suggesting that surface-associated coliforms are not evenly distributed in
the system. Flow rate in the pilot reactor did not significantly affect
the number and type of surface-associated bacteria.

93
Ihe results indicate that the utilizable fraction of the TOC at New Haven
is considerable and can therefore support regrowth in the distribution
system.

94
TABLE 4.5
Tubercle, Sediment, and Flush Sample Bacterial and Chemical Evaluations

'.-.:-. !t- » 1 2 3 « 5 7 8 ' 10 || 12 11 14 IS


Pat." roll.-!-!.-.! 3/7/yo 6/i.,/86 6/24/86 6/24/86 6/24/86 ;/,„;,,„ 7/17/llh 7/1 7/116 7/17/86 7/I7/K6 7/ M/H(, 7/ IO/MU 7/25/Hf, 7/9/ll(> 7/ (l.'.'lt.
Pl^.' Ivp..- M.'w Haven Hew Haven New Haven New Haven New Haven -ii .,,•„.
lined cast Wtilttiey UhlLuey Uhltney Uhltt.oy «,.„ n.iven »i-u llnwn Honm,.,ith-
Vlncheniur Ulnchcnter Scranton S, ranlor, "'», w 1 Incoln Hunrli- Mum- .•
rcarlor- ri-actor- reactor- reactur- p,,,,| t p^i t
6 Stari t Slarr Avenue Avenue plgKod 13 ,r At: 90 y
1 I3t , roen fii-w pipe, old pipe, old pipe, new pipe,
flush tubercle r,i. Paul St. Paul flufih sedi- nl|.r ran
tubercle tubercle fii*' hi El. flow high flow low (low low flow | sl fl,, s ), 2uil flush im>i»t
91 yr 24" 89 yr 8" 4" cast fleen flln till
gritty tubercle tubercle swab of «, .llmeni «edi™,.|.l
cast cast tuK- . •!.-
liquid
a" o.ist H" cast
4c»2 25 8cm 2
!2.9<-n 2 I2.9 tli|2
I'<tjl N.imple mass 1".9,. 14'. 2|. 259.38 196. 8g 215. 7g «.),„ 60.75g 92.89g 87 '83g 259. Ig 192. 9f. 587. 6B O.lf; 2.5 8
> 3400/g 0 Z.l/g |4.4/ s 19.4/n 0 0 > 314/g '48/g o 0000
Itl-C Kartcrla 4.1«105/ B 4.0>I06/,. 4.2,101/8 7.5xlO'/,! 7.8,IO*/R 2.)xlo5/J 8.0«IO<>/g 8.0xl0 6 /g *.6xl0 6 /g 1.4xl0 9 /g 7.8xlu 8 /g 4.7xIO<V|j
<o 2.0xlo5/ B 4.2x10
(-.•lilorns nT7 1) u oooo 0 0 0 « 0 0000
HHN 0 0 0000 o 0 0 0 o 0000
Iron bacteria + • » t . ^ + +
! moisture 30.1 "• s 5-2 23.8 43.1 61.0 98.2 25.9 **•' "•' 19.77 99. 9» 99.84
C Ct dry wt) 1.35 14 - 37 1-27 2.21 0.51 41.01 1.99 2.07 '•" 8-18 ;.'.« 2.21 42.61
•1 '! dry vt ) 0.78 •• il 1-21 1.27 ' 0.89 2.52 1.13 1.56 '•»' 2.37 , -28 ,_„ ,. 6 ,
r- < i i!ry wt ) 0.02 1.71x10-'' 6.89x10-4 l.OlxlO" 4 I.BNxlO"* 1.75x10-4 9.l6xlO- 5 9.01x10-5 8.43x10-5 0.70 l.Vixl.r* I.C,«lo-4 u.17
T'i< (I dry wt ) 0.?H n. 33*0. 20 0.074*0.01 0.077*0.002 O.IJ*0.0/2
5.0 PILOT PIANT EXPERIMENTS

E. van der Wende and W.G. Characklis


Experiments were conducted to assess biofilm growth processes in water
distribution mains with a pilot system consisting of RotoTorque@ reactors
(described in 5.2.2). The experimental system is much more flexible and
accessible than the pipeline reactor (Section 4.5.2) and, therefore, allows
more detailed study of biofilm properties and processes under controlled
conditions. Operation of the pilot plant system was the responsibility of
SCCRWA throughout the project. Though the AWWARF project terminated in
December, 1986, experimentation will presumably continue through at least
Summer, 1988. Pilot plant operation is being supervised by Dr. J.
Grochowski (SCCRWA) / W.G. characklis, and Ewout van der Wende, a Ph.D.
student at Montana State University supported by SCCRWA. The pilot plant
provides a continuing source of information and will remain a focus for
research in distribution network processes for some time.
5.1 EQUIFMENT AND EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

The pilot plant system consists of two components: 1) the pipeline reactor
and 2) the RotoTorque@ system. The conceptual design was prepared by N.
Zelver and W.G. Characklis (IPA, Montana State University). The idea for
using RotoTorques@ in this unique manner originated with N. Zelver who also
accomplished the engineering design for the entire system. The system was
fabricated by N. Zelver, E. van der Wende (MSU), Mark Jordan (MSU), and
personnel from SCCRWA. Consultation and advice was kindly provided by D.
Smith (SCCRWA) and W.A. Hunt (MSU).
5.1.1 Plug flow
The distribution pipe network has characteristics which are similar to a
plug flow reactor (PER) in that water is continuously fed to the front end
of the system and travels as a "plug" in which microbial growth and other
processes occur. Ideally, elements of water move progressively through the
reactor without mixing in the direction of flow so that radial gradients do
not exist but axial gradients (e.g., chlorine concentration) are important.
Thus, the composition of the water is uniform over any cross section,
although the composition obviously changes with distance from the inlet
through the reactor. The most important feature of the PFR from the
standpoint of microbial physiology is the progressive change in
environmental conditions seen by an organism traversing the reactor. In
fact, the situation in the ideal PFR is the same as that in the batch
reactor, with residence time in the PFR replacing batch reactor holding
time. The biof ilm organisms in a PFR also "see" different environmental
conditions depending on their location in the PFR.
5.1.2 RotoTorquef System (RTS)
The experimental apparatus used to simulate the distribution system consists
of two (2) RotoTorque@ reactor Systems (RTS) located at the West River water

97
treatment plant within the SCCRWA, New Haven. Each PTS consists of 4
individual RotoTorque@ reactors (FT) in series. A RT consists of an iron
pipe section (6" I.D.) with a bitumastic coating containing an inlet and an
outlet. A solid PVC cylindrical drum spins inside this pipe section with a
variable rotational speed. In the later experiments with continuous
chlorination, the iron pipe section was replaced with a PVC pipe section in
each FT.
The RotoTorque@ system provides significant advantages in simulating the
distribution system environment, especially in relation to biofilm
processes: 1) the four RotoTorques@ (each a continuous flow, stirred tank
reactor) in series simulate the plug flow characteristics of the
distribution system. Gradients in organic carbon, cell activity and
chlorine residual can be observed from one RotoTorque@ to the next, similar
to the gradients in the distribution system. No gradients exist in the
fluid phase of any individual FT since each individual FT is a CFSTR. Thus,
sampling is simple because the FT concentration equals FT effluent
concentration. The fluid residence time in each reactor determines the
residence time in the experimental system in much the same way as fluid
velocity controls residence time in the distribution system, 2) fluid shear
stress is controlled by the rotational speed of the drum and liquid
residence time is independently controlled by fluid flow rate into the
reactor (i.e., fluid shear stress and liquid residence time can be
controlled independently), 3) the pipe surface can be sampled conveniently
for biofilm.

5.2 INFLUENCE OF CHLORINATED FIUTER BACKWASH ON BIOFIIM PROCESSES

5.2.1 Purpose

The purpose of this experiment was twofold: 1) to determine the effect of a


chlorinated filter backwash on filter effluent quality including HPC
bacteria numbers, coliform numbers and total organic carbon (TOC)
concentration; and, 2) to determine the effect of the effluent from a
chlorinated filter backwash on biofilm accumulation in the RotoTorque@
system.
5.2.2 Design
The RotoTorque@ System. The experimental apparatus used for this experiment
(and for a number of additional experiments) consisted of two (2)
RotoTorque6 reactor Systems (RTS) and two (2) pilot filters located at the
West River water treatment plant of the SCCFWA in New Haven. Each RTS
consisted of 4 individual RotoTorque@ reactors (FT) in series (Fig. 5.1). A
FT can be classified as a continuous flow stirred tank reactor (CFSTR). It
consists of a pipe section with a bitumastic coating containing an inlet and
an outlet (Fig. 5.2). A PVC drum spins inside this pipe section

98
co
co flow through
tank with T T T
influent

RT 1 RT 2 RT 3 RT 4

FIGURE 5.1 A Schematic Diagram of the RotoTorque@ System (RTS).


o
o

1 BOTTOM PLATE
2 SHAFT
3 PIPE
4 ROTATING DRUM
5 TOP PLATE

FIGURE 5.2 A RotoTorque@ (RT) Reactor.


with a variable rotational speed. The RotoTorque@ apparatus has been
described in detail in other publications (Characklis et al, 1982; Trulear
and Characklis, 1982).
The RotoTorque@ system provides significant advantages in simulating the
distribution system environment, especially in relation to biofilm
processes. These include:
1. The four RotoTorque@s (KT) in series simulate the plug flow
characteristics of a distribution system. Gradients in organic
carbon, cell activity and chlorine residual can be observed from one
RotoTorque@ to the next, similar to the gradients in the distribution
system. The fluid residence time in each reactor determines the
residence time in the experimental system in much the same way as
fluid velocity controls residence time in a distribution system.
2. Fluid shear stress is controlled by the rotational speed of the
drum. Liquid residence time is independently controlled by fluid
flow rate into the reactor. Thus, unlike a traditional plug flow
pipeline reactor, fluid shear stress and liquid residence time can be
controlled independently. Fluid shear stress is a critical variable
influencing detachment of cells from the biofilm, whereas residence
time controls substrate loading rate to the biofilm.
3. The surface of the pipe can be accessed for biofilm observation
as well as microbiological and chemical analysis.
The RIS influent was effluent from the two pilot filters which both
received the same influent: chemically pre-treated, unfiltered, chlorine-
free water. The dimensions of the filters, some characteristics of the
treated water, and a description of the filter media are given in Table
D. 1 (appendix).
Procedures. Prior to starting the test, both filters were cleaned
thoroughly. During the experiment (April, 1986 - August, 1986), both
filters were backwashed daily. One filter, Filter A (FA) was backwashed
with chlorinated water while the other, Filter B (FB), was backwashed with
chlorine-free water. Chlorine, applied to the backwash of filter A, had to
be in excess of that necessary to "clean" the filter media. Therefore, the
chlorine residual in the backwash water was monitored to assure this
condition.
The filter influent (FI), filter effluents (FAE and FEE) and RIS effluents
(RIAE and RTBE) were analyzed frequently by SCCRWA using their standard
laboratory procedures. The biofilm was sampled less frequently from the
rotating inner drum of each RT. Each biofilm sample consisted of two (2)
square inches of biofilm removed from the drum surface by a vacuum
technique. Samples were collected in 20-40 mL sterile phosphate buffer in
a 50 mL sterile plastic container. The samples were stored on ice in a
Styrofoam cooler and sent to MSU by overnight mail. The types of analyses
performed on the effluent water and the biofilm are indicated in Table
5.1.

101
TABIE 5.1

The Types of Analyses Performed on the RotoTorque and Filter Effluent Water,
RotoTorque Biofilm, and Pilot Filter Media Granules for Experiment 5.2.

RotoTorque^__ _______Filter_______
Effluent Surface Influent Effluent Granules
flow rate x x
rotational speed x
pH x xx
temperature x x x
color x xx
turbidity x x x
chlorine x x x
alkalinity x x x
NH3 x xx
NO2 x xx
NO3 x xx
TKN x xx
TPhos x xx
TOC x x x x
AOC x xx
MFTC X x x x
HPC X x x x x

102
After homogenizing, the samples were analyzed for HPC-bacteria, coliforms and
total organic carbon (TOC). HPC-bacteria and coliforms were determined by
spread-plate techniques using R2A-agar and m-ENDO agar, respectively. TOC
was determined in 2 mL samples.
The overall hydraulic residence time in each RotoTorque@ system was 7.3 hours
(1.83 hr in each RotoTorque® reactor) which corresponds to a volumetric feed
rate of 14.5 ml/Kiin- The rotational speed was 150 rpm providing a wall shear
stress equivalent to the shear stress on a pipe wall with water flowing at
1.1 m/s (3.3 fps)/ somewhat higher than typical flow velocity in the SCCRWA.
Notation. The RTS that received its influent from filter A is RTS A. The
individual FT are 1A, 2A, 3A and 4A. 1A is the first KT of the series which
received the filter effluent and 4A the last one of the series. RT in RTS B
are noted in an analogous manner.
5.2.3 Results and Discussion
The results of the analyses of the filter influent, the filter effluents, and
the RotoTorque@ effluents are presented in the Table D.2-1 through D.2-7
(appendix). The results of the biofilm analyses are presented in Table D.4
(appendix). The results of the filter media analyses and filter pressure
drop are found in Table D.3 and Table D.7 (appendix), respectively. The
results of chlorine measurements in the backwash water are presented in Table
D.5 (appendix).
Pilot filters. The performances of pilot filters A (backwashed with
chlorinated water) and B (backwashed with chlorine-free water) are evident
from a comparison of their respective influent and effluent water quality
parameters (Table 5.1). Generally, the mean values have been reported in this
section although data sets (Table D.2-1 through D.2-7 (appendix)) that
contain one or more erratic values were excluded from the calculation. Only
data sets which included simultaneous measurements for the filter influent,
filter effluent, and RotoTorque@ effluent were considered.
TOC removal in the pilot filters was about 20%-25% with the final TOC
concentration in Filter B Effluent (FEE) (backwashed with chlorine-free
water) about 5% lower than in Filter A Effluent (FAE) (backwashed with
chlorinated water). The filter media were analyzed to evaluate the influence
of chlorinated backwash on microbial cell accumulation on the filter media.
The analysis (Table D.3 (appendix)) indicates a larger microbial population
in FB, the filter with the chlorine-free backwash. There was also an obvious
visual difference between these media. The filter media particles in FB
aggregated forming agglomerates of significant size.
Chlorinated backwash of the filter decreased microbiological
activity within the filter media resulting in lower removal of
TOC from influent water.
Color removal (>90%) and turbidity removal (from 0.64 to 0.28 NTU)
contributed to the TOC removed. A significant portion of the TOC in the
filters was apparently not biodegradable in the filter environment. The pH
dropped consistently in both filters (from 7.4 to 7.2) and there was a

103
decrease in alkalinity, both consistent with aerobic biological activity
in the filters. The alkalinity dropped from 14.9 mg CaOC>3/L to 13.0 in FAE
and 12.5 in FEE.
Ammonia nitrogen concentration increased in both filters from 80 to 110
jug/L partially as a result of hydrolysis of organic nitrogen (TKN
decreased by approximately 50% through the filters).
Coliform removal was >95% in the pilot filters. Coliform concentrations in
the filter effluents were very low (<0.3 cfu/lOOmL) and never exceeded 1
cfu/100 inL. HPC averaged approximately 750 cfu/mL in the filter effluents.
The initial HPC plating procedure had an upper detection limit of 5700
cfu/mL. Thus for the calculated averages, counts exceeding the upper limit
were taken as 5700. Curing the experimental period, the counting procedure
was changed in order to count numbers higher than 5700 cfu/mL. Because
only a relatively small number of samples were treated this way, counts
>5700 cfu/mL were taken as 5700.
The performance of filter FB (chlorine-free backwash) may also result in
more effective filtration because of decreased pore volume and more
adsorptive filter media surfaces. Pressure drop in the filter B was higher
than that in the filter with chlorinated backwash (Table D.7 (appendix),
Fig. 5.3). Substantially greater "clogging" occurred in filter FB.
RotoTorque@ system effluents. Results of AOC and TOG analyses from RTE did
not yield any conclusive results. No measurable changes were found in pH,
color, NH3, and NC>3 in the RTE. Alkalinity increased in both RTS (13.0 to
15.0 mg CaOC>3/L in RTS A and 12.5 to 14.2 mg CaOC>3/L in RTS'B). Coliform
numbers in RTE are very low: approximately 0.1 cfu/100 mL which is lower
than coliforms in the FE.
Coliforms entering the RTS did not inoculate the RTS biofilms.
Furthermore, the liquid phase coliform concentration decreased
across the RTS.
HPC bacteria concentration in RotoTorgue@ A Effluent (RTAE) was about 200
cfu/mL higher than the concentration in RotoTorgue^ B Effluent (RTBE)
(2750 cfu/mL and 2550 cfu/mL, respectively) while the concentration in the
FAE was only 40 cfu/mL higher than in FEE (760 cfu/mL and 720 cfu/mL,
respectively). The data suggest that HPC production in RTS A (receiving
effluent from filter with chlorinated backwash) was slightly greater
although perhaps not statistically significant. Greater microbial growth
would be expected in RTS A since FAE contains more TOC.
Water temperature in the RTE is essentially the ambient temperature in the
water treatment plant building. Temperature differences between the filter
influent and the RTS effluent ranged from -12°C to +2°C during the
experimental period.

104
FA=chlorinated,FB = n on—chlorinated
-e- FBE before bw (1)
—*-- FBE after bw (2)
— (2) minus (1)
FAE before bw (3)
FAE after bw (4)
(4) minus (3)

O
ai

0
en o *-
<N ro ro

date

FIGURE 5.3 Hydraulic Pressure of Filter Effluent Immediately Before and After Filter Backwash.
Biofilm. The most reliable biofilm data were obtained from samples
obtained from 7/2, 7/16, 7/22, and 7/28. However, oil leaked into FT 3B
during June and July and almost certainly had an impact on biofilm
accumulation in RT 3B and 4B. The microbial cell density in the biofilm
was greater in RIS A than in PTS B. To a lesser extent, this is also a
valid observation for biofilm TOC density (mgC/m2 ) (Table D.4 (appendix)).
Backwashing the filter with chlorinated water led to increased
biofilm accumulation in the RES based on biofilm cell numbers
and biofilm organic carbon. The RIS water was not chlorinated in
these experiments.
In the early stage of biofilm formation, visual examination indicated a
relatively large biofilm thickness in RT 4 for both RIS. As a more mature
biofilm developed, biofilm thickness was clearly the greatest in RT 1 of
both RIS and thickness declined throughout the consecutive RT's. HPC as
well as TOC indicate the decreasing amount of biofilm in the consecutive
RT (see Table D.4 (appendix)).
Biofilm accumulation varied with time and distance from the
inlet in the RES. The RIS water was not chlorinated in these
experiments.
In June and July, oil leaked into RT 3B. This caused biofilm 3B to grow in
thickness (observed visually as well as analytically (Table D.4
(appendix)). Also in June, the biofilm started to slough off. Initially,
sloughing occurred only in RT 1A and IB, but spread to the other RT later.
By June 30, 80% of the biofilm of RT 1A, 50% of the biofilm of RT IB and
10% of the biofilm of the other RT had sloughed off. Only the biofilm of
RT 3B remained unchanged.
Biofilm sloughing, occurred throughout most of the RES after
several months operation. The RES water in these experiments was
not chlorinated.
Very little change in turbidity was observed during the sloughing periods.
This result is not surprising since a poor correlation was observed
between HPC-bacterial concentration and turbidity in the RTS effluents
(correlation coefficient of 0.06 for RIS A). Turbidity may not have been
affected since the biofilm floes resulting from sloughing tended to
accumulate at the bottom of the RIS, especially in RT 1A and IB. This
accumulation was especially evident at low flow rates through the RIS.
5.2.4 Conclusions
Chlorinated backwash of the filter decreased microbiological activity in
the filter resulting in decreased removal of TOC from the influent water.
Coliforms entering the RTS did not colonize the RIS biofilms. Furthermore,
the planktonic coliform concentration decreased through the RTS.

106
Backwashing the filter with chlorinated water led to increased biof ilm
accumulation in the FTS based on biof ilm cell numbers and biof ilm organic
carbon.
Biof ilm accumulation varied with time and distance from the inlet in the
RTS.
Sloughing occurred throughout most of the RTS after several months
operation.
5.3 GROWTH RATES OF HPC BACTERIA IN THE BIOFILM AND WATER PHASES

5.3.1 Purpose
The experimental objective was to quantify the relative contribution of
biof ilm and planktonic cells to the RotoTorque@ effluent cell
concentration. The magnitude of the influence of biof ilm on
bacteriological water quality in the distribution system was to be
determined.
5.3.2 Design
RTS A was flushed for 1 hour with a flow rate of 1000 ml/min in order
remove accumulated biof ilm floes. Two days later, 200 mL were removed from
all RT and Heterotrophic Plate Counts (HPC) were determined. The sampling
of floes was avoided by a presettling period. After sampling, a 0.2 ^m
filter was installed to remove all cells from the RotoTorque@ influent.
The RT flow rate was increased to 470 ml/mi1"1 - Six (6) residence times
later, all RT were sampled again. The flow rate was readjusted, to an
intermediate flow rate of 45 rol/min. This time the RT influent was
unfiltered. All RT were sampled at this flow rate after two (2) days.
5.3.3 Results and Discussion
The results of the HPC-bacterial counts in the RTE are presented in Table
5.2. These data, together with biof ilm HPC-bacterial counts (Table D.4
(appendix) ) , were used for the following calculations. Consider the
following mathematical expressions which describe the balance of cells in
the RTS:
Planktonic Cell Balance in RT1:
dX F A
*
at v v
where X- = planktonic cell concentration in RT1 (# L~ )
X = planktonic cell concentration entering RT1 (# L~ )
_2
X . = biof ilm cell concentration (# L )

107
F = volumetric flow rate through FT1 (L t~ )
V = liquid volume in RT1 (L )
A = surface area for biofilm accumulation in FT1 (L2 )
jit = specific growth rate for planktonic cells (t )
r, = specific biofilm detachment rate (t )

Biofilm cell balance;


A -fb

where & = specific growth rate of biofilm cells (t~ )


For steady state, the equations simplify to
F A
_—— r v — v I _ i /Y ~u T* Y ™ r c\ *31
~
v"~ L
i
*\ ""
u
f\ J — r*^i
i a D v
fl^Kv ~~~" L3• JJ

Mj3 = rd [5.4]

The equations contain three unknowns: ji, / M/ and r,. However, if /i = M/


the set of equations is determinant.

Hydraulic residence time is V/F and its reciprocal, F/V = dilution rate
(D). D is a good approximation for specific growth rate of planktonic
cells (i.e., u = D). For F = 14.5 Mymin, hydraulic residence time V/F =
7.3 h in the RIS which is long enough to expect cellular reproduction in
suspension (n = 0.14 h-1) in addition to growth in the biofilm. When F =
470 ml/min, V/F = 13 min (n = 4.6 h"1) which is too brief a period for
significant microbial cell replication in suspension. In this case and for
a sterile influent (XQ = 0), Eq. [5.3] becomes

F A
—— [5.5]
V

or
FX
r = ———~ [5.6]
AXb

108
HPC Bacteria Concentration in cfu/mL in the Water Phases of the
RotoTorque^s of KES A During Experiment 5.3

Flow rates through the RIS


date sample 14.5 ml/roin 470 ml/min 45 rciL/min
RTI 2,300 0 1,900
1A 14,600 470 13,900
2A 13,300 70 16,100
3A 11,800 1,250 17,700
4A 4,500 380 17,700

109
Since Mi. = r,, /^ can be determined.

Calculations of M and ^b (=rd at steadY state) in RT 1A:


28.2 * 103 * 470
Eq. [5.6] r, = —————————————— = 0.0025 hr"1
0.207 * 2.6 * 1010

So, JLL = 0.06 day

where F = 470 ml/nu-0 = 28.2 * 103 ml/hr.

X = 470 cfu/mL

A = 0.207 m2

^ = 2.6 * 1010 cfu m~2sample

The cell turnover in the biof ilm is the reciprocal of the specific growth
rate or 17 days.
The specific growth rate (n) in RT1A fluid, calculated from Eq. [5.1], is
M = -2.9 day"*

where r,d = 0.0025 h~

F = 14.5 mL min"1 = 870 mL h"1

XQ - X1 = - 12.300 cfu/mL

Xb = 2.6 * 1010cfu m~2

A = 0.207 m2

V = 1.575 L = 1.575 * 103 ItlL

Although the calculated specific growth rate of biofilm cells is low, it


is large enough to permit cell numbers in the water of the RTS to increase
significantly because of detachment processes (see Table 5.2 and compare
cell concentrations in RT influent and RT 1A) . The low specific growth
rate in the biofilm is countered by a high concentration of biofilm cells
which results in a high cell production rate. Note that the ratio of
biofilm cells to planktonic cells is large (see Figure 5.4) .

110
The negative M value for planktonic cells may be explained by analytical
error or cell dieoff in RT 1A fluid. Dieoff is quite possible as suggested
by the declining viable bacterial numbers in the consecutive RT's
operating at the low flow rate (Figure 5.5a and 5.5b) . If dieoff is
ignored and we presume that all cells in the RT fluid originated in the
biofilm, r^ = 0.002 h~l for F = 14.5 mL/Kiin. Then, biofilm turnover time
is 21 days.
The growth rate calculation for F = 45 ml/min, however, results in a much
shorter biofilm turnover time of 7 days (r^ = 0.004 hr"1 ) . Substrate
loading rate increases with increasing flow rate and is not accounted for
in this analysis. Yet, the importance of substrate loading rate to biofilm
cell growth cannot be ignored. Therefore, the proportional relationship
between substrate loading rate and flow rate is a weak point in the
analysis which ignores the potentially greater biofilm activity at higher
flow rate. Therefore, biofilm net detachment rate calculated for the high
flow rate condition may be high. Accordingly, the calculated planktonic
growth rate may be underestimated.
Yet another approach indicates that planktonic growth can be neglected as
compared to the biofilm growth. If all growth was occurring in suspension,
M would be approximately 0.5 h"1 to match the growth found in RT LA. for
the low flow rate. Such a high growth rate is possible for an organism in
rather ideal growth conditions but not for organisms growing in
unsupplemented tap water.
Growth rate of planktonic cells is negligible conpared to
biofilm cells in unsupplemented, chlorine-free tap water.
In Figures 5.5a and 5.5b, HPC bacterial concentration in the RTE are
plotted versus RT and hydraulic detention time, respectively. For both
flow rates, a growth factor appears to become limiting within the RTS.
This limitation occurs in RT 1 at low flow rate (Figure 5.5a ) and not at
all in the high flow rate experiment. The limitation occurs at the same
hydraulic residence time in each experiment. This result is consistent
with the three times higher specific growth rate found for biofilm cells
under the high flow rate condition as compared to the low flow rate
condition, causing a three times higher growth factor load to be consumed
in the same amount of time.
Converting RotoTorque results so that they are applicable to a water
distribution pipeline 6 inches I.D. carrying chlorine- free water can be
approximated by estimating the corresponding hydraulic residence time in
the pipeline. The pipeline hydraulic residence time has to be corrected
for the loss of volume in the RTS caused by the presence of the PVC-drums
as well as the gain of biofilm surface area on the same drums. The
correction factor was calculated as follows:

111
biofllm
water (15 ml/min)
water (45 ml/min)

INFL 3A 4A

FIGURE 5.4 Planktonic cell (HPC) Concentration and Biofilm Cell


Concentration* in RTS A (No Chlorine; Semi Log Scale).

112
cell concentrations in RT effluents
20000 14.5 ml/min
45 ml/min

15000

10000-

5000-

1A 2A 3A 4A
rototorque
cell concentrations in RT effluents
20000 14.5 ml/min
45 ml/min

345
time (hr)

FIGURE 5.5 Planktonic cell (HPC) Concentration in RTS A During Experiment


5.3 Plotted Against RotoTorque® (5.5a) or Hydraulic Detention Time (5.5b).

113
volume of pipe section/(liquid volume) x
(surface area pipe section + surface area PVC-drum)/surface area pipe
section
= 4.9

Thus, a residence tijne of 5 h in the RTS is approximately 25 h in the 6"


pipeline.
For a chlorine-free water, most biofilm growth occurs near
the inlet of the system.
5.3.5 Conclusions
Growth of planktonic cells is negligible compared to biofilm cells in
distribution water.
For chlorine-free water, most biofilm growth occurs near the inlet of the
system.
5.4 COLIPOKM CHALLENGE TO THE BIOFILM

5.4.1 Purpose
Coliforms were artificially introduced in RTS B to determine whether they
will adsorb and grow in an established biofilm.
5.4.2 Design

A batch culture of Klebsiella pneumoniae was diluted with FB effluent and


monitored for a few days until cell numbers stabilized. The Klebsiella
strain was isolated from the New Haven water distribution system. On June
21, 1986, the cell concentration was approximately 105-106 cfu/mL. One (1)
mL of this culture was diluted to 1200 mL with FB effluent and
continuously fed to RTS B at a flow rate of 1.4 mL/min. On June 22, 200 mL
were sampled from each RT. The RTS was then flushed with approximately 40
L FBE, followed by sampling of the biofilm of all 4 RT. Daring the
following week, biofilm and water were sampled several times.
5.4.3 Results and Discussion
A total number of 3.2*106 cfu Klebsiella pneumoniae adsorbed to the
biofilm shortly after the inoculation, more cells than the total number of
organisms added (5.76*105 ). The total cell number calculated may be
slightly overestimated because it was not corrected for the loss of
biofilm area caused by sloughing. There was no apparent growth of
coliforms in the RTS. The coliform concentration in the biofilm decreased
rapidly with time (Table 5.3). Total recovery of coliforms during the
experiment, based on calculations from Figure 5.6 (plot of Table 5.4), was
approximately 100%.

114
TABLE 5.3

Coliform Density in Biofilm as a Function of Time and Position in the RT


System During Experiment 5.4. FT Surface Area is 0.207 m2 .

date sample ;fu/m2 cfu/RT


1986
7/22 IB 1.26*107 ^.6*10b
IBrep 1.31*107 2.7*106
2B 1.77*106 3.7*105
2Brep 1.51*106 3.2*105
3B 7.63*105 1.6*105
3Brep 8.67*105 1.8*105
4B 2.01*105 0.4*105
4Brep-1 2.05*105 0.4*105

7/28 IB 5.73*105 1.1*10-


2B 1.00*105 2.1*10^
3B 2.52*104 0.5*10^
4B <2.52*104

•'-replicate

115
5.4.4 Conclusions
The coliform isolate K. pneumoniae did adsorb to the biofilm but did not
colonize the biof ilm.
5.5 INFLUENCE OF FLUID SHEAR STRESS ON BIOFILM DETACHMENT

5.5.1 Purpose
Determine the effect of shear stress on biof ilm detachment (sloughing).
5.5.2 Design
RTS A was flushed for 30 minutes at a flow rate of 1000 mL/roin (= 6
detention times) to wash out accumulated floes. The flow was then set at
200 mL/min- The high flow rate was necessary to accommodate a total sample
volume (2400 mL) necessary for determining turbidity from each RT. The
initial shear stress was the same as during the entire preceding
experimental period (equivalent to shear stress on a 6 in. ID pipe flowing
at 1.14 m/s). The shear stress was then increased stepwise (see Table D.8
(appendix)), starting with the last RT of the series, RT 4A. Each stepped
increase lasted 4 minutes and, at the end of each step, a sample of 200 mL
was taken. The turbidity of these samples was measured with a
nephelometer. The same procedure was repeated for the other RT's.
5.5.3 Results and Discussion
An obvious increase in detachment rate occurred at a threshold velocity of
1.7 m/s (Figure 5.7; tabular results in Table D.8 (appendix)) for RT 1A.
The threshold velocity for RT 2A, 3A, and 4A is approximately 2.1 m/s.
Increased fluid shear stress resulted in partial detachment of
biofilm.
The lower threshold velocity for RT 1A may be a reflection of a higher
biofilm accumulation in FT 1A. In essence, this presumes a thicker biofilm
is more subject to detachment due to increased shear stress.
Detachment rate increased with increasing biofilm thickness.
Detachment processes may begin increasing at lower velocities, i.e., lower
than threshold, as a result of detachment of single cells and small floes
which are not detected by the turbidity measurement.
The flow velocities tested are high compared to those usually found
throughout a water distribution system (except for the household
plumbing). Regardless of the absolute fluid velocity, the biofilm
accumulation generally reaches a point where growth and detachment are
balanced, i.e., fluid shear forces remove biofilm mass produced by growth
processes. The strength of the biofilm at this stage is dependent on the

116
1500

1000

O
O
\
•*-
O
500-

4 6 10
time (days)

FIGURE 5.6 Coliform Concentration in the Effluent of RTS B During


Experiment 5.4.

117
RT 4A
RT 3A
RT 2A
RT 1A
,1.5-
o
*
/•^

en
5 -5H

1.1 1.6 2.1 2.6 3.1


flow velocity (m/s)

FIGURE 5.7 Turbidity of RotoTorque® Effluents for Various Simulated


Flow Velocities.

118
TABLE 5.4

Coliforms in Water Phase of RTS B During Experiment 5.4 as a Function of


Time and Position. RT Volume is 1575 mL.

date sample cfu/100mL cfu/RT


1986
7/24 IB 200 3.2*103
2B 300 4.7*103
3B 300 4.7*103
4B 400 6.3*103

7/28 4B 7 1.1*102

7/30 4B 4 6

119
state of its environment during the accumulation period, i.e., its
history. Consequently, if the film has accumulated at a constant shear
stress, then an increase in shear stress will probably result in some
biofilm detachment. Therefore, all four (4) biofilms, although some were
quite different in structure and appearance, all detached to some degree
when exposed to twice the normal flow velocity.
The biofilms tested in this experiment had not been exposed to chlorine.
5.5.5 Conclusions
Increased fluid shear stress will result in partial detachment of biofilm.
Detachment rate resulting from increased shear stress increases with
increasing biofilm thickness.
5.6 THE INFILIENCE OF CHUDRINE ON BIOFIIM DETACHMENT

5.6.1 Purpose
The purpose of this experiment was to determine the effect of a pulse of
chlorine on biofilm detachment (sloughing). A situation like this occurred
in the New Haven water distribution system in 1984 and 1985 when the
chlorine concentration was gradually increased up to 8 mg/L in order to
eliminate coliform bacteria.
5.6.2 Design
The chlorine concentration of the influent to RTS B was increased
according to the schedule in Table D.6 (appendix). During the chlorine
response experiment, the turbidity, the HPC-bacteria concentration, and
the coliform bacteria concentration in the RTS effluent were measured
frequently. At the end of the chlorine experiment, the remaining biofilm
was analyzed for HPC bacteria and for the carbon, hydrogen, and nitrogen
(CHN) composition.
5.6.3 Results and Discussion
Only two KT contained detectable biofilm after the chlorine experiment was
completed: PT 3B and RT 4B. The biofilm accumulation in RT 3B was
substantially greater and had a different color (orange-brown) than the
other biofilms. RT 3B had been contaminated with oil in June. No viable
organisms were detected in the two biofilms (RT 3B and RT 4B).
Periodic chlorine treatment at high concentration can
effectively remove or inactivate biofilm organisms accumulated
in unsupplemented, chlorine-free tap water.
The results of the CHN analysis of a collective biofilm sample from RTS A
and the two remaining biofilms from RTS B showed a significantly higher
C/N ratio (9.9) for the biofilm in RT 3B. The C/N ratios of biofilm RT 4B
and RTS A were respectively 6.8 and 6.5 (Table 5.5). The higher C/N in RT
3B may be the due to the oil leak (high C/N) which caused biofilm bacteria

120
to produce more extracellular polymer (EP generally has a high C/N).
Alternatively, the high C/N may be due to oil adsorbed in the biofilm.
5.6.4 Conclusions
Periodic chlorine treatment at high concentration can effectively remove
biofilm organisms accumulated in unsupplemented, chlorine-free tap water.
5.7 INFIIJENCE OF CHLORINE ON BIOFILM ACCUMULATION

5.7.1 Purpose
These experiments were to determine the effect of low concentrations of
chlorine in drinking water on biofilm accumulation and bacteriological
water quality.
5.7.2 Design
RTS A and RTS B were cleaned thoroughly. The iron pipe sections previously
used in the RotoTorques@ were replaced by PVC pipe sections. PVC tape was
applied to the inner surfaces of the PVC pipe to serve as substratum for
biofilm accumulation. The tape was removed at different times and the
biofilm was sampled. A predetermined surface area of PVC tape could be
conveniently removed which made sampling and analysis of biofilm more
convenient. The inner pipe walls were disinfected with alcohol. The RTS
experiments were then begun with the influent water containing chlorine
levels of 0.8 mg/L (FTS A) and 0.2 mg/L (RTS B). These concentrations were
obtained by mixing chlorine-free FEE and chlorinated tap water from the
West River WTP in two (2) feedtanks. The flow rate for both RTS was 30
mL/roin and the rotational speed of the inner drums was 150 rpm. Every two
(2) weeks, water from each RT and each feed tank were analyzed (Table
5.6). The biofilm was analyzed several times during the accumulation
period for HPC-bacteria, coliforms, and TOC.
5.7.3 Results and Discussion
Results of the water and biofilm analyses (HPC-counts) are presented in
Table D.9 and Table D.10 (appendix), respectively. The chlorine
concentration in RTSVA (low concentration) declines as water flows through
the system from 0.2 mg/L to 0.05 mg/L (Figure 5.8b). Figure 5.8a
indicates the concentrations of biofilm and planktonic HPC-bacteria (semi-
log scale) for three (3) stages of biofilm development in each RT.
The HPC-bacterial concentration in the biofilm was calculated by dividing
the total amount of biofilm cells in a RT by the RT water volume (1575
mL). Biofilm thickness increased through the RTS (Figure 5.8a) as

121
— biofilm
— water
45 days
30 days

)17 days

INFL 1B 2B 3B 4B
ROTOTORQUE SYSTEM B

.a

en

INFL 18 2B 3B
ROTOTORQUE SYSTEM B

FIGURE 5.8 Planktonic cell (HPC) Concentration and Biofilm Cell


Concentration in RIS B (Low Chlorine Concentration; Semi Log Scale)

122
TABLE 5.5

CHN Analysis of Biofilm (RT 3B and PT 4B had been Receiving High Chlorine
Concentrations While RTS A had not been Chlorinated (Experiment 5.6)

sample %C %H %N C/N
RTS A 34.9 5.4 5.4 6.5
PT 3B 12.8 2.9 1.3 9.9
RT 4B 18.9 3.0 2.8 6.8

123
TABLE 5.6

List of Water Quality and Biofilm Analyses Conducted in the RotoTorque@


System During Experiment 5.7.

RotoTorgue@
Water Surface
flow rate x
rotational speed X
PH X
temperature X
color X
turbidity X
chlorine X
alkalinity X
NH3 X
NO2 X
N03 X
TKN X
TPhos X
TOC X x
DOC X
AOC X
MFTC X
HPC X

124
contrasted with decreasing biofilm thickness through the system for the
chlorine-free RTS experiments (Fig. 5.4). Obviously, chlorine has an
important impact on the biof ilm development; biofiliti thickness decreases
with increasing chlorine concentration. Furthermore, as biof ilm continues
to accumulate, cell concentration in the water phase increases. Once
again, biofilm is the main contributor of cells in the water phase. A
system with low chlorine concentration appears to behave similarly to a
chlorine-free system. The relative influence of biofilm growth, as
compared to planktonic growth, within the distribution system is greater
as the water environment becomes less hospitable, e.g., presence of a
chlorine residual. Thus, after only 45 days of biofilm development,
planktonic cell numbers in RT 3B and 4B were at least as high as the
maximum cell numbers found in the chlorine-free systems (Table 5.2).
Chlorine concentrations at least as low as 0.1 mg/L
reduce the rate of biofilm accumulation.
but
These same chlorine concentrations, however, have no
effect on the ultimate planktonic cell numbers.
The chlorine concentration in RTS B ("high" concentration) declines from
0.8 mg/L to 0.5 mg/L (Figure 5.9b). Figure 5.9a for RTS B is analogous to
Figure 5.8a for RTS A. Figure 5.9a shows the greater inhibiting effect of
higher chlorine concentrations on biofilm development (compare with Figure
5.4). Essentially no planktonic cells were found as long as a biofilm was
absent. After 38 days, colonization of the pipe walls had begun and, for
the first time, low planktonic cell numbers were found consistently
throughout the RTS.
Chlorine concentrations as high as 0.8 mg/L reduce the
rate of biofilm accumulation significantly but cannot
prevent it.
The biofilm organisms found in RTS A ("high" chlorine concentration)
represented only a few species while an estimated 75-90% belonged to one
single genus (Pseudomonas).
The colonies of this genus, on R2A-agar, were clearly of the "smooth
type", indicating the production of significant amount of EPS. Rate and
extent of EPS formation is influenced by many environmental conditions but
it seems clear that the genus is capable of producing EPS in significant
amounts.
Chlorine residual in the water influences microbial
population distribution in the biofilm.
This lack of diversity was not observed in the chlorine-free system. Thus,
selection appears to be an important process in the early stages of
biofilm development in chlorinated water. The early stages of biofilm
accumulation, when adsorption is the dominant process, may have a
significant influence on subsequent biofilm activity. In a chlorine-free
environment, cells may randomly adsorb followed by cell growth dominated

125
-1
INFT. 1A 2A 3A
ROTOTORQUE SYSTEM A

ROTOTORQUE SYSTEM A

FIGURE 5.9 Planktonic cell (HPC) Concentration and Biofilm Cell


Concentration in RTS A After 38 Days Exposure. No Significant HPC-Bacteria
Were Observed Prior to This Time Either in the Biofilm or in the Water
(High Chlorine Concentration; Semi log Scale).

126
by the "fast growers". In an environment containing chlorine, organisms
which can resist the damaging effects of chlorine and adsorb to the pipe
surface can selectively accumulate in the system. Once a small resistent
microbial community has established itself, further enhancement of
chlorine resistance can be achieved by different processes such as
continued selection, mutation of the genetic material, and recombination
of genetic material (several mechanisms are known). In addition, a film of
organisms containing high amounts of extracellular polymers, which are
characterized by a high chlorine demand (Dydek and Characklis, 1976),
further insulate other organisms from the effects of chlorine.
The increasing number of planktonic cells in the influent to RES A as well
as RIS B are believed due to biofilm formation in the feed tanks and
supply pipes.
5.7.4 Conclusions
Chlorine concentrations as low as 0.1 mg/L reduce the rate of biofilm
accumulation. These same chlorine concentrations, however, have no effect
on the cell numbers that are finally found in the water phase.
Chlorine concentrations as high as 0.8 mg/L reduce the rate of biofilm
accumulation significantly but do not prevent it.
Chlorine residual in the water influences microbial population
distribution in the biofilm.
5.8 CONCLUSIONS

Chlorinated backwash of the filter decreased microbiological activity in


the filter resulting in decreased removal of TOC from the influent water.
Backwashing the filter with chlorinated water led to increased biofilm
accumulation in the RTS based on biofilm cell numbers and biofilm organic
carbon.
Coliforms entering the RTS did not colonize the RIS biofilms formed in
chlorine-free water. Furthermore, the planktonic coliform concentration
decreased through the RIS.
Biofilm accumulation varied with time and distance from the inlet in the
RIS.
Sloughing occurred throughout most of the RIS after several months
operation (sloughing was not observed during the study period in biofilm
systems receiving continuous chlorination.)
Growth of planktonic cells is negligible compared to biofilm cells in
distribution water.
For chlorine-free water and low flow rate, most biofilm growth occurs
near the inlet of the system.

127
CONCLUSIONS

The results of the statistical analysis of data from SCCRWA for 1985
indicate the following:
The format for a water utility data base should be organized to
permit diagnostic analyses as well as satisfy regulatory
requirements.
The effluent membrane filter total coliform (MFTC) percent positive
for groundwater supplies was about three times greater than that for
surface water supplies. Thus in terms of the frequency of positive
MFTC, groundwater entering the distribution system contains more
coliforms than surface water entering the distribution system.
A day-of-the-week pattern exists for MFTC in distribution water.
Increased distribution MFTC occurred on Thursday, Friday, and
Saturday for seven months in 1985. However, no similar pattern exists
for raw water or treated effluents.
During an episode, four or more individual distribution subsystems
can be affected simultaneously.
The most important predictors of distribution MFTC, based on
regression analysis were (in order of importance) pH, treatment
effluent MFTC, and raw water turbidity.
Distribution MFTC varies inversely with distribution free chlorine
and color according to the Principal Components Analysis.
Three components of variance are useful predictors of high MFTC in
the distribution system: 1) high pH (raw, effluent and distribution),
low distribution free chlorine, and low raw water color, 2) high
turbidity (raw, effluent, and distribution), low distribution color
and low distribution free chlorine, and 3) low distribution total
chlorine and high effluent MFTC.
The results of the modelling of chlorine residual in the Saltonstall
distribution system indicate the following:
The degree of skeletonization allowable in the predictive modelling
of chlorine residuals is site specific.
Ranges of chlorine residuals can be determined for the maximum and
minimum flows using the steady state modelling.
Reaction rate coefficient must be determined accurately to
effectively calibrate the chlorine prediction model for a
distribution system.
Predicted chlorine residuals are most sensitive to changes in the
global flow demands.

129
The model results indicate that there are locations in the
Saltonstall system that have no chlorine residual. The chlorine
deficit may be due to low flow velocities in those locations.
The results of the field testing, laboratory analysis, and pilot plant
experimentation indicate the following:
The method of van der Kboij to determine assimilable organic carbon
(AOC) was not satisfactory.
The utilizable fraction of the TOC (AOC) at New Haven is considerably
more than measured in other systems. Yet, carbon may not be the
growth-limiting nutrient in the distribution system water throughout
the year.
Tubercle and sediment material from the pipes contained high levels
of heterotrophic bacteria. Iron bacteria and sulfate-reducing
bacteria were associated with iron tubercles. No coliforms were
found in these samples, suggesting that biofilm coliforms are not
uniformly distributed either temporally or spatially in the system.
Flow rate in the pipeline reactor did not significantly affect the
number and type of biofilm bacteria.
The SCCRWA K. pneumoniae and E. coli isolates are capable of growth
under low nutrient conditions. Their reproductive capabilities
exceed that of their clinical counterparts indicating that the
environmental strains are better adapted to replication in
oligotrophic conditions.
Chlorinated backwash of the filter decreased microbiological activity
and increased the total organic carbon entering the pilot
distribution system (i.e., the Rototorque system, RTS).
Backwashing the filter with chlorinated water led to increased
biofilm accumulation in the pilot distribution system (RTS) as
reflected by biofilm cell numbers and biofilm organic carbon. The RTS
water was not chlorinated in these experiments.
Coliforms entering the RTS from the pilot filter system did not
inoculate the FTS biofilms in chlorine-free water. Furthermore, the
planktonic coliform concentration decreased as the water passed
through the RTS.
Biofilm accumulation varied with time and distance from the inlet in
the pilot distribution system (PTS). The RTS water was not
chlorinated in these experiments.
Sloughing, an apparently random phenomena, occurred throughout most
of the pilot distribution system (RTS) after several months
operation. The RTS water in these experiments was not chlorinated.
Growth of suspended organisms is negligible compared to biofilm

130
organisms in the pilot distribution system carrying unsupplemented,
chlorine-free tap water.
For a chlorine-free water and low flow rate, most biofilm growth
occurs near the inlet of the pilot distribution system.
Coliforms did not accumulate in the pilot distribution system biofilm
carrying unsupplemented, chlorine-free tap water. However, coliforms
did adsorb to the biofilm when artificially introduced into the pilot
distribution system.
Increased fluid shear stress resulted in partial detachment of
biofilm accumulated in chlorine-free water.
Detachment rate increased with increasing biofilm thickness.
Periodic chlorine treatment at high concentration effectively removed
biofilms accumulated in the pilot distribution system carrying
unsupplemented, chlorine-free tap water.
In the pilot distribution (RIS) system carrying tap water with a free
chlorine residual of 0.7 mg/L, HPC-bacteria grew only in the
protective biofilm environment and not in the water phase. At very
low free chlorine residuals (<0.2 mg/L), biofilm accumulation in the
pilot distribution system was substantial.

131
FUTURE RESEARCH NEEDS

The complexity of the distribution system phenomena leads us to believe that


a thorough understanding of the nature and control of the coliform outbreaks
cannot be achieved merely by statistical analysis of routinely collected
data in modest amounts. Further advances will require the following: 1)
vastly more historical data similar to those reported herein, 2) more
revealing data reporting results of experimental manipulations of operating
variables in a water utility, and 3) laboratory experimentation where
environmental conditions can be controlled. Our recommendations are as
follows:
Category I Immediate Benefit to Water Utilities
Guidelines for water utility databases to permit diagnostic analyses,
as well as meet regulatory requirements, must be developed.
The influence of assimilable organic carbon on distribution system
biofilm accumulation and detachment must be determined. Conduct
bioassays to determine the growth-limiting nutrient in the
distribution water. The role of biological treatment processes in
reduction of assimilable organic carbon or other growth-limiting
nutrients should be investigated.
Investigate the influence of various disinfectants and other water
quality parameters on biofilm activity, composition, and
accumulation. Investigate the activity of disinfectant-resistant
species in the biofilm.

Category II Long-range Implication to Water Utilities


Methods to better characterize the biological and chemical components
of biofilms should be investigated.
Improve the AOC bioassay procedure so that more useful stoichiometric
information results. Make it applicable with indigenous mixed
microbial species as well as with single species.
A plug flow model for biofilm accumulation must be developed to
relate concentration gradients in AOC and chlorine residual to flow
rate and to predict biofilm accumulation as a result. The model will
be necessary for more efficient experimental design related to
dynamics of microbial activity (planktonic and biofilm) in the
distribution system.
Optimization of data requirements for calibration of dynamic models
of the distribution system. Assess the benefits and costs for using
dynamic modelling of disinfectant residuals and biofilm accumulation
for operating a distribution system.

133
Systematically investigate the influence of hydraulic changes in
biofilm detachment. Consider fluid shear stress and pipe surfaces of
relevance to water distribution systems.
Category III Requires much more research before beneficial to water
utilities.
Develop a method to conveniently and quickly assess growth potential
for indigenous coliforms in the distribution system water.
Examine differences between clinical and environmental coliform
isolates and evaluate their ability to colonize and reproduce in
biofilms.

134
REFERENCES

Aerson, D.S., D.R. Marshall, H.T. Victoreen. 1984. Bacterial persistence


in the distribution system. AWWA Water Quality Control Conf. (Dec. 1984,
Denver).
Agate, A.D., M.S. Korczynski, and Lundgren, D.G. 1969. Extracellular
complex from the culture filtrate of Ferrobacillus Ferrooxidans.
Can.Jour.Microbiol. 15. 259.
Alien, M.J., E.E. Geldreich. 1977. Distribution live sediments and
bacterial regrowth. AWWA Water Ind. Tech. Conf. (Dec. 1977, Philadelphia).
Alien, M.J., E.E. Geldreich, R.H. Taylor. 1979. The occurrence of
microorganisms in water main encrustations. AWWA Water Qual. Tech. Conf.
(December, 1979). 113.
American Public Health Association. 1985. Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater. 16th edition. APHA, Washington, D.C.
Bitton, G., K.C. Marshall (eds.) 1980. Adsorption of Microorganisms to
Surfaces. Wiley and Sons, New York.
Brock, M.L., T.D. Brock. 1968. The application of microautoradiographic
techniques to ecological studies. Int.Assoc.Theor.Appl.Limnol. 15. 1.
Centers for Disease Control. 15 March, 1985. Detection of elevated levels
of coliform bacteria in a public water supply - Connecticut. MMWR. 34.
142.
Cohen, Y., I. de Jonge, and J.G. Kuenen. 1979. Excretion of glycolate by
Thiobacillus neapolitanus grown in continuous culture. Arch.Microbiol.
189-194.
Committee on Water Supply. 1930. Bacterial aftergrowth in water
distribution systems. Am.J.Pub.Health. 20. 485.
Costello, J.J. 1984. Post precipitation in distribution systems. JAWWA.
76. 46.
Daley, R.J. 1977. Direct epifluorescence enumeration of native aquatic
bacteria: uses, limitations and comparative accuracy. In Native Aquatic
Bacteria; Enumeration, Activity and Ecology. J.W. Costerton and R.R.
Colwell, (eds.). Amer. Soc. Testing and Materials. Philadelphia, PA.
DesRosier, J.P. 1985. Microscopic examination of microbial mats from San
Quintin, Baja California, Mexico. Abstracts of the Ann. Mtg. of ASM (SI-
104) . 163.
Geldreich, E.E., H.D. Nash, D. Spino. 1977. Characterizing bacterial
populations in treated water supplies: a progress report. Proceedings
AWWA Quality Technology Conference. 2B-5, 1.

135
Geldreich, E.E., et al. 1972. The necessity of controlling bacterial
populations in potable waters: community water supply. JAWWA. 64- 596.
Goshko, M.A., W.O. Pipes, R.R. Christian. 1983. Coliform occurrence and
chlorine residual in small water distribution systems. JAWWA. 74. 371.
Haack, T.K., G.A. McFeters. 1982. Nutritional relationships among
microorganisms in an epilithic biofilm community. Microbial Ecol. 8. 115.
Holdeman, L.V., E.P. Cato, W.E.C. Moore (eds.). Anaerobe Laboratory Manual.
4th ed. Anaerobe Laboratory, VPI and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
Howard, N.J. 1940. Bacterial depreciation of water quality in
distribution systems. JAWWA. 32. 1501.
Huber, W.C., et al. 1984 Storm Water Management User's Model, ver. Ill,
EPA-600/2-84-109a. USEPA, Cincinnati, OH, 9th prtg., September.
Hudson, L.D., J.W. Hankin, M. Battaglia. 1983. Coliforms in a water
distribution system: a remedial approach. JAWWA. 75. 564.
Karl, D.M. 1980. Cellular nucleotide measurements and applications in
microbial ecology. Microbiol.Revs. 44. 739.
Kroon, J.R. 1984. Water hammer: causes and effects. JAWWA. 76. 39.
LeChevallier, M.W., and G.A. McFeters. 1985. Enumerating injured
coliforms in drinking water. JAWWA. 77. 80-87.
LeChevallier, M.W., P.E. Jakanoski, G.A. McFeters. 1984. Evaluation of m-
T7 agar as a fecal coliform medium. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 48. 371.
Lowther, E.D., R.H. Moser. 1984. Detecting and eliminating coliform
regrowth. AWWA Water Qual. Tech. Conf. (Dec. 1984, Denver).
MacKenthun, K.M. and L.E. Keup. 1970. Biological problems encountered in
water supplies. JAWWA. 62. 520.
Males, R.M., R.M. Clark. 1983. Water Supply Simulation Model, vol. 1-3,
EPA-600/2-83-121a, 12Ib, and 12Ic. USEPA, Cincinnati, OH, November.
Marshall, K.C. (ed.) 1984. Microbial Adhesion and Aggregation. Dahlem
Konfrenzen. Berlin. Springer-Verlag. Berlin.
Martin, R.S., et al. 1982. Factors affecting coliform bacteria growth in
distribution systems. JAWWA. 74. 34.
McFeters, G.A., J.S. Kippen and M.W. LeChevallier. 1986. Injured
coliforms in drinking water. Appl. Environ. Micro. 51. 1-5.
McFeters, G.A., S.C. Cameron, M.W. LeChevallier. 1982. Influence of
diluents, media and membrane filters on the detection of injured waterborne
coliform bacteria. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 43. 97.

136
Munson, B. 1971. Chemical ionization mass spectrametry. Anal. Chem. 43.
28A.
Nagy, L.A., B.H. Olson. 1982. The occurrence of filamentous fungi in
drinking water distribution systems. Can. J. Microbiol. 28. 667.
O'Connor, J.T., L. Hash, A.B. Edwards. 1975. Deterioration of water
quality in distribution systems. JAWWA. 67. 113.
Olson, B.H. 1982. Assessment and implications of bacterial growth in
water distribution systems. EPA-600/S2-82-072, USEPA, Cincinnati, OH.
Ptak, D.J., W. Ginsburg, B.F. Wiley. 1973. Identification and'incidence
of Klebsiella in chlorinated water supplies. JAWWA. 65. 604.
Reilly, J.K., J.S. Kippin. 1981. Interrelationships of bacterial counts
with other finished water quality parameters within distribution systems.
EPA-600/52-81-035.
Ridgway, H.F., E.G. Means, B.H. Olson. 1981. Iron bacteria in drinking
water distribution systems: elemental analysis of Gallionella stalks,
using x-ray energy dispersive microanalysis. Appl.Env.Microbiol. 41. 228.
Ridgway, H.F., B.H. Olson. 1981. Scanning electron microscope evidence
for bacterial colonization of a drinking-water distribution system.
Appl.Env.Microbiol. 41. 274.
Seidler, R.J., J.E. Morrow, S.T. Bagley. 1977. KLebsielleae in drinking
water emanating from redwood tanks. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. .33. 893.
Staley, P.M., M.A. Gage, E.L. Schmidt. 1979. In Native Aquatic Bacteria:
Enumeration Activity and Ecology. J.W. Costerton and R.R. Colwell (eds.).
Am. Soc. for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA.
Starr et al. (eds.). 1981. The Prokaryotes, Vol. 1, M.P. Springer Verlag,
Berlin.
Stout, J.E., V.L. Yu, M.G. Best. 1985. Ecology of L. pneumophila within
water distribution systems. Appl.Env.Microbiol. 49. 221.
Talbot, H.W., R.J. Seidler. 1979. Cyclitol utilization associated with
the presence of Klebsielleae in botanical environment. Appl.Env.Microbiol.
.37. 909.
Tracy, H.W., V.M. Camarena, F. Wing. 1966. Coliform persistence in highly
chlorinated waters. JAWWA. ^8. 1151.
Touvinen, O.H., et al. 1980. Bacterial, chemical and mineralogical
characteristics of tubercles in distribution pipelines. JAWWA. 72. 626.
Van der Kooij, D., A. Visser and W.A.M. .Hijnen. 1982. Determining the
concentration of easily assimulable organic carbon in drinking water.
JAWWA. 74: 540-545.

137
Victoreen, H.T. 1984. The role of rust in coliform regrowth. AWWA Water
Qual. Tech. Conf. (Dec. 1984, Denver).
Victoreen, H.T. 1984. Controlling corrosion by controlling bacterial
growth. JAWWA. 76. 87.
Victoreen, H.T. 1980. The stimulation of coliform growth by hard and soft
water main deposits. AWWA Water Qual. Tech. Conf. (Dec. 1980, Miami
Beach). 111.

138
APPENDICES

139
APPENDIX A HISTORICAL DATA ANALYSIS

Appendix A.I Inventory of Data


The South Central Connecticut Regional Water Authority (SCCRWA) provided us
with a magnetic tape of data containing observations on the three data
categories—raw, effluent and distribution. The files we located on the tape
are the following: 1) RAW85.DATA, 2) EFF85.DATA, 3) DIST85.DATA, 4)
RAW84.DATA, 5) EFF84.DATA, and 6) DIST84.DATA. File names with the digits 84
contain data for all years observed previous to and including 1984, whereas
those with the digits 85 contain only 1985 data. The total amount of
information on the tape is 9,816,374 bytes. As mentioned in the discussion
on the historical data analysis, we worked the information on the tape into
a more usable form. In the process of this we broke the tape down into
several hundred individual files based on data category, location, and
year. Tables A.I, A.2 and A.3 contain lists of this breakdown for the
three data categories. The location names and numerical codes were provided
by SCCRWA in documentation accompanying the tape and through personal
communication. The tables do not indicate the frequency of the
observations at these locations.
We did however investigate the frequency of observations by computing
frequencies for each variable at each location. The results of this
analysis are difficult to summarize due to the large variation of the
frequencies and are not presented here. We also did not use the
frequencies to influence our selection of variables, with the exception of
our eliminating from the data base those variables with a zero frequency
over all years. Table A.4 contains a list of the variables included in our
data base and the respective categories for which they were observed. The
formatting and names of these variables were provided in the documentation
accompanying the tape. Where possible the name has been lengthened to a less
cryptic form.

140
TO
oo£i— r-r-r—(—r—r-.2r— t—r—|— r-j:-£f~
3> o
fH f~ >-• OO • o
—t-nr~-iooi/> oo o^mmrnmrommomrnmmm—4 —4 m
zo«~ r~r~o3:jc o QD
m z j> » m m j> m m J> I O '& oo .1 n IB CD -< -< £
-<oo^)»-<mrnx>oooo —« m ;cj»j»r~.*a»i-«;om3> x.
-OC7<- U O ^fi JC -I- m c,-> r J»»L.—«mmr~r-o—«>-<i— (— i-«
^ m >-< f—* rn >—i »—i —(C^-«oi»^r~-H-nooj:(—j»j>—i
|— -jo z ^ r~ JO ?o ^7 UDZO'JUOO OOT3J>f~/^/^Z
r~ CT CD rn m m -CT'CzrnZc: £Z»mzj»mmm
e 3» j» ^3 oo moooo-<jo -<
o en m s: sz * —) oo r~ r~—i —i o*cit
t-i >-« r~ rn m
rn

-O
00
m m r"" m m m LxJ
r- r- o r- r-
I
r~ r~ oo o
-O
OO
.0
m m

g
O
o
>Ji *~ io r\J —» —*
-O <oi -» o o jo

o
O

O>O O >O >OO >O >O'O'OO-O 1O NO OO OO


OOJOOOJOOOC!OOOOOoOCOoOO«^«0*OOU>oOOO

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I UD

"O O O O ^3 -O O O O O O •^^ ^3 s^ H? O "*3 m


UOj»u»jOJOo»00_*JOJ»J» OO o* 00 00 00 UO JO

m
TABLE A. 2

EFFLUENT WATER DATA/ 19,32-1985

LOCATION NAME LOCATION CODE YEARS 013 SERVED

N. CHESH IRE WELL FIELD 1 n 1 03 2- 1 7 33- 1 034-1 035


•>_
MT. CARMEL WELL FIELD 1 5 1 9,°, 1 9 33- 1 934-1 985
-> _ •0 •33-
N. SLEE D ING GIANT WELL FIELD 2n 1 98 1 19 >3 4 - 1 985
S. SLEEPING GIANT WELL FIELD 21 1 03 2- 1 0 33- 1 9S4- 1 985
S. CHESHIRE WELL FIELD ?5 1 2- 1 9 33- 1 984-1 9,35
NAME UN < MOWN 3 T. 1 0,3 2- 1 o 83- 1 934
•>
93 2- 1 33- 1 ^•35
WEST RIVER 37 1 984-1
GAILLA^D 34 1 93 2- 1 0 33- 1 T34- 1 935
N. CHESHIRE WELL FIELD «1 35 1 93 2- 1 0 33- 1 ?84
MALT8Y 36 1 93 2- 1 9 83- 1 934
MT CARMEL 37 1 98 2 1^34
"!
SALTONSTALL 4 1 93 2- 1 9 33- 1 984-1 935
SLEEPING GIANT #1 4 3 1 93 2- 1 0 33- 1 084
SPRING ST. PUMPING STATION 44 1 98 ?- 1 9 33- 1 984
WHITNEY HIGH PUMPING STATION 46 1 93 p
WHITNEY LOW 47 1 93 2- 1 0 3 5- 1 984-1 9,85
SLEEPING GIANT //"! 43 1 93 2- 1 0 3 3 — 1 084
MT CARMEL #1 49 1 93 '- 1 0 83- 1 ^34
NAME UN<NOWN 5T 1 93 ?_ 1 0 33- 1 934
•> - 0 33- 034
NAME UNKNOWN 51 1 93 1 1
^3
->
MILL ROCK EAST 52 1
MILL ROCK WEST 53 1 98 ?
WINTERGREEN-WH ITNEY 55 1 OP, ?- 1 0 83- 1 984
">- 33- 1 034
GRASSY HILL PUMPING STATION 5 6 1 98 1 0
-)
WINTERGREEN TANK PULPING STATION 5 7 1 0°
MALT8Y PUMPING STATION 5 p 1 OP 2- 1 0 33- 1 084
SLEEPING GIANT #4 50 1 op, ^~ 1 0 83- 1 934
1 93 ?_ 1 0
WHITNEY CLEAR 'WELL 61 8 7,- 1 034
NAME UNKNOWN 61 1 9* 2- 1 0 33- 1 934

142
TABLE A. 3

DISTRI3JTION SYSTE" DATA

SYSTEM NO. STATIONS STATIT.' YEA7S

CHESHIRE .IELLS 75
1 1 2
1 31 7i-79-vO-31-3'-83-84-S5
1 46 81 -32-83-34-«,5

GAILLARD 1 3 66 76-77-73-79-80-31-8?-.8 3-84-35


72 76-77-77-79-80-81-32-83-84-35
73 76-77-73-79-30-31-32-83-.3 4-85
77 76-77-7^-79-10-81-32-83-34-85
1 05 76-77-78-79-80-81-32-83-84-35

1 1 ',
76-77-7^-71-80-31-82-33-84-3=;
1 23 76-7 7 -7^-79-80-31-32-S3-34-35
1 24 76-77-73-79-30-81-32-83-84-35
76-77-78-7 5-80-81 -32-33-8 4-3 5
76-77-78-79-80-81-32-33-84-85
14!> 79-10-^1 83-54-8^

GAILLARO JEST RIVER 1 0 69


70 76 -7 7-73-79-30- 81 -82-33-34-85
71 76-77-73-79-80-31-32-33-34-35
108 76 -7 7 -73- 79- »0- 3 1-32-83-8 4- 85
1 10 76-7^-78-79-80-81 -8 '-83- 3 4- 85
113 76-77-7T-79-81-81-8-'-83-84-35
118 76-7'-7",-79-80-81-'P-33-84-8S
119 76-77-73-79-80-R1-82-83-84-85
120 76-77-73-79-80-81-32-83-34-85
122 76-77-73-79-80-? 1 -82-.33-8 4- 8 5

GAILLARD-WHITNEY 54 34-85
65 76- 7 7-73-79-^i-81-8 :) -33-34-85
125 76-77- 7 3-79-80-81-32-S3-34-.85
141 78-79-80-81-3'-33-84-35
141 7 9-80-81 -32-83-84-8S
17Q 8S

GAILLARO-WHITNEY-WELLS 101
104
109 76-77-7^-70-<n-<n -3 2 -S3- 3 4- 8 5
137 7 7,-7->-TO-81-3^-83-34-85
143 30-81 -3^-33-34-85

143
TABLE A.3 (continued)

SALTONSMLL 6 *> 7 7 6-7 7- 7 -! - ^ - VO-S 1-3?-33-3 4-H 5


31 76-77-73- 7 ''- :n-31-?'> -33-34-35
T? 76-77-73-79-3Q-,31-3?-33-34-35
1 06 76-77-73-79-30-.31-32-33-34-35
107 76-77-71-79-3T-,31-3?-33-84-^5
1'3 76-77-73-79-30-31-«?-S3-34-85

SLEEPIN3 GIANT-HT CARTEL 6 74 76-77-73- 7 9-3T-31 -3?-33- 34-SS


7~> 7&-77-73- 7 9-3T-31 -"P-33-S4-BS
1? 7 76-77-73-79-30-31 -32-33-i3 4-35
129 76-77-73-79-30-.31-3^-33-34-35
130 7A-77-73- 7 9-30-31-S2-?3-34-35
139 73- 7 9-30-R1-3-;-33-34-'l(5

WEST RIi/ER ? 6^ 7 6- 7 7-73-79-30-R1-3?-R3-34-35


1?1 76-77-73-79-30-31-32-33-34-35

144
TABLE A. 4

OBSERVED VARIABLES
D « M C'V TEIT^Y
VARIABLE NAME R VJ EF-L'JENT D I ~ T =! IT UTI 0 N

ARSOLUTE VAL'JE INCHES ABOVE D ^ 1 X


RAINFALL INCHES X
BLOW-OFF VALVE TURNS X
BLOW-OFF HOURS X
DRAFT/GIVEN X
DRAFT/ CALCULATED X
CURRENT METER READING X
PREVIOUS METER READING X
SCREEN CLEANED X
INTAKE LEVEL X
DAYTIME OF OBSERVATION X X X

ODOR XXX
COLOR X
LAB COLOR X
APPARENT COLOR X
TRUE COLOR X
TUR9IDIOTY XXX
LAB TURBIDITY X
pH XXX
LAB pH X
FR EE CHLORINE X X
TOTAL CHLORINE X X
RESIDUAL CHLORINE • '•<
PPM CHLORINE X
POUNDS CHLORINE X
CHLORIDE X
FLUORIDE X
POUNDS FL'JORIDE X
PPM FLUORIDE X
OPSERVED FLUORIDE X
POLYPHOSPHATE ANALYSIS X
POLYPHOS°HATE T Y "> E X
PPM POLYPHTSPHATE X
POUNDS POLYPHOSPHATE X
°PM CAUSTIC X
°ERCENT SOL^J. H Y D R OF L') OS I L I C A C I 5 X
POUNDS COPPER SULFATE X
BACTERIA TOTAL COUNTS X
nACTERIA SETS '. COUNTS I- 1? X
CHE'IICAL CODE SETS '. AMOUNTS 1-6 X
STANDARD PL<\TE COUNT X < X
MEMBRANE FILTER TOT^L COLIFOR 1! XXX
MEMBRANE FILTER FECAL COLIFOR'1 XXX
ATYPICAL3ACTERIA X X V

145
Appendix A. 2 The Magnitude of the Missing Observation Problem
I. The false zero problem, in theory
The data tape we received from SCCFWA does not distinguish between zeros
and missing values. We were concerned, therefore, that some fraction of the
zero values recorded in the data tape might in fact represent missing data
rather than actual measured zero values. If this fraction were large, the
utility of the data tape would be seriously compromised.
A few of the variables are immune from this problem, in that zero values
would not make physical sense, and so missing values could not be
mistaken for true zeros (eg. pH and temperature).
II. Estimation of the severity of the problem
We obtained photo-copies of the lab notebooks for the month of June for the
years 1982-1985, for all 8 distribution systems. We exhaustively scanned
all these sheets visually, specifically noting each entry where a
distribution system station and date was listed along with non-blank values
(including explicit zeros) in other fields (as distinguished from a null
entry which consists of a station-date entry with blanks in the other
fields). Each such non-null entry was then recorded (by station and date
only) in a computer file which we created. On completion of this
station-by-day matrix of known non-null entries, we made a comparison
between it and the full set of distribution data coded on the data tape.
In such a comparison, we could detect discrepancies between the notebooks
and the data tape in terms of (a) non- null entries which appear in the
notebooks, but not in the tape, and (b) non-null entries which appear in the
tape, but not in the notebooks. The only possible reasons for a discrepancy
of type (a) would be some miscoding at the time of terminal entry of the
data tape, a miscoding at the time of our scanning of the notebooks, or
perhaps omission of a notebook page in the package sent to us. The only
possible reasons for a discrepancy of type (b) would be some miscoding at
the time of terminal entry of the data type, a miscoding at the time of our
scanning of the notebooks, or transcribing of a null entry from the
notebooks as a spurious entry of zero values in the data tape. It is the
latter situation that is our concern in connection with interpretation of
zero values in the data tape, so our essential question of the comparison is
whether there was a large number of discrepancies of type (b). A small
number of such discrepancies implies that there cannot be many cases of
missing values giving rise to misleading zero records in the data tape (at
least for our "sample" of all the June data).
In the actual event, the comparison showed a total of 2 reports (a report is
a station-day entry) in the notebooks which were not in the data tape, and a
total of 11 reports which were in the data tape but not in the notebooks. In
the actual event, none of these 13 missmatches turned out to be due to
missing values erroneously coded as zeros. Further, since the number of
missmatches represents a very small fraction of the total number of June
reports, we conclude that coding of missing data as spurious zeros in the
data tape, and other data entry problems, cannot have been frequent.

146
The numbers of discrepancies by year for the month of June are the
following
Year In data tape but In notebooks but Total number of
not in notebooks not in data tape reports in data
1982 0 0 324
1983 3 0 331
1984 0 0 314
1985 8 2 781

III. Disposition of the missing-value/erroneous-zero problem


Since the fraction of zeros in the data tape which erroneously represent
missing values is small, in the June sample, we have proceeded to use the
data tape, treating the recorded zero's as true zero's.

147
Appendix A. 3 Sample Scheduling at the Distribution System Stations
I. Statement of the problem
We are informed that the water authority is obliged to resample, the next
day, any distribution station that shows an MFTC positive, and to
continue sampling that station on successive days until two consecutive
zero MFTC counts are obtained.
This contingency built into the sampling schedule has serious implications
for statistical analysis: it results in greater sairpling frequency during
times when coliform events are observed, and it results in greater sampling
frequency of those stations where coliform events occur. For this reason,
analyses of temporal and spatial patterns will be distorted by the
re-sampling protocol, and conventional significance tests, which presume
independence of observations, will not be applicable. In order to
circumvent these problems, we have attempted to distinguish "regularly
scheduled" samples from samples taken as "re-samples" after a detected MFTC
positive.
The water authority allegedly samples daily at their Effluent (treatment)
and Raw (supply) stations, so consideration of re-sampling does not affect
our analysis of these data.
II. Analysis of MFTC reporting frequency and schedules
The analysis of scheduling reveals: that the sampling schedules at the
various respective Distribution stations were different; that these
schedules changed from year to year; and that, aside from the re-sampling
following MFTC positives, the sampling schedule was not rigidly adhered to
in any case. Because of this degree of indeterminacy, we cannot absolutely
distinguish between "regularly scheduled" samples and "re-samples." Instead
we must adopt a decision criterion, with a chosen margin of error, that
will mistakenly discard a certain percentage of "regularly scheduled"
samples in order to reduce bias in mistakenly accepting samples that were
actually "re-samples".
In Table A.6-1 we list the following information for each year for each
station for each day of the week (in the period 1982-1985):
row 1: the number of MFTC reports
row 2: the number of reported MFTC positives
row 3: the number of MFTC reports following a
reported MFTC positive (previous day)
row 4: the number of reported MFTC positives following
a reported MFTC positive (previous day)
row 5: the number of MFTC reports which do not follow a
reported MFTC positive ( row 1 - row 3 )
row 6: the fraction of MFTC reports that do not follow
a reported MFTC positive ( row 5/rowl )
To determine the regularity with which resampling was carried out, we formed
the ratio of the number of MFTC reports following an MFTC positive to the

148
number of MFTC positive reports on the previous day of the week ( row3[day
i]/row2[day i-1]). A histogram of the resulting 1456 values (7 days per
week, 52 stations, 4 years) is shown in Table A.5-1. We observe a large
excess of ones, corresponding to station-year-days which faithfully
re-sampled according to the required protocol. These comprise 415/552=75% of
the station-year-days which ever followed a reported MFTC positive (we
excluded from this histogram station-year-days which followed days which
never reported an MFTC positive, since under the protocol there was no
requirement to re-sample on these days). Eighty-eight percent (485/552) of
station-year-days showed a re-sairpling compliance of greater than 50% of
required. We conclude that there was a high degree of re-sampling on days
following reported MFTC positives.
In Table A.5-2 we plot a histogram of the number of MFTC reports by
station-year-day, omitting the 417 station-year-days-of-the-week for
which there were no MFTC reports. The plot is distinctly bimodal, with
no station-year-days showing a report frequency in the range 27-34, and few
in the range 18-38. The lower-valued mode is the larger, accounting for 673
out of the total 1039 (=65%) non-null station- year-days-of-week for
which no MFTC samples were recorded. The higher- valued mode accounts of
366 station-year-days. Owing to the distinctness of the two modes, we are
tempted to stipulate that station-year-days in the upper mode are "regulary
sampled", provided we can confirm that the bulk of the observations in
station-year- days in the lower mode are re-samples.
In Table A.5-3 we plot a histogram of the number of MFTC reports not
following reported MFTC positives the previous day, by station- year-day,
again omitting the 417 station-year-days-of-the-week for which there were
no MFTC reports. This plot represents a partition of Table A.5-2,
confining attention to MFTC reports which probably are not re-samples
(since they do not follow MFTC positives, but they might still be
re-sample trials following a re-sample which yielded a zero MFTC count). In
this histogram an excess appears in the lowest bin, because the exclusion of
MFTC reports immediately following MFTC positives creates a new class of
zero counts, in addition to the zeros that were present in Table A.5-2. Like
Table A.5-2, the histogram is distinctly bimodal, with no station-year-days
showing a report frequency in the range 27-34. The numbers of non-null
station- year-days in each of the two modes is unchanged: 673 in the lower-
valued mode, and 366 in the higher-valued mode, as before.
In Table A.5-2, treating all MFTC reports, 673 reports fell in the lower
mode, and 366 fell in the higher mode. In Table A.5-3, treating only those
MFTC reports that did not follow MFTC positives, the same numbers of
reports fell in the two respective modes (though their distribution within
each mode is different). Thus, the bulk of the observations in the lower
mode were not re-samples following MFTC positives. Nevertheless, the
continued distinctness of the two modes in Table A.5-3 argues in favor of
treating all station-year-days in the upper mode (35 or more MFTC reports
per station-year-day) as "regularly scheduled", and excluding other
station-year-days simply on grounds that these days-of-the-week were
sampled so infrequently (at that station on that year) that the observations
are not useful for statistical comparison.

149
Table A. 7 shows the number of MFTC reports for each station-year-day in our
record of distribution-system data from 1982 through 1985, enclosing in
square brackets all the values greater than or equal to 35, corresponding
to station-year-days which we will accept as "regularly scheduled" for
sairpling.
Finally, to explore the consequences of adopting a criterion of 35 or more
MFTC reports, not following a previous day's MFTC positive, for inclusion of
a station-year-day-of-week in analysis of "regularly scheduled"
observations, we ask what fraction of the reports are excluded in the
process. This is obtained from a convolution of the frequencies in the
histograms of Table A. 5-1, -2 and -3 with the number of MFTC reports each
frequency class represents. Of the total 20,165 MFTC reports, the proposed
criterion excludes 4,135 = 21 %. Of the 1,291 positive MFTC reports, the
proposed criterion excludes 419 = 32%.
Generally, we would expect days which were "regularly scheduled" for
sampling (at that station for that year) to have relatively higher values
for entries in row 1 (number of MFTC reports) and relatively higher
entries in row 6 (fraction of reports not following a previous
day's positive). But the filter of row 6 does not remove all re-samples,
since the requirement is to re-sample daily until two consecutive zero
MFTC counts are obtained. The analysis is made more difficult by the
marked differences among stations with respect to overall sampling
frequency. We adopted two approaches to normalizing for station sampling
frequency.
(a) Normalizing according to total frequency of sampling by station.
We express each days number of reports as the fraction of that stations
reports (for that year) falling on the given day (i.e., divide row 1
entries by the sum of all 7 such entries for that station in that year).
Thus depending on the number of days which were "regularly scheduled" for
weekly visits, that year, the fraction on regularly scheduled days
chould be as high as 1.0 (1 day scheduled) or as low as 1/7 (all days
regularly scheduled).
To take into account MFTC reports which may have been resamples, we formed
a product of the two ratios (fraction of all reports that day)x(fraction
not following MFTC+) giving an "index" to the degree of "regularly
scheduled" sampling on each day of the week for each station for each
year. This is exactly equivalent simply to normalizing row 5 (number of
reports not following an MFTC positive) by the total number of reports
for that station that year.
A histogram of the resulting values is shown in Table A.5-4 unfortunately,
this histogram shows a marked excess of zeros, trailing off to very small
frequencies at a "scheduling index" value of about 0.5, with only a
small fraction of the station-year- days (55 out of 1456)
exhibiting high values (>0.75) for the "index". There is no very obvious
breakpoint in the area of 1/7 which would have been the miniimjm possible
value for a "regularly scheduled" day (all days of week scheduled) when no
correction was made for the (probably infrequent) extra samples owing to

150
re-sampling. The difficulty probably arises because we are smearing
together station-years with different numbers of "regularly scheduled"
days, and hence different values of the index for "regularly
scheduled" days. This will be addressed in the second normalization.
(b) Normalizing according to the greatest sampling frequency for the
station.
We express each day's number of reports as the ratio of the number of that
stations reports (for that year) falling on the given day to the number of
reports falling on the day of the week for which the number of reports is
greatest (for that station-year). To take into account MFTC reports which
may have been resamples, we again formed a product with the fraction not
following a positive MFTC, yielding as our "index" (# of that days
reports/maximum )x(fraction not following MFTC+).
A histogram of the resulting values is shown in Table A. 5-5. We again
see an excess of zeros (owing to days which were never sampled at
that station-year), but now there is an interesting bi-modality, with 417
station-year-days-of-the-week showing an "index" score of 0.75 or
greater, of which more than 2/3 (280) have a score of one.
We conclude that there was a core of certain days of the week for
each station-year combination, which were "regularly scheduled" for
sampling in the distribution system. We believe that our criterion of 35
or more samples per year at a station will surely exclude samples that would
not have been taken except for the re-sample requirement; and we trust
that this criterion will not discard too many samples that were not owing
to the re-sample requirement. We would not, in any case, be comfortable
using, for most statistical purposes, data from station-year-day-of-week
combinations that were infrequently sampled, unless we could be assured
that these infrequent samples were genuinely taken at random (which is
almost certainly impossible, after the fact).

151
TABLE A.5-1

SAS 12119 MONDAYf MAY 12. 1986 1

FREQUENCY BAR CHART


MIDPOINT
FR2 fREQ CUM. CUM
FREQ F'EFiCE in
0.025 ***** 25 25 4 . 53
0.075 0 ?5 4 . 53
0. 125 0 25 4 . 53
0. 175 0 25 4 . 53
0 , 225 " ;= M . 53
0 . 275 2 27 4 . 8?
0.325 e
1 6 33 78
0. 375 1 L
35 34
7 -
Ol 0. 425 0 c . 34
0.475 ***•»* 32 £7 12. 14
1 -.
0.525 0 67 1 4
0.575 i 5 7 *"'
13. 04
0.625 -I
74 12. 41
0.675 * **** 27 101 18. 30
0 . 725 *** 17 1 18 21 . 38
0. 775 «* 10 128 23. 19
•0. 525 * ~4 732
i~; ?r
0, 675 * 5 137 24. 82
0.925 0 ! 37 ?4 , 82
0.975 . 552 100. 00
----^---4----4.--_i___A___-L___J___A___A___X___A---4.----4----4---- + --- + ---4----t---- + ---4----
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400
rREOIIEHCY
TABLE A. 5-2

SAS-
13:00 TUESDAY, HAY 12. 19S6 1
FREOUEUCY fcAR CHAF:T
MIDPOINT
fi5
FF EQ CUM. CUM.
FF;EQ PERCENT
1 Hi i****4**** ******* »**»*14Ht •4 4 t 4 4 4 t * 4 4 4 1 4 4 4 * t 4 * * * * 4 * t < * * 4 4 4 ->o
c- 4 * * 4 4 4 ***** t * * t 4 4 :• 4 ***** 4 * 4 * * 4 4. 4 4 i 4 * :* * 4 4 4 4 4 * t * * > * * * * t * 4 * * * 4. 4 * *• *f 44 t* * t * * * t * * * * * 1i ;. ^ 129 12.42
~7 4 4 4444 4 4*1** 4*4* 4 44444*4444444**** 4*4* -»s = ?} 27.05
*:| 4 -,t 4 t4 t«.tf:! 4 J**!S*4:**J:*i M4 4. * 4: * * 4 1 1 » * -3 G 34. 2i
o i i i 4 it 4 i •» 4 * 4 M 4 * * 4 * 4 4 t 4 * * * * 4 4 * »«*»*• (•M«tt«4*t«f 434 41.77
» < r. •"*
11 iT4j444*****44t444**4
13 t 1 1 4 • M 1 4 » » * * 4 It » 41 575 ^ c ' ~i A
608 '• S '. 5 ""
17 M »t444> 33 Ili69
»' 4 »4 15 <56 63. 14
21 J A 63.81
J'. ~- 4' 4 4 d £5 £4.00
Ol ? -• i» 5 £ 70 64 . 49
7 6 7"1' £4.77
co r,
5? 673 •i 4 . 7 7
2I 6 673 c4 . 77
0 673 64 . 77
35 ?»' 0 673 64.77
37 ***** 4 6717 65. 16
2^ .i i * 4 4 * t i ,> t * * i * * * * * * J * * t » * 4 1 C 4 • 4- 9 686 66.03
•11 » t 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 * » t * f * *: *:* J * * t * * * 4 * I 4 t 4 4 * * * 4 * * * 4 **•-*..**** J: * 62 748 71 .99
•13 T* 1 >4 4****»?t4* 97 845 61 .33
•15 M 4 *» i 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 t *44 * * »**** 4 ^•^ S74 84.12
47 4 *4 f44* 926 89. 12
A0 14 940 90.47
4 4' * 4 i * * 13
51 1 r .J T T * t S t * * * •» * T ? :!• f ? * * * * t * * * * t. * * * :* * * * t S f. 4 t * * * 953 91 .72
86 1039 100.00
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150
FREQUENCY
TABLE A. 5-3

SAS 12126 MONDAY, MAY 12, 1986


FREQUENCY fcAR CHART
MIDPOINT
FR3 FREQ CUh. CUri .
FREQ PERCENT
1 »**:M 41* ******* ********M*»***»************** ***<<: *:**** *»*?!•»*****»***'*****» r * 1 1 «: l: S t »:**** i 6 i 666 45.74
3 ******.•»*.**»**»» 1 15 781 53.61
5 ***** 40 821 56.39
7 ********** 75 896 61.54
9 ************ 89 985 67.65
1 1 ->** t 28
7-> 1013 69.57
13 *»* * 1045 71 .77
15 >** f 20 1075 73.33
17 » 7 1062 74.31
1r 1 1083 74 .38
Ol 21 -i1 1084 74.45
23 1087 74 ,66
25 3 1090 74.86
27 0 1090 74.86
29 0 1090 74 .66
21 0 1090 74 .86
33 3 1093 75.07
3 -J 1098 75.41
27 »« 20 1118 76.79
39 t * * j .J * * * *. * * 91 1209 S3. 04
41 t 1 A**4 4 * 69 1278 87.77
•13 »* 19 1297 89.08
15 i *4 * M 53 1350 on i 7">
47 t 18 136S. 93.95
49 *» 15 1383 94 . 99
51 ttj*t**»** 73 145i 100.00
-_--i___A__-4-___4.___A___4.__4-___4__. l.___4.___+___i___l.^__ A-__^___i___4.---4----A---4.---x___a_
30 40 90 120 i: 0 180 210 240 270 300 330 360 390 420 450 480 510 540 570 600 630 660
FREQUENCY
TABIE A. 5-4

SAS 14:27 THURSDAY/ MAY &, 1986 1


FREQUENCY BAR CHART
[NT
FRI FREQ CUM. CUM.
FREQ PERCENT
7 0 A c 7 o o
0.025 ( O O ;> j . v B
C17
. J ' S
J *«**«***•*»** 131 91 7 62.98
0. J25 1003 68.89
0.175 1102 75.69

0.225 *»** 37 1139 78.23


0.275 **«*«**«*«** 117 1256 86.26
-» p c *-***** + * 7R
3 • J t J "*""***" I o 1334 91 .62
8! 0.375 t 9 1342 92. 1 7
0.425 ** 16 135S 93.27
0.475 ** 23 13S1 94.85
0. 525 * 1 4 1395 95.81
0. 575 2 1397 95.95
n.625 0 1397 95.95
0.675 2 1399 96.09
3. 725 2 1401 96.22
9. 775 2- 1403 96.36
0. B25 2 1405 96.50
0. 875 * 5 141 0 96.84
0.925 « 1 2 1422 97.66
0.975 «** 34 U5o 100.00
. — __«____ + ____ + ____,._--- + ____,.__ — + _ — _(.- — - + -- — <.--_- + — --t- —— 1 ____ + —— - + -- —
5C 100 150 200 250 3TO 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750
FREQUENCY
TABIE A. 5-5

SAS 12129 HONDAYt MAY 12i 1986


FREQUENCY BAR CHART
MIHF-OIMT
FK4 FREC1 CUM. CUH.
FREQ PERCENT
0.025 *************************»********»»:****** t **.*<:*:(:***<*;(.***: ****»*»*:*********!: t 4: & i1.: * * i * * * * 649 64? 15. 90

C-.075 ********* 71 720 50.92

0.125 ****** •1676654. 17

0.175********** 77 84359.62

0. 225 ** * 24 867 6 1 . 3 Z-

0.275 **»*' 33 VOO '3. 65

0.325 *»** 33 933 65.98

0. 375 * E 941 66 . 55

0.4254 694746.97
01
o> 1496167.96
0.4754*

0.525 * 5 966 68.32

I'. 575 * 8 974 66.88

0.625* 898269.45

0.675 « 9 991 70.03

0.725 » i 997 70.51

0.775 * 10 1007 71.22

O.B25 ** Id 1023 72.35

0.£75»4»4-« 40106375.18

0.925 »***»**** 71 1134 80.20

0.975 1.44*************** ******************* 260 1414 100.00

30 40 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 100 'J30 360 390 120 150 480 10 540 570 600 630
FREQUENCY
TABLE A. 6-1

YEAR: 1982
SYSTEM: CHESHIRE WELLS
STATION: 75 2 45 1 51 50 6 3
1 0 0 3 3 0 1
1 1 0 0 3 3 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 n
1 44 1 51 17 3 3
0. 500 0.978 1.000 1.000 0.940 0.500 1.000

STATION:
0 "
112 1 11 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
01
1 11 0 0 0 0 0
1. 000 1.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

STATION: 131 1 0 0 51 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 51 1 1 0
1. 000 0.000 0.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.000

STATION: 146 0 9 0 1 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 9 0 0 0 0 0
0 9 0 1 1 1 0
o.ooo 1.000 o.ooo 1.000 1.000 1.000 o.ooo
89 L
ts>
-<
in
^
m
o x
z o
O-
o-
o
• u
o o o o o o
o ooooo oooooo oooooo o-»ooo-» oooooo o-»ooo-»
o o o o o
o o a o o
o 00000 oooooo oooooo oooooo oooooo
o o o o o
O O-» Ov/i
O i\)OOr\jro O
o o
o o
o oooooo O- O-»O.\J
o o o
o o CD
o oooooo oooooo
o o o
o o
o ooooo oooooo oooooo
o o o
o o o o o
o-»ooo-»
o ooooo oooooo OIVOOOINJ oooooo oooooo
o o o o o o
c C!
^o
o o o o
ot-ooero «-ooo< -o oooooo o cooooo
c o o o o o
t
o
c o o o o o
OOOOOO -ooo»-o •OOO oooooo r^ooor^-o oooooo
c o o o o

o
o 0 O o c O
ocoooo OODi-O CMNJOOOO oooooo OOi-OOcO OOOOOO
o 0 -* -*O o in ^"O- O
• f t t t
T— r— 0 0 0
O
*-ooo,-o
O 0, ^~ o
«— olo«— c fVOOOfvOi (M^^Or-OO oooooo
inO o Oi in mo o
o
o o o o o
ocoooo OOO'OOO r-OOOt-O r-OOOt-C (Vr-OOMO oooooo
o o in mo in 1/10 o
t •
o
o o o o o o
oooooo inoooino mOOOinO
<• -4-0 oooooo inooomo oooooo
o vr sj-o o o
t f
o
o o o o o
oooooo o oooooo o oooooo
o O o o o o
t * t
o o

ro 00
ro

•z 2
o o

159
o o o o o
o oooooo oooooc oooooo oooooo
ooo ooo OOOOC'O
o o o o o
o o t I t
o o o

o o o o o
o o oooooo oooooo -c
ooc ooo oooooo oooooo oooooo in
o o o o o
o I •
• O
o o
o o o o o
o o oooooo oooooo o
ooo ooo oooooo oooooo oooooo o
o o o o o
o t • I t

o o o o
o
o o o o o
o o oooooo oooooo
ooo ooo oooooo fVOOOfMO oooooo o
o o m l/IO o o
t
o
o o o o o
o o oooooo oooooo oooooo
ooo ooo oooooo oiooooo oooooo
o o o
o o o o
• t
• t
o o o o
o o o o o
o o «-ooo»-o
inOO Oino U1OOOI/1O 1/>OOO1/>O inOOOinO
sl-O o
-J-

o e? o o o
o o r-OOOr-0 r-OCOi -o oooooo
T-00 0»-O «-OOOi -o «- ooo«-o «-ooo«-o o
o o o o o
o t t
t o

00
CO
</l o
LU

2
z
o
o o
oc.

t-

tu

160
ooo
OOO OOO OOOOOO OOOOOO
ooo
• • t
000
ooo
OOO OOO OOOOOO OOOOOC
ooo

ooo
ooo ooo oooooo opoooo
O O "V in O
• f I

O O O
OOO OOO OOOOOO fMCOOtVC'
o o m ir>o

o O o
ooo ooo oooooo opoooo
o 0 o
t f f
0 o o
o 0 , o
u"»OO Ou*»G lAOOOmO ooooc-o
>J- *^O >$• ^J O o

o 0,0
o«-o ^-ooo»-o opoooo
000
f f f

•<
t—
in

161
o o o o
oooooo oooooo oooooo o ooooo oooooc
o o o o o o
t I t
o o
o o o o o o
oooooo oooooo o o o ooooo oooooo
o o o -JO o o
• t
o o
c o o o o o
oooooo oooooo (\IO«-OT-O G o ooooo oocrooo
o i/-\ mo in o o o
I
o
O f\J o o o o
oooooo -oc oooooo o oooooo
o o o o o

C o o o o o o
cooooo roOO»-o (MfMOOfVO oocooo ooooo ooooocr
o mo m mo o o o
t I
• I o
I o
o o
o o o o oocooo
oooooo inoooino oooooo oooooo OOOK^O
o o
o o o
t
o
o o o o o o
oooooo «-ooo»-o oooooo oooooo o ooooo oooooo
o o o o o o
I 9
I o
o »-

t- sT in
HH u^ -o
I
O Z- 2 Z Z
a- O o o o
< 1-1
_J «t

162
691.
-» X
O O o >-<
•O .£-
-<
I
O o o o
oooooo oooooo o oooooo
O o o o
T
o o
Oivooorxi o-»ooo-»
o o o
o
o OUI o

o

I
i'
OuiOOOv/1 oooo- oooooo oooooo
o o o o a
o o o o
O-P-OOO*- o-»o- oooooo
o o o
o OUI vi o o o
or\>ooor\j OOOOIMO oooooo oooooo oooooo
o o o o o
o o o o o
oooooo oo OOOOOO oooooo oooooo
o o o o o
o o
ff
o o o o
oooooo oooooo oooooo oooooo
o o o o
CO
-» o
(-. Z
o o o O en
z z z
ro o oo OO
oo o OJ
o

o o o o o o a\
oooooo oooooo oooooo oooooo ooct>ooo o-»ooo-»
o o o o o
o
o o o o o
OOOOOO oooooo oooooo t
oooooo
o
oooooo
o o o o
§
rH-
Orvi o I
OfNJOOOlN) o Of\)OO- oooooo
O o o o o
O o

O o o o
oooooo OOOOOO oooooo ooo-»o-» OOOfNJ-
o o o o IV
o o
I
o o o o o
oooooo oooooo oooooo o-»ooo-> oot>ooo 00-00
o o o o o o
o o o o o
oooooo o-»ooo-» oooooo oooooo oooooo
o o o o o •o
o o o
t I
o o o o o o
oooooo oooooo oooooo oooooo oooooo o-»ooo-»
o o o o o o
o o o o o o
ooo ooo OOOOOO QOOOOO oooooo oooooo oooooo
c o o o o o
I t
o o
o o
«-ooo«-o o o o o
ooo ooo oooooo oooooo (MOOOMO oooooo
o o o o o o
t
o
o o
»-ooo«-o o o o o
-o
ooo ooo oooooo OOOOOO <MO«-*-'i~O «-OOO'
vn mo o o • in o
I

o o o o o o
(\JOO oooooo <\j|OOorvo (voooroo «-o <MOOO<MO
in mo o o in mo mo

o o o o o o
ooo ooo <\IO«-C»-O 0 OOOOOO oooooo i^-ooor^-o
o in r-O o o o
I t
o O o
o o o o o
ooo ooo OJt-OOfVO oooooo oooooo o
o o o o o
I

o o o o o o
000 OOO T-OOOr-O ot^oooo
r o OOOOOO oooooo oooooo
VO o o o o o
I t t t
o o o o o

UI
x:
ac

ar
I
o
(NJ

z 3?
o o
a.
tu
UI

165
TABLE A. 6-1 (continued}

SYSTEM: WEST RIVER

STATION: 62 1 45 52 52 50 47 1
0 1 2 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 2 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 45 51 50 50 47 1
1 .000 1.000 0.981 0.962 1.000 1.000 1.000

STATION: 121 1 45 1 1 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 45 0 1 0 0
o> 1 .000 1.000 0.000 1.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
o>
TABIE A. 6-2

YEAR: 1983
SYSTEM: CHESHIRE WELLS
STATION: 75 1 45 1 52 51•> 2 2
1 1 1 0 0 0
0 1 1 1 6 2 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0
1 44 0 51 51 0 2
1. 000 0.978 0.000 0.931 1.000 0.000 1.000

STATION: 112 0 10 0 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 10 0 1 1 0 0
CD 0.000 1.000 0.000 1.000 1.000 0.000 0.000

STATION: 131 0 0 0 52 2 2 0
0 0 0 3 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 2 0 0
0 0 0 0 C 0 n
T 0 0 52 0 2 6
0. 000 0.000 0.000 1.000 0.000 1.300 0.000

STATION: 146 0 4 2 7 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 n
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 n
0 4 2 7 0 0 0
0.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.000 0.000
O o o o o
ocoooo oooooo oooooo oooooo -OOO«-O ooc-ooc
o o o o o
I » t
o o o
o o o o o o
&
oooooo oooooo KiOOOflO oooooo ooo«-o
o1 oooooo
o o o o
t
o
o o o
t-OOOT-O -OOOT-O (MOr-Ot-O OCO 0
o o in o

o o o
.-OOOT-0 ooocoo f\J»-«— r-r-C"
ino o o o in
t «
o o
o o o o o p
(MOOoroG (MOOO<MO <\Ji-OO(XO «-o»-aoo Or-OOOO rviroOOrJo
in ino in mo in o mo t- in
t

o o o o o
o oooooo oooooo oooodo
incoomo oooooo oooooo o
o o o o
• I
o o
o o o o o o 0
(MOOOfMO oooooo oooooo oooooo oooooo oooooo oooooo
o o o o o o
f I I
o o

m
o

•z
o z z
a: o o o

«r t-
h-
co 00

f
LU

in
>-
VI

168
O O O o o
OOOOOC' OOOOOO «*OOO»*O oooooo oooooo
O o O o in o
• • t
O o o
O O
T-O»-OOO o 00
o oooooo
O O o
O

O O
O 0
t- I>O rO O OO >J- ._._._,._._._.
o mo ir> >»•(> oooooo
• ,
o
O O O O (M
O fMT-OO(VO <\JOfMOOO fM«-<\J«-OO
mo in uio o o

o o o -o
oooooo oooooo *r<\ioo>*o
o o mo «- *-o oooooo
t f t I •
o
o o o t
o
o o o o o o
oooooo moooino moOOino oooooo OOino
o o oooooo
o

o o o o o
OOOOOO oooooo oooooo oooooo -*OOO»J-O o
o o o o o oooooo
• • I
o o o

Kl CO
rvi

z z
o o

«c
t-
</)

169
OLl
•H
m
is
t/> >
o
z o
i
o D> (/>
00 00 <0 -H
m
TO
o o o
I
I t
o o o o o o o
oooooo o ooooo oooooo oooooo oooooo QOOOOO ooo|ooo
o o o o o
o o
oooooo O Ov/lOOOi/1
o o o O
o o O o

• I •
o o o o o
ooo-'o- OO0OOO
oooooo o ooooo oooooo oooooo oooooo
o o o o o o o
o o o o-»ooo-
o ooooo oooooo ooooou
o o o o
o o o o o o
oooooo o ooooo oooooo oooooo o-»ooo- oodooo
o o o o o o
o
I
o o o o CJ
o ooooo oooooo oooooo O'NJOOOro O-'OOO- oooooo
o o o o o o
o o o o o o
OOO'JOO o ooooo oooooo oooooo oooooo oooooo oodooo
o o o o o o o
o o o
000,000 oocooo -i-COr-O
o o O

o o
ocrlooo oooooo o,-ooo
o o o

o
o o o
000)000 oooooo
o o
I
o
o o o
000)000 oooooo fMOOOfJO
o o in

o o
ooaooo oooooo oooooa
o o o

o
«-ooo«-o
o

o o
ooo|ooo oooooo
o o o
t
o

o
(\J

;*
o

171
ZLV
(A
-<
to
<n
v>
o
z
o o
I I I
O o o o o
OOOOOO oooooto o- ooo ooo oooooo
o o o o o
o o
t
t
o o o o
oooooo O-'OOO-' ooo ooo oooooo
o o o o o
o o
I I
o o o •Oin o
oooooo oruo OD-t-l-k oooooo
oooooo o o o
o
o

o o o o
oooooo o oooooo
o o o o
o o o o
ft
« •
o o o o
oooooo ooooolo oooooo ooo ooo oooooo
o o o IM o
o
o o o o
oooooo oooooo ooo ooo oooooo
o o o o
I
o o o o
o-»ooo-» o
OOOOQO o-»ooo-» ooo ooo oooooo
o o o o o
ezi
O O O 30
z z z o
•• •• •• I
o >->
-» -4
z
m
-<
I
c
m
r-
gB
O O O O O ^
• • • t •
o o o o o
OOOOOO OOOOOO OOOOOO OOOOOO OOOOOO
o o o o o
• t t It
O O^ ^"* O O^* ^ O
Or\>OOOfS^ O*^OO™* Wl O^*OOO£* O^tOOO^/1 O^OOlO*^
o o o o o I
•* O -» o -»
O •'Owi ^/i O O O
5-
I
O"^JOO^™^ OO^O^f^ fNJ O^KOO^*O^ OOOOOO O^^OOO^
o -» o o o
o o o o -*
• • • • «
^ Wl vi O O
0-»O-*O fN> 0-*0-*OPJ OOOOOO
000
O Owl Wl O O O
r-i-»OOO-» O-»OOW -» o-'OOO-1 OOOOOO OOOOOO
o o o o o
u Q* o o o
OOOOOO CMVO-»O W O-»OOO-» OOOOOO OOOOOO
o ->J o o o
o o o o o
OOOOOO OiNJOOO rvJ OOOOOO OOOOOO OOOOOO
o o o o o
o O O o o o
(\JOf\lOOO OOOOOO oooooo oooooo ocoooo COOCOO
o o o o o o
I
c
o o o o
OOOOOO oooooo oooooo ooccroo
-JO o o o o

o o o
(VJOIMOOO KlOOO r"0 oooooo
o o o o o
I I t t
o o
o o
t-Or-000 oooooo
o o
o
o o o o
OOOOOO (\Jf\jOOfNJO fioooroo
mo o in CM fMO
I
o
o o o o o
OOOOOO oooooo oooooo oooooo oooooo
-JO o o o c o
I
o
o o o o o o
OOOt-O oooooo ocoooo oooooo oooooo oooooo
o o o o o o
t t
o o

•o OO
CO o o PJ

2
VI O o
z •-•
o >~

174
9/1
V)
-<
to
CO
-H m
3* m
O 2
z CD
>
_a>
m
O g
t
O O O O O O
5
O ooooo oooooo oooooo oooooo oooooo oooooo y
O O O O O >
O O O O O
O oooooo oooooo oooooo oooooo
O O O O O
O
I §
O O O O O O
O o>oooo> oooooo oooooo o oooooo OOOOOO
O O O O O
Ov/i O O
O O Orvjoororvi OOOOOOOO oooooo
O O O O O O
O O
O O Own
O ooooo o-»ooo-» O-»OOi\J
O O O
O O O O O
O ooooo O o oooooo ooo-»o
O O O O O
O O O
t t I
O O O O O O
O ooooo oooooo oooooo oooooo o o- ' 3OO-
O O O O O o
TABLE A. 6-2 (continued)

SYSTEM: WEST RIVER


STATION: 62 7 45 52 52 51 48
0 1 1 1 4 9 0
0 0 1 1 1 4 8
0 0 0 0 0 0
7 45 51 51 50 44 0
1,000 1.000 0.981 0.981 0.980 0.917 0.000

STATION: 121 45 0 0 0
1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
45 0 0 0
-vl 0.000 1.000 0,000 1.QOO 0.000 0.000 0.000
O)
O ' ^

• t
O^OOCaO r-jOt-OOO
-o ^D ^^ ^" o^ o
i I
o f O

o o
o ooooo-o
o o
t
O

o
K10OO oooooooo
f>O o eo
f
o o
o
T-O

o o o
oo-o ooooo-o 00(000000 s-ooor^o
o o o o

n o o o
oo o»-o MOOON-O OOOOOO
O T- »-O

o o o
OfMO oooooo OOOOOC1
\r\ o o

3
tu z
o: o

CO <
Ul »-
I CO
00
o

< to
UJ >•

177
o o
(MfMr- (VllO vOCOO-OO -c
00 <r- c -c
t
O O

o o 00 o
CfllMCOOOO OOOOOOOO OOOCOOCO
o o
o
o fO
o >oooo>oo
o o
• t
o o
CO o o o
on oncrooooo
CO c o «-
ff
o O o
o O Kl o o c
rfi C!
T-O »-cr
t
C

OO
•O<M< -oinr- OOOOOCOO T- <MT-
o »>
t

o o to o o
r\j »—»-«—»— o oooooo *-C5»-OOO »^ «-(\j»-. -Kl -oo«-o oooooo
o o o o o
t t I
o o o

rvi Kl in •O
N- O

2-
z
a: o o o O
t-t
t-
< «r
t-
00

178
TABLE A.6-3 (continued)

STATION: 117 3 14 9 49 11 16 9
1 1 1 3 1 2 2
2 1 1 1 3 1 2
1 0 1 0 0 1 1
1 13 a 48 8 15 7
0.333 0.929 0.889 0.930 0.727 0.938 0.778

STATIOM: 123 1 41 15 43 19 13 14
1 1 1 8 2 2 1
1 1 1 1 6 1 1
1 1 1 1 2 1 1
0 40 14 42 13 12 13
0.000 0.976 0.933 0.977 0.684 0.923 0.929

STATION: 124 3 39 49 3 49 18 23
1 2 2 0 13 2 3
2 1 2 0 0 10 2
CD
1 0 0 0 0 2 1
1 38 47 8 49 8 21
0.333 0.974 0.959 1.000 1.000 0.444 0.913

STATION: 126 0 8 16 7 8 7 8
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
~f 0 0 0
0 8 16 jj 7 3
0.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

STATION: 138 1 46 43 49 44 50 10
1 2 4 6 3 2 0
0 1 2 3 6 3 1
0 0 2 ? 1 1 0
1 45 41 46 38 47 9
1.000 0.978 0.953 0.939 0.864 0.940 0.900

STATION: 142 9 14 10 1 3 12 16 10
2 4 2 7 6 6 4
4 2 4 2 6 6 5
1 2 0 1 5 6 3
5 12 6 16 6 10 5
0.556 O.S57 0.600 0.889 0.500 0.625 o.5ho
TABIZ A.6-3 (continued)

SYSTEM: GAILLARD-WEST RIVER

STATION: 69 3 47 10 15 9 15 9
2 3 2 2 1 2 1
1 2 3 2 2 1 2
0 1 1 1 1
'7 1 0
2 45 7 13 14 7
0.667 0.957 0.700 0.867 0.778 0.933 0.778

STATION: 70 2 46 9 15 9 15 8
1 1 0 1 1 1 2
2 1 1 0 1 1 1
1 0 0 0 1 1 1
0 45 8 15 8 14 7
0,000 0.978 0.889 1.000 0.889 0.933 0.875

STATION: 71 3 47 10 49 11 16 10
0 1 0 3 1 3 1
1 0 1 0 3 1 3
0 0 0 0 1 1 1
2 47 9 49 8 15 7
0.667 1.000 0.900 1.000 0.727 0.938 0.700
oo
o
STATION: 108 1 41 15 9 14 9 14
0 3 1 1 0 1 0
0 0 1 1 1 0 1
0 0 1 1 0 0 0
1 41 14 8 13 9 13
1.000 1.000 0.933 0.8S9 0.929 1.000 0.929

STATION: 110 2 45 10 16 10 16 10
1 2 1 2 2 1 2
2 1 2 1 2 2 1
1 1 1 1 2 0 0
0 44 8 15 8 14 9
0.000 0.978 0.800 0.938 0.800 0.875 0.900

STATION: 113 2 40 15 9 13 9 1 3
1 1 0 1 4 2 1
1 1 1 0 1 4 2
1 0 0 0 1 2 1
1 39 14 9 12 5 1 1
II. 500 o.vf 5 O.V53 i . u rni u.vz3 Trr5T6~Tr. 846

STATION: 118 3 7 14 43 13 8 13
2 1 3 1 4 2 2
2 2 1 3 1 4
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 5 13 40 12 4 1 1
3.333 0.714 0.929 0.930 0.923 0.500 0.846
TABI£ A.6-3 (continued)

STATION: 119 2 47 12 15 9 15 9
0 2 1 1 1 2 2
2 0 2 1 1 1 2
0 0 0 0 1 1 2
0 47 10 14 8- 14 7
0.000 1.000 0.833 0.933 0.889 0.933 0.778

STATION: 120 2 41 16 10 14 9 14
0 3 1 0 1 2 1
1 0 2 1 0 1 2
0 0 1 0 0 1 1
1 41 14 9 14 8 12
0.500 1.000 0.875 0.900 1.000 0.889 0.857
oo
STATION: 122 2 9 8 42 44 14 11
1 0 0 5 6 1 2
2 1 0 0 5 3 1
1 0 0 0 1 1 1
0 8 8 42 39 11 10
0.000 0.889 1.000 1.000 0.886 0.786 0.909
TABIZ A.6-3 (continued)

SYSTEM: GAILLARO/WHITNEY

STATION: 54 0 6 7 7 6 8 6
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 6 7 7 6 8 6
0.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

STATION: 65 2 46 43 49 43 1 8 11
0 3 3 3 4 1 2
2 0 3 3 3 3 1
0 0 0 0 0 1 1
0 46 40 46 40 15 10
0.000 1.000 0.930 0.939 0.930 0.833 0.909

STATION: 125 1 13 44 17 11 14 7
1 0 3 1 2 1 0
oo 0 1 0
"Q
3 1 2 1
(0 T 1 1 0
n 0
1 12 44 14 10 „ 12 6
1.000 0.923 1.000 0.824 0.909 0.857 0.857

STATION: 140 5 15 10 15 9 49 13
1 1 2 1 0 8 0
0 1 1 1 1 n 5
0 0 1 1 0 0 0
5 14 9 14 8 49 8
1.000 0.933 0.900 0.933 0.889 1.000 0.615

STATION: 141 0 10 17 10 13 8 13
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 • 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 10 17 10 13 3 13
0.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

STATION: 170 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O
OOOO O*OO oooocrooo >» CO
O o *~ OO

o
o er
oooooooo
rj o
o
ro o O
OOOO OOOO OOr-OCOOC FOOOOK1O
o OO «- r-0
t •
C o
o O
>o occoococr
CT -or o

o o
o o o o o
OO OOOO OOOO f-OOOf.O oocooooc
•!*• O »- r-O r- T-O
t •
O
00 o o o
«ooo o«oo O t<~>»-oor- T-C*OO«—
CO T-O T-O

t t
o o r-

o o o C o
coo ooo oooooo o
(M o o in o
t •
o o o o

_J
UJ

>*• o-
•-< C o o
I r-

I
o Z
ac. o

<f
t-
bO

r
UJ

183
TABIJE A. 6-3 ( continued)

SYSTEM: SALTOMSTALL
STATION: 67 3 40 42 43 42 43 9
3 1 3 ft 1 8 2 _
2 3 1 3 6 1 3
2 1 1 1 1 1 2
1 37 41 40 36 42 6
0. 333 0.925 0.976 0.930 0.857 0.977 0.667

STATION: 81 1 9 9 42 13 10 9
1 0 0 6 2 1 0
0 1 0 0 3 2 1
0 0 0 0 2 1 0
8 42 10 8 8
1. 000 0.889 1.000 1.000 0.769 0.800 0.839

STATION: 33 0 7 43 9 7 8 6
0 0 2 0 0 0 0
oo 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 7 43 8 7 g ff
0. 000 1.000 1.000 0.889 1.000 1.000 1.000

STATION: 106 1 8 44 9 7 9 7
1 0 2 0 1 1 0
0 1 0 1 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 1 0
1 7 44 8 7 3 6
1. 000 0.875 1.000 O.S39 1.000 0.889 0.857
STATION: 107 1 7 25 9 10 3 9
0 0 2 1•> 1 1 1
1 0 0 1 1 1
0 0 n T 1 1 1
0 7 25 7 9 7 «
0. 000 1.000 1.000 0.778 0.900 0.875 0.839

STATION: 128 1 8 44 9 10 8 0
1 0 2 0 1 1 0
0 1 0 2 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 1 0
7 44 7 10 7 R
1. 000 0.875 1.000 0.778 1.000 0.375 0.339
TABIE A. 6-3 (continued)

SYSTEM: SLEEPING GIANT-MT CARTEL WELLS


STATION: 74 0 7 8 42 44 13 13
0 0 0 2 8 2 1
0 0 0 0 2 5 2
0 0 0 0 C 2 0
0 7 8 42 42 8 11
0 .000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.955 0.615 0.846

STATION: 79 1 39 9 9 42 1 1 9
0 2 0 0 3 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 3 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 39 8 9 42 8 9
1 .000 1.000 0.889 1.000 1.000 0.727 1 .000

STATION: 127 0 12 16 13 9 8 6
oo 0 0 4 0 0 0 0
en 0 0 0 3 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 12 16 10 9 8 6
0 .000 1.000 1.000 0.769 1.000 1.000 1.000

STATION: 129 2 9 8 43 11 13 8
1 0 0 6 1 1 1
1 1 0 0 5 1 1
1 0 0 0 1 1 0
1 8 8 43 6 12 7
0 .500 0.889 1.000 1.000 0.545 0.923 0.875

STATION: 130 3 9 8 43 8 11 8
0 1 1 1 1 2 0
0 0 1 1 1 1 2
0 0 1 0 0 1 0
3 9 7 42 7 10 6
1 .000 1.000 0.875 0.977 0.875 0.909 0.750

STATION: 139 0 8 13 3 8 6 8
0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a. A. 12 3. _S. A S
0.000 1.000 0.923 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
TABLE A.6-3 (continued)

SYSTEM: WEST RIVER


STATION: 62 3 40 43 43 42 43 12
1 2 3 6 4 7 2
1 1 2 3 6 4 4
1 0 0 n 2 1 1
2 39 41 40 36 39 8
0. 667 0.975 0.953 0.930 857 0.907 0.667

STATION: 121 0 40 14 8 13 8 13
0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
n 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 40 14 9 13 8 13
0,000 -U-QOO 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
00
05
TABI£ A. 6-4

SUN MON TUE WEO THU FRI SAT


YEAR: 1985
SYSTEM: CHESHIRE WELLS
STATION: 75 7 5 40 4 40 3 40
1 1 3 2 2 1 5
5 1 1 3 2 2 1
1 0 0 2 0 1 1
2 4 39 38 1 39
0. 286 0.800 0.975 0.250 0.950 0.333 0.975

STATION: 112 5 38 4 40 5 40 6
oo 0 3 1 3 2 7 2
2 0 2 1 3 2 4
0 0 0 1 1 1 2
3. 33 ? 39 2 38 2
0. 600 1.000 0. 500 0.975 0.400 0.950 0.333

STATION: 131 3 40 4 40 5 39 4
1 3 1 2 1 3 1
1 1 3 r 2 1 2
0 Q
"T Q 1 0 1 0 0
2 1 39 3 38 2
0. 667 0.975 0.250 0.975 0.600 3.974 0.500

STATION: 146 6 11 39 9 39 7 41
2 0•? 4 1 A 1 4
4 0 4 1 4 1
1 0 0 0 1 0
38 3 40
69 39 5
2
0.333 0.818 1.000 0.556 0.974 0.429 0.976
TABLE A. 6-4 (continued^

SYSTEM: GAILLARO 6
8 35 A 39 3 AO
STATION: 66 1 0 3 0 7 1
2 6
1 2 1 0 3 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0
7 33 3 39 0 AO
0.875 0.9A3 0.750 1.000 0.000 1.000 0.000

A A1 3 39 A A1
72 8
STATION: 1 0 2 0 3 2 6
A 1 0 2 0 3 2
1 0 0 0 0 1 0
4 3 A1 1 39 1 39
0.500 0.750 1.000 0.333 1.000 0.250 0.951

73 9 38 2 A1 3 AO 8
STATION: A
1 2 0 3 1 7
A 1 1 0 3 1 7
0 1 0 n 1 0 3
5 37 1 A1 0 39 1
0.556 0.97A 0. 500 1.000 0.000 0.975 0.125
00
00

77 3 3 A1 2 AO 1 33
SIAJ1-QN: 0 1 1 2
1 0 3
2 1 0 ? 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 1 1
1 2 A1 0 AO 0 37
0.333 0.667 1.000 0.000 1.000 0.000 0.97A

105 8 A AO 1 39 5 A1
STATION): A
3 0 0 0 5 3
A 3 0 0 C A 3
2 0 0 0 0 3 1
A 1 AO 1 39 1 38
0.500 0.250 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.200 0.927

115 3 1 38 2 38 A 38
STATION: 3
1 0 1 0 A 0
3 0 0 1 0 3 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 38 1 38 1 38
0.000 1.000 1.000 0.500 1.000 0.250 1.000

5 A AO 2 39 A A1
STATION: 116 1 0 0 3 2 7
1
5 1 1 0 0 3 2
1 0 0 0•> P 1 ?
0 3 39 39 1 39
0.000 0.750 0. 975 1.000 1.000 0.250 0.951
TABLE A.6-4 (continued)

STATION: 117 2 38 1 40 0 40 2
0 1 0 0 0 2 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 38 0 40 0 40 0
1. 000 1.0QO 0.000 1.000 0.000 1.000 0.000

STATION: 123 7 3 41 1 38 3 40
0 0 1 1 1 1 4
4 0 0 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 1 0 0 0
3 3 41 0 37 2 39
0. 429 1.000 1.000 0.000 0.974 0.667 0.975

STATION: 124 7 2 39 1 38 4 39
0 0 1 0 1 1 4
GO 4 0 0 1 0 0 1
CO
0 0 0 1 0 0 0
3 2 39 3 38 4 38
0. 429 1.000 1.000 0.000 1.000 1.000 0.974

STATTDM: 126 5 39 6 41 2 33 6
1 4 1 1 0 5 1
1 1 ^ 1 1 0 5
0 0 1 0 0 0 0
4 38 3 40 1 38 1
0. 800 0.974 0.500 0.976 0.500 1.000 0.167

STATION: 138 2 38 2 41 1 40 2
0 1 0 2 1 3 1
1 0 1 0 1 1 2
0 0 0 0 1 0 1
1 38 1 41 0 39 0
0. 500 1.000 0. 500 1.000 0.000 0.975 0.000

STATION: 142 2 38 0 4r 1 40 2
1 1 0 0 0 2 1
0 1 0 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 1
2 37 0 41 1 40 0
1.000 0.974 0.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.000
RIVER
TABLE A.6-4 (continued)
SYSTE1: GAILLARD-WEST
STATION: 69 3 39 2 41 0 39 3
0 2 0 0 0 3 0
0 0 2 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 39 0 41 0 39 1
1,000 1.000 0.000 1.000 0.000 1.000 0.333

STATION: 70 1 38 2 41 0 40 0
0 2 1 1 0 0 0
0 0 2 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0
1 38 0 40 0 40 0
1.000 1.000 0.000 0.976 0.000 1.000 0.000

STATION: 71 5 4 41 1 39 1 41
2 1 2 0 2 0 4
3 2 1 1 0 1 0
2 1 0 0 0 0 0
2 2 40 0 39 0 41
0.400 0.500 0.976 0.000 1.000 0.000 1.000

STATION: 108 0 24 1 24 0 22 0
0 2 0 0 0 0 0
<o 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
o 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 24 0 24 0 22 0
0.000 1.000 0.000 1.000 0.000 1.000 0.000

STATION!: 110 2 37 34 40 35 39 36
0 0 1 0 2 2 1
0 0 0 1 0 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 37 34 39 35 37 34
1.000 1.000 1.000 0.975 1.000 0.949 0.944

STATION: 113 3 2 40 0 38 2 41
1 0 0 0 1 1 1
1 1 0 0 0 1 1
1~> 0 0 0 0 0 1
1 40 T 38 1 40
0.667 0.500 1 . 00 0 0.000 1.000* 0.500 0.976

STATION: 118 4 3 40 2 40 2 40
0 1 1 0 2 0 2
2 T) 1 1 0 7 0
0 0 0 0 0 6 0
2 3 39 1 40 0 40
0.500 1.000 0.975 0.500 1.000 0.000 1 .000
TABLE A.6-4 (continued)

STATION: 119 4 38 2 40 1 39 5
0 2 0 1 0 4 2
1 0 2 0 1 0 4
0 0 0 0 0 0 1
3 38 0 40 0 39 1
0.750 1.000 0.000 1.000 0.000 1.000 0.200

STATION: 120 3 5 41 0 40 0 40
2 1 0 0 0 0 3
2 2 1 0 0 0 0
2 1 0 0 0 0 0
1 3 40 0 40 0 40
0.333 0.600 0.976 0.000 1.000 0.000 1.000

STATION: 122 5 39 3 40 1 40 3
0 3 1 1 0 4 1
1 0 2 1 0 0 3
0 0 0 0 0 n 1
4 39 1 3^ 1 40 0
0.800 1.000 0.333 0.975 1.000 1.000 0.000
TABTJE A. 6-4 (continued)

SYSTEM: GAILLARO/WHITNEY
STATION: 54 9 36 39 39 39 39 40
0 1 3 1 2 2 5
5 0 1 3 1 2 2
0 0 0 a 0 n n
4 36 38 36 38 37 38
0. 444 1.000 0.974 0.923 0.974 0.949 0.950

STATION: 65 2 39 3 40 1 40 3
1 3 0 1 0 3 2
2 1 2 0 0 0 2
1 0 0 0 0 0 2
0 33 1 40 1 40 1
0. 000 0.974 0.333 1.000 1 .000 1.000 0.333

STATION: 125 3 38 3 40 2 40 4
0 2 0 2 0 4 1
CO 1 0 2 0 1 0 3
IS) 0 0 0 0 • 01 0 1
2 38 1 43 40 1
0.667 1.900 0.333 1.000 0.500 1.000 0.250

STATION: 140 4 39 1 41 2 40 5
0 1 0 3 1 5 1
1 n 1 0 1 1 4
0 0 0 0 0 0 1
3 39 0 41 1 39 1
0. 750 1.000 0.000 1.000 0.500 0.975 0.200

STATION: 141 3 3 40 3 38 5 41
2 0 3 0 5 0 4
3 2 0 2 0 3 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 40 1 38 2 41
0. 000 0.333 1.000 0.333 1.000 0.400 1.000

STATION: 170 2 39 4 40 3 40 1
1 3 2 3 1 1 0
0 1 2 2 2 1 1
0 0 1 0 0 1 0
2 38 2 38 1 39 0
1.000 0.974 0.500 0.950 0.333 0.975 0.000
TABLE A. 6-4 (continued)

SYSTE.M: GAILLARD-WHITNEY-WELLS
STATION: 101 7 36 21 41 20 36 10
3 4 6 6 4 6 4
3 3 4 6 6 4 5
2 2 3 3 3 2 2
4 33 17 35 14 32 «;
0. 571 0.917 0.810 0.354 0.700 0.889 0.500

STATION: 104 2 39 1 39 6 40 4
0 2 1 2 0 3 0
-0. H .1 1 2 Q 2.
0 0 1 0 0 0 0
2 39 0 38 4 40 2
1. 000 1.000 0.000 0.974 0.667 1.000 0.500
(0
co
STATION: 109 8 7 36 9 37 6 37
1 0 4 1 2 0 9
8 1 0 3 1 2 0
1 0 0 1 1 0 0
0 6 36 6 36 4 37
0. 000 0.357 1.00Q 0.667 0.973 0.667 1.000

STATION: 137 4 39 3 39 5 40 6
0 3 0 0 1 6 1
1 0 3 0 0 1 4
0 0 0 0 0 0 1
3 39 0 39 5 39 2
0. 750 1.000 0.000 1.000 1.000 0.975 0.333

STATION: 143 8 6 40 2 38 1 40
1 0 0 0 3 0 7
7 1 0 0 0 1 0
1 0 0 0
•> 0 0 0
1 40 38 0 40
0.125 0.333 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.000 1.000
TABLE A. 6-4 (continued)

SYSTEM: SALTONSTALL
STATION: 67 10 7 41 0 39 5 40
3 0 0 0 4 2 9
9 2 0 0 0 4
3 0 0 0 0 1 2
1 5 41 0 39 1 38
0.100 0.714 1.000 0.000 1.000 0.200 0.950

STATION: 81 5 35 3 41 2 39 5
1 1 0 0 1 4 2
2 1 1 0 0 1 4
0 0 0 0 0 0 1
3 34 2 41 2 38 1
0.600 0.971 0.667 1.000 1.000 0.974 0.200

STATION: 83 6 6 41 2 39 4 40
1 1 0 0 2 1 5
5 1 1 0 0 2 1
CO 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 5 40 2 39 2 39
0.167 0.833 0.976 1.000 1.000 0.500 0.975

<?f*T TOM ; 1 TA _£
c 4a z 3J 7 41
p 0 1 0 5 3 5
4 2 0 1 0 4
1 0 0 0 0 2 1
2 3 40 1 37 3 38
0.333 0.600 1.000 0.500 1.000 0.429 0.927

STATION: 107 4 39 3 41 2 40 6
3 2 1 0 1 6 1
1 3 2 1 0 1 5
0 0 1 0 0 0 1
3 36 1 40 2 39 1
0.750 0.923 0.333 0.976 1.000 0,975 0.167

STATION: 128 4 39 1 41 0 38 4
0 0 0 1 0 3 1
1 0 0 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 39 1 41 0 38 2
0.750 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.000 1.000 0.500
SYSTEM: SLEEPING GIANT-NT CARTEL WELLS
STATION: 74 4 39 1 40 4 39 3
2 0 0 3 0 2 2
7 2 0 0 3 0 2
1 0 0 a 0 0 2
2 37 40 1 39 1
5«;
-t ij \j 0 • «— LJ
^ n 1.000 0.333
0. 500 0.949 1.000 1• * nnn

STATION: 79 8 8 40 3 39 3 40
1 0 2 0 1 1 8
7 1 0 1 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 1 0
1 7 40 2 39 2 39
0. 125 0.875 1.000 0.667 1.000 0.667 0.975

STATION: 12? 6 5 40 4 38 6 40
0 0 4 1 4 1 5
CO 0 0 4 1 3 1
01 5
0 0 0 1 1 0 0
1 5 40 0 37 3 39
0. 167 1.000 1.000 0.000 0.974 0.500 0.975
•>
STATION: 129 7 4 41 38 6 40
1 1 5 0
-> 5 1 5
5 0 1 0 4 1
1 0 0 0 0 1 0
2 4 40 0 38 2 39
0. 236 1.000 0.976 0.000 1.000 0.333 0.975

STATION: 130 7 3 40 3 39 6 39
1 1 4 0 3 3 5
5 1 1 1 0 3 2
1 1 0 0 0 1 0
2 7 39 2 39 3 37
0. 286 0.875 0.975 0.667 1.000 0.500 0.949

STATION: 139 4 40 4 41 3 40 5
1 2 0 2 0 5 1
1 1 2 0 2 0 4
0 0 0 0 0 0 1
3 39 2 41 1 40 1
0. 750 0.975 0. 500 1.000 0,333 1.000 0.200
TABLE A.6-4 (continued)

SYSTEM: WEST RIVER


STATION: 62 6 4 39 4 40 4 40
0 0 4 1 7 1 4
4 0 0 2 1 4 1
0 0 0 1 0 1 0
2 4 39 2 39 0 39
0. 333 1.010 1.000 0.500 0.975 0.000 0.975

STATION: 121 4 2 40 4 39 2 41
0 0 3 0 2 0 4
3 0 0 3 0 2 0
CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 2 40 1 39 0 41
0. 250 1.000 1.000 0.250 1.000 0.000 1.000
TABLE A.7

MUNICIPAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM 1982-1985 SAMPLING SCHEDULE AND FREQUENCY

Brackets enclose frequencies on regular sampling days. All other


frequencies are considered resaroples.
DAY OF THE WEEK
SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT
SYSTEM: CHESHIRE WELLS —————————————————————————————— —————— ——————————-

STATION: 75

1982 2 [453 1 C51] [503 6 3


1983 1 [453 1 [523 [513 2 2
1984 4 [413 9 [433 [423 17 13
1985 7 5 C4Q] 4 [403 3 [433

STATION: 112
1932 11100000
1983 0 10 0 1 1 0 0
1984 01399 8 79
1935 5 E33D 4 [403 5 [403 6
STATION: 131
1932 1 0 0 C513 1 1 1
1933 000 [523 220
1984 1 7 8 [423 14 13 11
1985 3 [403 4 [403 5 [393 4
STATION: 146
1982 0901110
1983 0427000
1984 0 10 7 13 7 9 6
1935 6 11 [393 9 [393 7 [413
«— fMOOO OCTCon OOr-r-
«->*•

OOO-O

UJ3
UJI l/>«— f^-O-
f\J«-<\JO-
ro
ID
XO rir-inm nn
t-U) r\JOr-«- (\jrofM OCJOOM

r-inn»~i
(\JINJ -J-O

1
•H r i> >r^m
i/iirvotn oor—* oooroc OOf^r-

r-OOoo OO»-O> OOOOO


r^
<

Kl 1/1
O

z z z
o o o

ooecoooo <r ocecococ


t- O-OOO t- t— oo-oo t— oooo »— ooo^c- \—
v> 1-v—i— r- in

198
OOOOO COOr- oo

O«— 1/>O O^J^O' OO Of\j OO-OO OOOro fMOooro


T--1- 1-

UJI oooo o«—oo oo

10
»-UJ oo oo-oo oooo
3
U-) * " " '

OOOfM OO lAr-
1—

r-if-ii—i
tnin «— >»•
I—It—I L-l

O<\J» r-0 t-0 Ocoro

00 o 00
o

z z
o o
•-i ^ ocooco 00 *c oooooooo < ooecooor < oooo oo°° ocooooco <r oCocoooo
ty }— OOOO ^ OOOO H- OOOO ^ OO OO H— OOOO OOOO I— OOOO
I—
</>
UJ

<c
_)
_J

199
oc-src OC-C'fM

nnnn
OOtnO- OOOO r^-oooo oooo

I
nnnn
onoo (MfNJO r-

OCKMfNJ ooecri oocr<r


*—4"
|_j l—ll—I1_JUJ

rinr-ir-i nnn rinn


nnn
l/"UnN.OO 1/MTlT-lA i/"if>»— IfMAO-fM oooco ooo-ec
>J-s*--* T-K1

LJI-ILJ

t-Org-*

o (M >0 oQ
(M fVI (M
CM

2
o ar z
o o o
i-*
ocoooooo «c OOOOOOOO «j •< < oocoec oo < oo
OOCSO* K- >- t- ^ oooo t— oooo
trt (/I ^^^—*~~ «^ t/^ ^—«— *^ r~
00

200
102
CD
>
__»—»__»__> I/} ——.__!——»_» tO —>—>—>—I
oooo -i •oo^o-o —t >o-o^o<o -( m
00 JO UO 00 to 'JO 00 CO OO J» 00 00 OOOO J» jo JO 00 Co 00080000 00000039 > x
o o o
z z z
fV VJ1
V/l VJ1
I\)OOO
nnn
*>ui>-n
-»ooo •j*»r\jro <=-<
LJUJI—I
n nnnn n
4N- 1^4
OOUO
f.
m-«
OXOO
>-Jl_|l_ll_l LJ 01
m
nnn n
1^4
-OOOO im
Cm
OOOO UiOOOO
n

-»000
OO-OO
202
ff)
3*
3*
73
00 _»_»_»_»
—i OvO^O-O O-OO -O *O ^D ^D ^0 **^ *O^3*O^D *"*4 rn
J> OOUOQOOO jouooo oo OoOOOOoo ^ uo^Oooo ^ -<
i\j
O m
u
OJ >o
g
ooooo OOOO O
mi—if-in
nnt—i m .
O
O
•n
I
ox
m
nr-in n
-» O OOOOO xm
czm
o^ooo
OOf^r-

-OOOO

V
UJ nnnn
uiz Or-N-N- OOO(M
ro r-
UJ
10 (-inn r-innn
>-tu rofVJMO IMfVJfM,- Or-O^PO OOOr-

O
UJ nnnn
VZ3 (\JfSJf\jT- OOOM CJMintO
(M(\J(M

.5 n
miner N- noeoin oor^-o
fO

fO O
oo n

Z ~Z 7- 2
O O O O
HH »—I I-* ^H

ooocoooo *t oroooooc < oooooron < oooooooe


t- O-C-(7-C> K-
C/! r—«—t—T— CO «—<—«—r- CO r—T—T—t— CO t— r- r-r- CO T—«—t—T—

t/5
7
O

V
bo

203
00-00 ooooo ooooo*

-r-r-KI OOOO-O OOOO

Oi
K)

LU
10 nnnn
t-UJ OOfVMNJO oooro
3

OOCQT- CCCOO

ooo>oo

t^
COO'0
<
t,
£
p
O> N ^ O
r^ <M M ro

2 Z
o o
** (-1
t— {\ifo-crin t-
X < onecoooo < co oo oooo < ooooenoo «t eoooeoeo < ooeoeooo < Weoonoo
I »- ao-O-O^ I- O-O>O>CT- H- O-O-O.O H- O>O-O^O^ H- -—-- • ----
t~ W r-r-^*^- V) r-r-^-^- </> f"^"»—r- (/I ^r-^-t— (/5

U)

204
S02
c
m
to
m
33
—*_>_>_> CO ^k -*_»—» (/>
~^.^_4~Jk C/l
•O-OO-O -« -O-OO>O —I <O<O-O<O -4
000030QO > 00 CO 00 OO > 00 OOOOOO >
o
z
(\J
00
r\J
5g
a
>
^j
•ooooo
r-ii—irin
H>
C-<
LJl_Ju_ll_J m
nr-in
s:
*«00-»-» m-4
-»>OO«IO
I—ILJl_ll_J cm
r—inr—i
oooooo roooOO
orooo-
Appendix A. 4^
A.4.1 Definition and Logic of Maximum MFTC Comparisons
The distribution system MFTC must be compaerd to its treated effluent and
raw influent to reveal the importance of coliform sources in the individual
systems. However, the interconnections between distribution systems and the
multiple treated effluents (from multiple raw influents) which may feed a
system prevent a clear definition of the systems. The two exceptions are the
Cheshire Wells and Saltonstall which are isolated. Thus, we linked
distribution systems to treated effluents and raw influents as best as
possible. After consultation with SCCRWA, we settled on the definitions
described in Table A.8.
The daily MFTC maximum for each distribution system represents the
maximum value out of all sample locations in the system. The effluent
maximum was similarly selected from all possible treatment effluents
assigned to that system. The influent is the value for the raw influent at
the treatment station of the effluent maximum (which might not be the
greatest influent value for that system that day).
The maximum values were used because they provided more consistent
relationships although the daily maximum or the daily mean could also have
been used. Since the daily MFTC in the distribution system ranges normally
from zero to the maximum (e.g., Table A.9), the mean is often much less
than the maximum. Consequently when the distribution is compared to its
effluent, there are fewer cases where we record a higher concentration of
coliforms in the distribution system. If maxima were compared, the
distribution coliform density would be far greater than that for effluent.

206
TABLE A. 8

Defined Relationship Between Raw Wupplies, Treated Effluents and Water


Supply Systems Used for Analysis.

System Effluent Raw


1-Cheshire Wells N. Cheshire N. Cheshire
S. Cheshire S. Cheshire
2-Gaillard Gaillard Gaillard
3-Gaillard-West River Gaillard Gaillard
West River West River
4-Gaillard-Whitney Gaillard Gaillard
Whitney Whitney
5-Gaillard-Whitney-Wells Gaillard Gaillard
Whitney Whitney
N. Sleeping Giant N. Sleeping Giant
S. Sleeping Giant S. Sleeping Giant
Mt. Carmel Mt. Carmel
6-Saltonstall Saltonstall Saltonstall
7-Sleeping Giant-
Mt. Carmel Wells N. Sleeping Giant N. Sleeping Giant
S. Sleeping Giant S. Sleeping Giant
Mt. Carmel Mt. Carmel
8-West River West River West River

207
TABI£ A. 9
Sleeping Giant-Mt. Carmel Distribution System Samples 7/13/85

Station Codes 79 127 129 130

MFTC (Cfu/lOOmL) 100 150 9 0

The comparisons were made only on days during which the distribution
system maximum was greater than zero. MFTC values greater than zero are
considered to indicate a coliform outbreak. Three types of comparisons
were made to tabulate frequencies for six categories. The six categories
are the following: 1) distribution and effluent MFTC both greater than
zero, 2) distribution, effluent, and influent MFTC all greater than zero,
3) effluent MFTC subtracted from distribution MFTC exceeds a critical value
(25, 50, or 100 cfu/lOOmL), 4) influent MFTC subtracted from effluent MFTC
exceeds a critical value (25, 50, or 100 cfu/lOOmL), 5) distribution MFTC
divided by effluent MFTC exceeds a critical value (100%, 200%, or 300% ),
and 6) effluent MFTC divided by influent MFTC exceeds a critical value
(100%, 200%, or 300%). For categories (3), (4), (5), and (6), frequencies
were computed for all critical values. To avoid zero denominators in ratios
(5) and (6), zero values in a denominator were treated as the value 1.
Effluent and influent comparisons were made from samples collected at the
same treatment facility. The results for this analysis is given in Table
A. 11
There are definite conclusions which can be drawn from these
frequencies. Frequencies of categories 1 and 2 indicate the number of
distribution coliform outbreaks for which effluent, and effluent and
influent together, could have contributed to the distribution coliform
population. This is true insofar as coliforms identified in the influent
can constitute part of the effluent population, and coliforms identified in
the effluent can constitute part of the distribution population.
Frequencies of categories 3 and 5 have been used to compute the fraction of
coliform outbreaks for which distribution regrowth must have contributed
appreciabley to the coliform population. The influence of regrowth assumes
the following: a) the effluent water has travelled to the distribution
sample location which provided the maximum MFTC, b) one sample is adequate
to assess the coliform population, and c) the difference or percent increase
is large enough to indicate regrowth. Categories (4) and (6) are analogous
to categories (3) and (5) except that they compare effluents and
influents. Frequencies for these categories are indicative of coliform
growth at the treatment facility. Only assumptions b and c are necessary
for categories (4) and (6) since there is no ambiguity concerning the flow
of raw influent to treated effluent.

208
A.4.2 Frequency Analysis of MFTC Events at Distribution Systems and Their
Treatment Stations
The following discussion considers the eight distribution systems
defined in Table A.8 and the results of the frequency analysis (all results
from 1985 data) in Table A.11. The percentages used represent the percent
of coliform outbreaks in the respective distribution system. For example,
consider the Cheshire Wells system in Table A.11 (system 1). For this
system, there were 35 coliform events in 1985 (D > 0 = 35). During 17.1% of
these events, the distribution daily maximum exceeded that in the effluent
by 25 cfu/lOOmL (row 4), and during 48.6% by at least 100% (row 7). During
11.4% of the 35 distribution events, the effluent's MFTC daily maximum
exceeded that in the influent by at least 25 cfu/lOOmL (row 10). Analogous
interpretations can be made from the other critical values.
The frequency analyses are supplemented by trajectory plots of weekly
averages and weekly maxima by week (Figures A. 1-1 - A. 1-14) for all
distribution systems, treated effluents, and raw influents. Refer to Table
A.10 for calendar dates of the weeks in these plots, and Table A.12 for the
actual data.
The ordinate scale on the trajectory plots is not constant but is scaled so
that the trend is easily discernible. This approach was necessary because of
the large variation in MFTC. Weekly averages have been used and may obscure
some of the conclusions. For example, in the distribution system plots the
averages are computed by summing over all stations within a system each week
and dividing by the total number of observations in the sum. By computing
the average in this manner, we assume that each station is equally
informative and that averaging over stations with different respective
sampling schedules provides a mean value for that week. For systems where
the MFTC distributions are significantly different among stations and where
MFTC distributions change with day of the week, the average must be
interpreted cautiously. For the raw influent and treated effluent, using
averages is not as problematic. Both influent and effluent samples are
collected at only one site for each plot and it appears that all days of the
week have approximately the same MFTC distributions (see Section A.5.4).

209
TABLE A.10

Columns are week - last month/day of week in 1985.


1-1/9 14-4/10 27-7/10 40-10/9
2-1/16 15-4/17 28-7/17 41-10/16
3-1/23 16-4/24 29-7/24 42-10/23
4-1/30 17-5/1 30-7/31 43-10/30
5-2/6 18-5/8 31-8/7 44-11/6
6-2/13 19-5/15 32-8/14 45-11/13
7-2/20 20-5/22 33-8/21 46-11/20
8-2/27 21-5/29 34-8/28 47-11/27
9-3/6 22-6/5 35-9/4 48-12/4
10-3/13 23-6/12 36-9/11 49-12/11
11-3/20 24-6/19 37-9/18 50-12/18
12-3/27 25-6/26 38-9/25 51-12/25
13-4/3 26-7/3 39-10/2 52-1/1/86

210
TABLE A. 11
Frequency Analysis of 1985 MFTC Data

D = Distribution System, E = Treated Effluent, R = Raw Influent


Frequencies are tabulated only when D > 0 is true.
Percents are computed using D > 0 as the denominator.
Sample sizes for maxima and minima are equal to frequencies for
D > 0.
System 12345678

D > 0 35 52 33 43 47 29 42 20
D>0&E>0 16 3 4 8 15 3 22 1
D>0, E>0&R>0 7 3 4 8 15 3 13 1

D - E > 25 cfu/lOOmL 17.1% 30.1% 28.6% 9.3% 17.0% 27.6% 9.5% 10.0%
D - E > 50 Cfu/lOOmL 8.6 19.2 18.2 4.7 8.5 17.2 4.8 10.0
D - E > 100 Cfu/lOOmL 2.9 9.6 3.0 2.3 4.3 3.5 2.4 5.0

D/(E*2) > 1.0 48.6% 63.5% 48.5% 44.5% 51.1% 69.0% 33.3% 60.0%
D/(E*3) > 1.0 42.9 59.6 42.4 39.5 49.0 37.9 31.0 55.0
D/(E*4) > 1.0 31.4 57.7 39.4 34.9 42.6 58.6 26.2 50.0

E - R > 25 Cfu/lOOmL 11.4% 0.0% 0.0% 4.7% 10.6% 0.0% 19.1% 0.0%
E - R > 50 Cfu/lOOmL 5.7 0.0 0.0 4.7 8.5 0.0 11.9 0.0
E - R > 100 cfu/lOOmL 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.7 6.4 0.0 7.1 0.0

E/(R*2) > 1.0 20.0% 0.0% 0.0% 4.7% 17.0% 0.0% 28.6% 0.0%
E/(R*3) > 1.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 4.7 17.0 0.0 26.2 0.0
E/(R*4) > 1.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 4.7 14.9 0.0 26.2 0.0

D maximum 153 200 117 174 174 108 150 149


D minimum 11111111

E maximum 139 6 6 177 200 1 200 1


E minimum 0 00 0 0 0 0 0

R maximum 148 51 142 540 780 360 200 70


R minimum 00110000

211
TABLE A.12
MFTC Maximum (cfu/lOOmL) During Coliform Events

0 = Oistribution/. E
= Effluent* 3 = t n f I u ? n t
Systems < codes as in table 5.3.1 )
1 234

r -- F •>
D - E - R D • - R D - * - 7

6 0 3 7 n 3 2 3 1 16 0 239
-j 7
1 0 7. 0 1 ^2 6 1 1 1 2
~)
1 0 V«, 6 3 1 0 1 3 3 1
2 0 3 1 3 n 1 42 0 24 1 13 10
? 1 7 39 7 *> 0 24 1 1 10 ^ 1 59 1
13 32 3 1 0 12 1 3 1 0 7 7
23
32 1 3 26 p 51 1 1 7 0 51 7 3 10
i -) -y
1 0 3 31 22 <2 0 T 1 1 3
139 1 4 ? ")
7 6 3 10 2 1 1 1 1 43
•>
2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 3
1 •)
5 0 1 9 0 1 3 0 14 1 3
1 3 3 6 0 4 1 0 7 /, 1 7 7 23
23 22 3 1 0 <5 4 0 n 1 3 1 3
28 0 2 3 4 3 n 2 9 7 1 0
3 0 3 1 n 3 3 3 0 1? 1 1 1
1 0 3 79 0 1 55 1 1 4 1 1 0
100 0 3 1 3 0 49 3 11 1 1 1 3
4 n 1 1 -n 3 2 0 1 1 1 1 S3
2 1 1 2 n 3 2 3 0 2 0 110
153 S3 3 1 1 0 1 0 6 n 1 540
1 70 3 5 n 7 7 1
*>
31 1 /,
"J
13 3 3 1 0 24 0 7 L,
1 i3
•> .',
3 1 3 1 21 0 0 1 0 2 174
32 1 3 3 0 1 99 2 4 T 1 40
3 38 3 4 0 0 1 0 3 2 1 140
2 0 3 105 n 3 41 3 3 37 1 110
* 0 3 2 3 1 76 0 3 1 3 ?
1 0 3 151 0 11 29 3 5 2 1 3
22 7 3 200 n 1 1 0 7 12 3 3
8 2 3 22 0 0 1 0 34 5 1 3
5 0 3 3 n 0 1 1 39 1 3 5
89 n 3 1 1 3 6 5 1 112 1 1 1
5 0 3 1 5 0 2 2 3 55 1 0 7
4 3 3 7 3 3 4 i 33
1 0 3 5 0 2 1 3 32
1 1 6 7 7
3 34
51 3 4 1 3 4 3
1 3 P 1 3 165
9 0 4 -\ 2 °.
2
4 2 4 1 1 30
T 1 5 T 3 53
33 n 6 51 1 91
1 3 3 2 2 3 1'4
•i
23 7
2 n 4
61 0 5
39 0 S
1 3 3 4
1 0 J
1 n 5
26 0 20
1 5^ 1 79

212
TABLE A.12 (continued)

Systems

5 6 -7 -i

D - E - * r> _ c - R 0 - E - R *) - r - *

7 0 3 T3 1 1 1 3 0 7 3 0
41 0 3 133 0 4 2 3 0 •>"" 3 3
1 6 3 51 0 3 1 3 1 A 3 2
21 0 3 43 p 1 3 0 0 1 ?. 3 ?
63 0 3 34 3 2 1 0 0 ? 3 5
4 0 3 ?•> 0 7 1 3 3 5 1 30
R 0 3 0 360 1 3 1 ' 0 2
174 0 3 18 0 50 7 3 0 2 3 4
1 0 3 25 1 10 43 0, 0 •> 3 1
10 0 3 1 0 10 2 0 n 1 1 2
2 0 1 •3 40 8 3 0 •. 3 1
25 0 3 45 3 13 1 34 0 ? 3 1
14 0 3 34 0 10 49 ?03 5 7 3 1
98 0 3 21 0 13 32 45 7 4 0 0
2" 0 3 57 0 13 2 2 1 12 3 1
6 0 3 3 0 10 1 25 3 149 0 2
5 0 3 1 0 30 15 1 1 ? 3 6
3 0 7 1 4 0 23 1 5 0 T 3 7
1 0 3 5 0 73 16 33 1 1 3 1 1
1 0 1 7 0 130 1 3 0 2 3 73
1 0 3 1 3 60 1 n 0
7 0 3 6 0 70 150 200 230
6 0 3 1 0 40 R 0 n
1 0 3 13 0 10 1 1
2 200 5 4 1 2 23 2 •>0
14 45 7 2 0 123 1 0
1 26 783 <? 0 1SO 4 31 n
1 1 3 T 0 AO 2 3
•>
1 1 1 0 0 17 127 6
50 5 3 1 3 0
8 177 23 5 0 0
1 200 233 14 112 0
8 2 3 44 0 n
6 9 3 136 ? n
1 0 2 10 8 10
2 0 3 20 61 0
21 81 0 40 34
3 2 4 61 2 2
125 0 3 3 0 0
1 112 0 8 0 o
18 0 3 1 0 0
9 0 3 3 0 0
4 0 3
2 0 3
1 4 3
1 0 3
6 0 0

213
TABLE A.12 (continued)

1985 MFTC WEEKLY AVERAGES AND 'lAXIIinS FOR THF n I S r 11 ii'.l T 10 \ SYSTEM
Distribution Systems: 1) Cheshire Jells/ 2) Gaillar.1/
3) Ga i I lard-We s t River/ 4) GaiI I ard-Whitney S) r> a i I I * rd-'Jh i t ney- We I I s /
6) Sa I tons ta I I » 7) Sleeping Giant-it. Carmel Wells/ !5 > Jest River
Weekly Averages ( -1.C indicates no tiati )
week 1 3 3 4 5 6 7 S
1 -1.0
-1.0
-1.0
-1.0
-1.0
-1.0
-1.0
-1 .0
-1.0
-1.0
-1.0
-1.0
-1.0
-1.0
-1.0
-1.1
2 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0
3 -1 .0 -1 .0
4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0. 1
»'0 n.o
7
9 olo85
0.1
3.8
0.0
0.1
4.6
0.0
0.3
0.0
n.o
3.3
1.5
5.0
0.0
3. 1
0.0
0.1
0. 1
0.0
1.?
n.o
10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.3 0.0 0.0 0.0
11 0.0 3.8 1. 5 0.0 2.7 9.2 0.1 0.0
12 0.0 3.3
0.2
11.8
n.o
0.0 9.4 .3.4
0.0
0.0 11.?
13 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.3 2.7
14 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 o.o 0.0 0.0 0.0
15 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
16 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0
17 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
18 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
19 0.0 0.0 0.0 n.o 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
20 0.0 0. 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0. 1 0.0 0.4
21 0.0 0.0
0.0
0.0 0.0 0.3 n.o 0.1 0.0
22 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0
23 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 n.5 0.0 0.6 1 .0
24 2.3 2.6 0.0 0.2 0.6 0.0 3.4 0.0
25 4.1 0.3 0.2 0.3 1.2 0.1 6.5 0.0
26 1.4 4.0 0.2 0.6 n.2 3.2 1. 2 0.3
27 7.7 3.9 0. 1 1.3 6.2 0.3 2.4 0.7
28 8.7 11.2 3.7 2.3 0.1 4.6 14.9 0.2
29 0.6 1.0 0.4 0.2 1.0 1.2 2.6 3.0
30 15.0 0.2 0. 8 0.5 0.1 3.7 0.1 2.8
31 2.9 2.0 4.3 12.9 1.9 1 .4 0.6 o.n
0.0 1.9 0.0 2.0 3.3 0.8 1. 1 26.3
11 0.0 0.0 1. 5 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0
34 2.9 0.7 2.6 1.0 1.3 0. 1 11.2 1.5
35
36
0.8
7.8
5-2
3.4
0.0
1.2
0.0
0.1
0..3
0.5
0.0
1 .0
0.6
4. 3
0.0
o.s
37 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.6 0.0 0.0
38 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 3.4 n.o
39 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0. 0 0.0 0.0
t?
0.4
0.4
1.1
0.0
0.0 0.1
1 .6
0.1
0.0
0. 2
0.0
o.s
o.n
0.0
0.0
0.0
42 0.0 6.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0. 1 o.n 0. 1
43
44
0.2 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.0 0.0 o.n 0.1
0. 1
0.0 0.0 0. 1 2.3 0.4 0.0 0.2
45
46
0.0
-1.0 0.0
-1.0
0.0
-1.0 0.0
-1.0
0.0
-1.0 0.0
-1.0 0. 0
-1.0 i.i
-1.0
47 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1 .0 -1.0 -1.1
48 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1 .0 -1.0 -1.0
49 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1 .0 -1 .0 -1.0
50 -1.0 -1.0 -1 .0 -1.0 -1.0 -1 .0 -1.0 -1.0
51 -1.0 -1.0 -1 .0 -1 .0 -1.0 -1 .0 -1.0 -1 .)
52 -1.0 -1.0 -1 .0 -1 .0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0

214
TABLE A.12 (continued)

Weekly Maxiiiums
week 1
1 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 3
2 0 0 3 ^ 3 0 3 3
3 0 0 i 3 3 0 3 3
4 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 3
5 3 0 0 0 3 0 3 3
6 0 0 3 3 3 3 0 3
7 0 2 2 16 41 3 1 3
6 98 S 7 3 93
~>
7
•j P 1
9 0 0 r} 3 63 3 3 3
10 0 0 0 1 74 0 3 3
11 n 76 4 ^ 0 25 133 1 3
12 0 31 11 7 0 9S 34 3"^ ',7
13 0 6 3 3 6 0 16
14 0 1 0 3 0 0 3
15 0 0 3 3 T 0 n 3
16 0 9 1 3 3 3 0 12
17 0 0 0 0 3 3 n 3
18 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 3
19 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 3
20 0 2 0 3 3 2 3 -i
21 0 5 0 3 1*7 0 1
22 1 1 0 0 3 1 3
1 0 0 1 7 3 7 5
11 13 79 1 3 6 3 43 3
25 32 5 4 7
14 7 49 3
26 7 121 3 9 1 25 1 5 2
27 28 105 3 14 50 1 16 7
28
29
100
4
230 55 19 1 45 1 53 i
15 7 2 J^ 21 23
30 153 5 24 13 1 57 1 1 2
31 32 51 99 174 21 1 4 4 3
0 .33 3 37 1 25 6 1 7 *3
11 0 0 41 ? 3 3 5
34 22 23 76 12 1 3 1 136
35 8 0 0 3 7 0 10 3
36 89 61 29 1 4 1 3 40 3
37 0 10 n 0 p 3 0 3
38 0 1 3 1 i 0 61 3
39 0 0 3 4 3 0 0 3
40 5 26 0 1 1 3 S 3
41 4 0 1 22 n 0
i
0 3
42 0 157 1 7 3 3 3
43 1 0 5
"? 9 3 3 3 3
44 0 0 50 ^ 3 3 3
45 0 0 0 3 T 3 3 'i
46 0 0 3 3 3 3 3
47 0 0 3 3 3 .3 3 3
48 0 0 0 3 0 3 3 3
49 0 0 0 3 3 0 3 3
50 0 0 3 3 3 0 0 3
51 0 0 0 3 3 3
52 0 0 0 3 3 3
">3 3
^

215
TABLE A.12 (continued)

1935 MFTC WEEKLY AVE R AGE S <\MD i \ x t :i u ••1 S f 1 X THE TT C A T E D E F F L ' ! E Kl T


Treated E f f 1 uent S t a t ion s: 1) M. Cheshire W Ml Fie I \, 11 '1 t . C ,1 r m e I
Well F i el d s 3 ) 'J . S 1 e eoi n I 'i \ antW e I 1 F i r. I ,-j , I. ) S . 3 I <?•: o i n •; ", i ,1 n t Welt
Fields 5) S. Ch e s hire We ii Fi e Ms 6) West R i v e r s i7 ) G a i U .1 r j.
8) Salt on stalls 9 ) W h i t n ey

We ek I y Av e r a qe s ( -1 .C i n 'j i c i t e s no data )
~>
w eek 1 ? 3 A 5 0 7 1
1 -1.0 -1.0 -1.3 -1.3 -1 .3 -1 .3 -1 .n -1.3 -1 .n
-1.0 -1.0 -1.3 -1.3 -1.3 -1.3 -1.0 -1.3 -1.0
§ -1.0 -1.0 -1 .3 -1.0 -1.3 -1 . 3 -1.3 -1.3 -1.0
tt 0.0 -1 .0 3. 3 3.0 -1.3
-1.3
3.0 3.3 3. 3 n.n
5 0.0 -1 .0 3.0 3.3 3. 3 3. 0 0.3 3.0
6 0.0 -1 .0 3. 3 3.3 -1.0 0.3 o.n 3.3 n.o
7 0.0 -1 .0 3.3 3.3 -1.0
-1.3
3.0 n. n 0.3 3.0
8 0.0 -1 .0 3 3 3.4 3.0 3.7 0.3 3.9
9 0.0 -1.0 0*. 3 3.3 -1.3 3.3 3.0 3.3 3.0
10 0.0 -1 .0 3. 3 3.3 0.0 3. 3 n.n 0.3 0.0
11 0.0 -1.0 0.3 0.0 3.0 3.3 0.0 0.3 n.o
12 0.0 -1.0 3.3 0.3 -1 .0 3.0 n.n 0.3 3.7
13 0.0 -1.0 0.3 3.3 -1.3
-1.3
3. 3 n.n 3.3 n.n
14 0.0 -1.0 3.0 0.3 0.3 n.n 0.3 n.o
15 0.0 -1 .0 -3.3 3.0 -1.3 3.0 n.n 0.3 n.n
16 5.0 -1.0 0. 3 3.3 3.3 n.o 3.3 0.3 n.n
17 0.3 -1 .0 3.3 0.3 3.3 3. 3 3.3 3.3 3.0
18 0.0 -1.0 3.0 3.3 0.0 3.3 o.n 3.3 n.o
19 0.0 -1 .0 0.0 3.0 0.3 3.3 n.o 0.3 n.n
20 0.0 -1.0 3.0 3.0 3.3 3.3 3.3 0.3 n.n
21 n.o -1 .0 3.3 3.3 0.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 n.n
22 0.0 -1.0 3.0 3.4 0.3 3.3 0.0 0.3 n.o
23 0.1 -1 .0
-1.0
3. 3 0.3 0.5 3.3 o.n 0.3 n.n
24 2.6 1 . 3 4.9 10.7 3. 1 0.3 3.3 -, 1 •'
25 4.0 -1 .0 9.3 38.3 13.3 3.5 3.2 3.1
26 23.4 -1 .0 3.3 4.1 -1 .3 11.4 0.0 3.3 3^7
27 3.6 -1 .0 1 . 3 5.3 0.3 3.0 n.n n.o 75.3
28 0.0 0.0 19. 6 40.2 0.3 3.3 n.n n.n n.3
29 0.1 0.3 1-> . -i4 3.3 0.3 3.3 3.3 n.n 3.1
30 22.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 n.n n. i 3.0
31 7.1 12.6 V. n 1 .5 5.2 3.3 3.? 0.3 0.0
32 3.1 0.0 1?. 1 0.3 3.2 3.3 3.3 n' 0 3.1
33 0.3 0.0 3. 1 0.3 4.6 n.o 3.3 3.3
34 2.9 0.1 1.6 16.3 0.0 3.3 o.n nin -1.0
35 1.3 0.0 1. 1 o.n o.n n. 1 n.n 0.1 -1.0
36 1 .4 2.4 3. 1 13.6 0.0 3.1 o.n 3. 3 -1 .0
o.n n.n -1.0
37
38
39
0.0
0.0
n.n
2:8
0.0
3. 1
3. 3
3.3
3.3
0.7
3.3
0.3
3.3
3.3
3.3
3.0
n.o
3.3
3.3
n.n
3.3
-1 .n
.-1.0
40 0.0 -1.0 3.3 3.3 0.3 3.3 n.n 0.3 -1 .°
-i.n
41 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.3 -1.3 3. 3 n.n 0.3
-i.n
42 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.3 3.3 3. 1 3.3
43 0.0 0.0 3. 0 1.S 3.0 3.3 0.1 3.3 -1 .0
44 0.0 0.0 3. 3 3.3 0.0 3.3 3.1 n. 3 -1.0
45 0.0
-1.0
0.0
-1.0
3.3
-1.3
3.3 0.3
-1.3
3.3
-1.0
3.0
-1.3
3.3 -1 .n
-i.n
46 -1.3 -1.3
47 -1.0 -1.0 -1.3 -1.0 -1.3 -1 .3 -1.3 -1.3 -1 .3
48 -1.0
-1.0
-1.0 -1.0
-1.3
-1 . n -1.3 -1 .3
-1.0
-l.n ~ 1 ^ -i .n
49 -1 .0 -1.0 -1 . 3 -1.3 -1 .' 1 -1.3
50 -1.0 -1.0 -1 .3 -1.3 -1.3 -1 .3 -1.3 -1.3 -1 .3
51 -1.0 -1.0 -1 .0 -1 .0 -1.3 -1 .0 -i.n -1.0 -1 .n
52 -1.0 -1.0 -1.3 -1.3 -1.3 -1 .0 —1 n -1.3 -1.0

216
TABLE A.12 fcontinued^

Weekly la x i mums
week 1 2
0 3 3 0 3 0 3 3 Q
2 0 0 3 n 3 0 Q 3 ri
3 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 0
4 0 0 .3 3 3 3 0 3 n
5 0 0 0 r\ 3 0 3 3 3
6 0 0 3 0 3 3 3 ")1 0
7 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0
8 0 0 53 3 0 0 6 1 27
9 0 0 0 0 3 n 3 3 0
n
10 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3
11 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 0
12 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 5
13 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0
14 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0
15 0 0 0 0 0 0 n 0
16 35 0 3 3 3 Q 3 3 n
17 0 0 0 0 3 ^ •3 3 3
18 0 0 3 0 3 b 3~j 0
19 0 0 3 3 3 0 0 0
23 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 0
21
22
23
0
0
1
0
0
0
3
3
0
3
0
0
0
?
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
0
0
0
24 18 0 S 34 32 1 3 3 13
25 21 0 45 230 54 p 1 1
26 139 0 1 25 0~> 3d 0 1 26
27 22 0 5 30 n 0 3•) 1 77
28 0 0 137 230 0 0 0 2
29 1 1 9 2 0 3 0 3 1
30 83 0 9 0 3 3 3 3 0
31 38 81 14 6 12 0 2 3 0
32 21 0 127 0 1 0 0 3 1
33 2 0 1 3 31 0 0 0 C
34 1 9 112 3 0 3 0 0
35 7 0 ^ 0 n 1 n 1 0
36 8 13 1 61 n
•3
1 6 1 n
37 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 0
38
39 g
0
33
0
3
3
3
0 3
3
•33
3
3
3
3
0
0
40 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 0
41 0 0 0 0 0 0 •3 0 C
42 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 C
43 0 0 3 9 3 3 1 3 n
44 0 0 0 0 3 3 1 3 6
45 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 T 0
•) 3
46 0 0 0 3 3 3 0
47 0 0 0 3 3 3 0 1 n
48 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 0
49 0 0 0 ^ 0 0 0 0
50 0 0 d 0 0 0 0 3 0
51 0 0 n 0 0-) 0 n 0 0
52 0 0 3 1 n n n 0

217
TABLE A.12 (continued)

1985 MFTC WEEKLY AVERAGES AMD MAXI'-IUIS FOR THE IM U INFLUENT


Raw Influent Stations: 1) N. Cheshire Well Fiell* 21 Mt . C-irmel
Well Field* 3) N. Sleeping Giant Well Fiel'i, /. ) S . SleepinT Giaant Well
Field/ 5) S. Cheshire Well Field/ 6) W»st Sivpr/ 7) Gaillar)/
8) Saltonstall/ 9 ) Vhitney
Weekly Averages ( -1.C indicates no data )
Week
1 -1.0 -1.0 -1 .0 -1 .3 -1 .3 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0
2 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.3 -1 . 0 -1.0 -1.3 -1.0
3 -1.0 -1 .0 -1 .0 -1.3 -1. 1 -1.3 -1.0 -1.3 -1.0
it 0.0 -1 .0 3.3 3.3 -1.3 3.8 ?.8 2.6 4.0
5 0.0 -1 .0 3. 3 3,3 -1.3 3.7 1.4 1.6 2.3
0.0 -1.0 3. 3 3.3 -1.3 1.6 1 .1 3.7 1.9
f 0.0 -1 .0 3.3 3.3 -1.3 1.1 3.9 3.7 IS?. 3
8 0.1 -1.0 3.3 0.3 -1 .3 3.6 1 .4 3.4 39.0
9 0.0 -1.0 3.0 0.3 -1.3 1 .1 1 9.1 1.4 1 1 .0
10 0.0 -1.0 •3.3 0.3 0.3 3.7 26.3 1.4 13.3
11 0.0 -1.0 3.0 3.3 0.3 1 . 1 1 7.4 1.9 43.0
12 0.0 -1.0 3.0 0.0 -1 . 3 7.1 16.4 1.4 7.1
13 0.0 -1.0 0.0 0.3 -1.0 3.7 20.9 2.3 2.6
14 0.0 -1 .0 3.3 0.3 -1.3 1.7 7.0 2.6 3.0
15 0.0 -1.0 3.0 3.3 -1.3 3.9 6.9 0.6 1.7
16 0.0 -1.0 3.0 3.3 3.3 2.7 3.2 0.9 4.3
17 0.0 -1.0 3,0 3.3 0.3 1.3 2.2 3.7 5.9
18 0.0 -1.0 o n 0.3 3.3 27.3 9.0 2.4 9S.4
19 0.0 -1.0 3!6 3.3 3.0 3.7 4.7 3.1 9.9
20 0.0 -1.0 3.0 0.0 0.3 3.7 4.8 6.6 9.9
21 0.0 -1.0 3.2 0.3 0.3 1.3 5.5 13.3 7.3
22 0.0 -1.0 D.O 0.6 0.3 1 .7 2.0 59.6 23.7
23 0.0 0.0 3. 1 3.1 3.3 6. 1 1 .7 173.9 S.3
24 4.3 -1.0 3.1 3.3 0.3 21.3 3.7 22.9 7.4
25 0.0 -1 .0 1.6 3.3 0.4 3.7 1 .9 77.1 12.9
!>
28
17.6
0.2
1.5
-1.0
n.o
-1 .0
1 . 9
3.0
0.3
1.6
3.3
0.3
15.9
2.0
1.2
1 . 3
24.3
1 7.1
124.3
14.3
29 0.1 0.0
3.1
3.1
43.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 1 n.o 17.9
0.3 0.3 3.4 1 . 5 15.7 98.6
30 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.3 2.3 4.1 2.7 188.6 134.3
31 0.1 0.0 1.4 2.3 1.2 42.0 2.3 6R.5 32.9
32 8.7 0.0 0.4 0.3 0.0 3.3 4.4 55.7 65.7
33 0.1
0.0
0.0 3.0 3.3 n.o 1 .6 1 .6 25.7 153.0
0.0 3.2 3.3 3.3 21 .1 7.6 12.7 S2.9
ft 0.2 0.0 3.3 3.3 0.3 18. 7 3.2 111.6 •S3. 4
36 0.0 0.1 3.1 3.3 0. 3 2.3 4.4 3.7 9.3

;s
37 0.0 0.0 3.1 3.3 0.3 74.4 3.7 52.? 33.0
8:8 0.0
0.0
0.3
3.3
7.7
3.3
0.3
3.3
16.3
55.3
6. 1
23.4
S.6
31. 7
67.1
93.0
40
41
0.0
0.0
-1.0 3.3 3.0 n. i
-1.3
155.7 24.1 65.7 37.1
0.0 3.0 3.3 51 .4 46.3 30.3 11.4
42 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.3 17.1 35.1 8.6 .71.4
43
44
0.2 3.0 3.3 0.3 3.3 11.4 43.3 ?5.7 73.6
0,0 0.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 75.7 64.3 24.3 77.1
45 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.5 3.3 102. 3 91,3 93.3 '73.0
46 -1.0 -1.0 -1,0 -1 .0 -1 .n -1.3 -1.3 -1.0
47 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1 .3
-1.0 -1.3 -1.3 -1.3 -1.3 -1.0
48 -1.0 -1.0 -1.3 -1 .0 -1.3 -1.3
-1.0 -1.0 -1 .3 -1 .0 -1 .0
49 -1,3 -1 .3 -1 .3 -1 .3 -1.3 -1.3
50 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.3 -1.3
-1 .0
-1 .3 -1.3 -1.3 -1 .0
51 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.3 -1.0 -i.n
-1.0 -1.0 -1 .3 -1 .0
52 -1.3 -1 .3 -1 .3 -1 .3 -1 .3 -1.1 -1.3

218
TABIE A.12 (continued)

Weekly

1 0 0 0 0 i 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 T 0
2 n
3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0•;
<S
4 n 0 0 0
1
1
0
4
3
4
3 ^ H
5 0 0 0
n 4
6 n 0 0 0
0
7
4
4
?.
3
7 341
7 0 0 0 0

8 1 0 2 0 0 2 5 1 71
9 0 0 0 0 0 4 51 5 54
10 0 0 0 0 0 3 S7 3 57
11 0 0 0 0 0 3 24 4 98
12 0 0 0 0 0 43 51 ^ 26
13 n 0 0 0 0 •?2 104 7 6
14 n 0 0 0 0 17 S R
15 n 0 0 0 0 2 16 2 4
16 0 0 0 n 0 3 8 •?3 16
17 0 0 0 0 0 3 6 20
18 0 0° 0 64 27 6 204
19 0 2? 0 0 13 10 10 28
20 0 0 o 0•) n 9 3 9 22
21 0 0 1 T > '2 \2 17
22 0 0 0 i 3 4 4 214 38
23 0 0 1 1 a 30 3 30T 20
24 39 0 1 0
«, 0•> 69 3 70 20
25 0 0 o 16 10 360 30
148 75 1 0 30 3 50 780
?1
26 0
27 3 0 11 0 5 5 40 20
28 16 0 203 2 2 1 1 10 30
29 1 0 0 0 1 6 40 300
30 0 2 3 2 9 12 8 950 540
12 119
0
0
23
6
14
0
6
0
142
7 13
6 130
110
no
170
140
33 1 0 •)1 0 0 5 3
7
900
34 0 0 0 0 30 40 330
35 2 0 10 0 0 40 10 610 190
36 0 1 2 0 0 10 3 10 30
37 0 0 1 0 0 350 7 130 50
38 0 0 0 48 0 4.? 1 4 10 260
39 0 0 0 0 0 120 33 70 ?00
40 0 0 0 0 T 540 52 200 210
41 0 0 0 0 a no 165 TO 20
42 0 0 0 0 0 30 68 20 40
43 3 0 5 a 0 30 11? 70 350
44 0 3 0 3 0 60 124 50 250
45
'.6 0 0 0 1 0 134 112 106 410
0 0 0 0 0
•) 0 0 0 0
47 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
48 0 0 0 0 ->
0 0 0 0 0
49 0 0 0 0 -] 0 0 0 0
50
51
0
0 g0 0
0
0
n 0
0
0
0
0
0
0~\
0
n
52 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 n

219
N. CHESHIRE WELL FIELD RAW INaUENT
MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
1985
150

E
o 100
o
3
H-
o
o 50-

i
0 20 40 60
WEEK

S. CHESHIRE WELL FIELD RAW INFLUENT


MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
1985
10

O
O

M—
5-
U
Legend
O WEEKLY AVERAGE
WEEKLY MAXIMUM

0
0 20 40 60
WEEK

FIGURE A.1-1

220
N. SLEEPING GIANT WELL HELD RAW INFIUENT
MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
1985
30

E
O 20-

3
M—
u

CJ 10 J

0 20 40 60
WEEK

S. SLEEPING GIANT WELL FIELD RAW INFLUENT


MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
1985
200

£
o
o
100-
Legend
o
WEEKLY AVERAGE
WEEKLY MAXIMUM

1A
0 20 40 60
WEEK

FIGURE A.1-2

221
MT. CARMEL WELL FIELD RAW INFLUENT
MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
1985

E
O 2-
o
13
M—
O

O 1-

0 A
0 20 40 60
WEEK

Legend
WEEKLY AVERAGE
WEEKLY MAXIMUM

FIGURE A.1-3

222
WEST RIVER RAW INFLUENT
MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
1985
600-

O 400-
O

^
o 200-

0 20 40 60
WEEK

GAILLARD RAW INFLUENT


MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
1985
200-

<-> 150-

o
o
100-
o
Legend
o
WEEKLY AVERAGE
50-
WEEKLY MAXIMUM

0 20 40 60
WEEK

FIGURE A.1-4

223
SALTONSTALL RAW INFLUENT
MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
1985
1000

o
o
500-
o
O
I—
u.

0 20 40 60
WEEK

WHITNEY RAW INFLUENT


MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
1985

If
o
o
^ 500-

\
o
Legend
F
i

1
0
1—
u.
2
\ fy
WEEKLY AVERAGE

\h WEEKLY MAXIMUM

|U AA)yWH/ _J

0 20 40 60
WEEK
FIGURE A.1-5

224
N. CHESHIRE WELL FIELD TREATED EFFLUENT
MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
BY WEEK, 1985
150

E
o
o

O 50-

0 20 40 60
WEEK

S. CHESHIRE WELL FIELD TREATED EFFLUENT


MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
BY WEEK, 1985

0
O
40- I
M—

Legend
0 20-
WEEKLY AVERAGE
u.

A
WEEKLY MAXIMUM

/
/'
A hi^
l\'

0 20 40 60

WEEK
FIGURE A. 1-6

225
N. SLEEPING GIANT WELL FIELD TREATED EFFLUENT
MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
BY WEEK, 1985
150-

O 100-
O

50-

JI ^v
0 20 40 60
WEEK

S. SLEEPING GIANT WELL HELD TREATED EFFLUENT


MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
BY WEEK, 1985
200

o
o
100-

Legend
WEEKLY AVERAGE
WEEKLY MAXIMUM

0 20 40 60
WEEK
FIGURE A.1-7

226
MT CARMEL WELL HELD TREATED EFFLUENT
MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
BY WEEK, 1985
100

E
o
o
D
^t—
50-
o
O
u_

0 20 40 60
WEEK

Legend
WEEKLY AVERAGE
WEEKLY MAXIMUM

FIGURE A.1-8

227
WEST RIVER TREATED EFFLUENT
MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
BY WEEK, 1985
100-

E
o
o
D 50-
s-
O

CJ

0 20 40 60
WEEK

GAILLARD TREATED EFFLUENT


MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
BY WEEK, 1985

§
O
2- Legend
WEEKLY AVERAGE

r WEEKLY MAXIMUM

0
0 20 40 60
WEEK

FIGURE A.1-9

228
SALTONSTALL TREATED EFFLUENT
MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
BY WEEK, 1985

E
o
o
>0. 6
O

0 20 40 60
WEEK

WHfTNEY TREATED EFFLUENT


MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
BY WEEK, 1985
200

£
o
o
100-
Legend
0
WEEKLY AVERAGE
WEEKLY MAXIMUM

0 20
m 40 60
WEEK
FIGURE A. 1-10

229
CHESHIRE WELLS DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
MFI'C AVf- RAGES AND MAXIMUMS
BY WEEK, 1985
200-

E
o
o
100-
o

O
Lt.
50-

0 20 40 60
WEEK

SLEEPING GIANT-MT CARMEL WELLS DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM


MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
BY WEEK, 1985
150

E
O 100
o
13
*+—
O
Legend
O 50-
WEEKLY AVERAGE
WEEKLY MAXIMUM

oJ
0 20 40 60
WEEK
FIGURE A.1-11

230
GAILLARD DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
BY WEEK, 1985
2CO

O
O

u.

ii Ml
L'-A1= /.y.
0 20 40 60
WEEK

GAILLARD-WEST RIVER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM


MFTC AVERAGES AND IvIAXIMUMS
BY WEEK, 1985

1
O 100-
o
\
O

u SO
i

i
l! 1.
/I Legend
LI- ' 11 / WEEKLY AVERAGE
2
i *' *i M
ii WEEKLY MAXIMUM
IA
A
1 ! l\l
n- J;A J/JJl
0 20 40 60

WEEK
FIGURE A. 1-12

231
GAILLARD-WHITNEY DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
BY WEEK, 1985
200

o
o

o
v._x

O
t—
u. 50-

0 20 40 60
WEEK

GAILLARD-WHITNEY-WELLS DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM


MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
BY WEEK, 1985
200

<=> 150-

O
O

o
o
Legend
I—
b_ 50-
WEEKLY AVERAGE
WEEKLY MAXIMUM

0-
,A^-\
0 20 40 60
WEEK
FIGURE A.1-13

232
SALTONSTALL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM
MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
BY WEEK, 1985
150-

E
O 100-
o

O 50-J
u_
2

0 20 40 60
WEEK

WEST RIVER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM


MFTC AVERAGES AND MAXIMUMS
BY WEEK, 1985

¥
i
O 100-
o

s—
o
1 Legend
O
^_ 50-
DU
WEEKLY AVERAGE
L_
^
WEEKLY MAXIMUM
,' i
\
I
n- ^ i\\ A A -ZV V- V^v -v

0 20 40 60
WEEK

FIGURE A.1-14

233
Cheshire Wells. Cheshire Wells consists entirely of groundwater supplies
and is one of two isolated distribution systems in the New Haven area
(Saltonstall also is isolated). There are two supply well fields (N.
Cheshire and S. Cheshire) at which the water is treated and four
distribution system sampling locations.
Coliform outbreaks occurred predominantly between late May and mid-
September 1985 in the distribution system, in the treated effluent, and in
the raw influent. Out of 35 distribution coliform events, 16 occurred
simultaneously with events in the treated effluent (almost 50%). This
percentage is high relative to the other distribution systems suggesting
that treated effluent water could be a major contributor to coliform
outbreaks. The small values for differences, D - E (17.1%, 8.6%, and 2.9%
(table A.11) suggest that effluent coliforms comprise part of the
distribution system coliform population.
During seven of the distribution coliform events, it appears plausible that
both raw influent and treated effluent contributed to the coliform
population. For illustrative purposes, consider the large maximum peak
occurring in both the effluent and influent at the N. Cheshire Well Field
during week 26 (Figures A. 3-1 and A. 3-5). Our inquiry into the daily data
for N. Cheshire Well Field during week 26 shows that on 6/28/85 the raw
influent density was measured as 148 cfu/lOOmL while that in the treated
effluent was 139 cfu/lOOmL. It is possible that no cells from the raw
influent passed through to the effluent and that the effluent population
was produced during treatment. However, direct transmission of raw
coliforms through the treatment facility might be a factor.
In the Cheshire system, the most fertile coliform source appears to be
distribution system regrowth since 19 of 35 coliform events cannot be
traced to the effluent. However, effluent coliforms often entered the
system contributing to the coliform population in the pipelines. The
correlation coefficient between distribution and effluent is 0.2656.
Although this value is apparently low, 16 out of 35 distribution coliform
events in the distribution system may have been supported by effluent
coliforms, suggesting that effluent water is also an important source.
Generally, the raw influent is clean barring discrete coliform events, as
indicated by a frequency of seven for D>0, E>0&R>0 (table A.11).
However, it is possible that raw coliforms have passed into the
distribution system. The degree of correlation between effluent and
influent is 0.7705. Inspection of the data (table A.12) gives the
impression that this correlation reflects environmental conditions
generally favorable both to coliform growth in raw water and in the
treatment plant. Therefore, "breakthrough" may not have occurred since the
events (viewed on a daily basis) often were not synchronous and since
magnitudes of MFTC counts were not closely related in raw and effluent.
Gaillard. The Gaillard system is apparently isolated. It is fed only by
surface water, which is treated solely at the Gaillard treatment station. A
total of 13 distribution system sampling locations are used for monitoring.

234
Coliform densities as high as 100 cfu/lOOinL occurred several times during
1985. The first coliforms appeared in late February and persisted through
March and most of April (Figure A.1-12). Following several weeks of reduced
coliform activity (4/24/85 and 6/5/85), densities increased to measurable
magnitudes throughout summer and fall. The last episodes of coliform
activity had ended by late October.
A comparison of Gaillard distribution and effluent plots (Figures A.1-12
and A. 1-9) strongly suggests that distribution regrowth is the major
coliform source. This is also indicated by the dearth of coliform events
for which both effluent and distribution were positive (approximately 6% of
the distribution events). Based on percent increases, the percentages of
distribution system coliform events for which distribution MFTC exceeded the
effluent are 63.5% (100% increase), 59.6% (200% increase), and 57.7% (300%
increase). These high percentages suggest distribution system regrowth as
the primary source.
The results also show the effectiveness of coliform reduction at the
Gaillard treatment station. Comparison of the influent and effluent plots
(Figures A.1-4 and A.1-9) shows that while high densities of coliforms
enter the treatment facility, very few of the organisms are leaving and
entering the distribution system (see Table A.12). Comparing effluent and
influent (Table A.11), the data indicate that rarely, if at all, do raw
influent coliforms pass to the treated effluent.
Gaillard - West River. Mixed supplies of surface water feed the Gaillard -
West River system. Both the Gaillard and West River facilities are used to
treat these supplies. The distribution system monitoring program includes
ten sampling locations.
The Gaillard - West River system in 1985 was plagued by coliform outbreaks
during late February and March and then throughout the summer to early fall
(6/5/85 - 9/25/85). This pattern was sijnilar to that at Gaillard.
In the Gaillard - West River system, distribution system regrowth also
appears to be the most important coliform source, as both the Gaillard and
West River treatment facilities are generally effective at reducing
coliform numbers, while the distribution system persistently suffers from
high coliform densities (Figures A.1-9 and A.1-12). Table A.11 shows that
out of 34 coliform outbreaks, only four may have been augmented by effluent
coliforms and four by both effluent and influent (D>0=34, D>0&E>0
=4, D>0, E>0&R>0=4). During 42.4% of the coliform outbreaks,
distribution MFTC exceeded that of effluent by greater than 100%. The
significance of this finding is influenced by the potential error during
sampling and counting (small numerators and denominators, such as 3/2 etc.;
see Table A.12).
Except for a few isolated coliform outbreaks, both treatment stations
appear to reduce the coliform densities significantly from those entering
in the raw influent (Figures A.1-4 and A.1-9).

235
Gaillard - Whitney. Gaillard - Whitney water supplies come from surface
water treated at either the Gaillard treatment station or the Whitney
filtration station. In the distribution system, there are six monitoring
locations.
Episodes of high coliform counts in the distribution system were not
frequent but occurred throughout most of 1985. Despite a small coliform
event in late February, the bulk of measurable densities were found between
June and September. Other small events took place until early November
(Figure A.1-13).
The number of coliform outbreaks in distribution coliform were large as
compared to those occurrences in which both distribution and effluent
coliforms were positive (43/8 (Table A.11). Thus, like Gaillard and
Gaillard - West River, this system was subject to coliform regrowth within
the distribution system. The combination of low percentages for
differences, D - E (9.3%, 4.7%, 2.3%), and sizeable percentages for percent
increases, D over E (44.5%, 39.5%, 34.9%), indicates that the distribution
coliform events were often small (Table A.11). Note that since the effluent
is commonly zero, only a distribution density of 2 cfu/lOOmL is often
required to exceed the effluent by 100%.
Inspection of both Tables A.11 and A.12 leads to the conclusion that raw
coliforms generally did not bypass the treatment process to reach the
effluent and that effluent coliforms contributed very little to the
distribution population. However, there were instances where the effluent
coliform density was far greater than that in the influent (E - R of 4.7%
and E over R of 4.7%) indicating that growth of the organisms may have
occurred during treatment at these times.
Gaillard - Whitney - Wells. Surface water and groundwater passes through
five treatment stations to feed this system, which has five distribution
sampling locations. Surface supplies are routed through the Gaillard and
Whitney treatment stations, whereas groundwater is treated at each of three
well fields—N. Sleeping Giant, S. Sleeping Giant, and Mt. Carmel. This
system has more components than all others and is therefore the most
difficult to analyze with much certainty.
The most dense coliform populations in the distribution system were present
between 2/13/85 and 3/27/85 when MFTC weekly maxima peaked at 174
cfu/lOOmL. As in other systems, coliform activity subsided (4/3/85 through
5/22/85) and then revived, lasting through summer into fall (Figure A.l-
13).
Due to the higher number of effluents feeding this system, it is ambiguous
as to which coliform source is most important. Both the Gaillard and
Whitney treatment stations successfully reduced coliform densities which
obviates their contribution to distribution cells (Figure A. 1-9). The
groundwater treatment stations were not as effective and released coliforms
into the distribution system during many of the outbreaks (Figures A. 1-7 and
A.1-8). Caution is necessary in interpretation here since it is not clear
if the groundwater supply was used heavily in this system. If, during
outbreaks, the groundwater demand was high, effluent could have been a

236
coliform source. For this system, under our present understanding of its
configuration, we see that approximately 33% of the distribution coliform
events may have been in part developed from effluent and influent coliforms
(D>0=47, D>0&E>0=15, D>0, E>0&R>0=15 (table A.11).
This leaves approximately 66% of the coliform outbreaks which are most
likely explained as phenomena of distribution system regrowth.
That distribution system regrowth possibly accounts for the majority of
coliform outbreaks in this system is also shown in the frequency analysis.
In terms of percent increases, distribution over effluent is high, giving
percentages of 51.1, 49.0, and 42.6 for 100, 200, and 300 percent increases
respectively. Again, the implications these percents depends on how
comfortable we feel with the assumptions. Note that, in terms of
differences, our indications of distribution regrowth are not as strong.
Here we compute percentages of 17.0, 8.5, and 4.3 for 25, 50, and 100
cfu/lOOmL signed differences respectively. This latter analysis is more in
support of the explanation that effluent coliforms are most important
in the distribution system. The possible origin of the effluent coliforms
is discussed below in the section on Sleeping Giant - Mt Carmel Wells.
Saltonstall. The Saltonstall system, like the Cheshire Wells system, is
isolated from all other systems, and has one treatment station only. The
water supply is entirely from Lake Saltonstall. In the distribution
system, six sampling stations are used for monitoring.
Coliforms seem to be under control in this system as compared to others.
Although several outbreaks in the distribution system occurred in 1985,
there are fewer than in other systems (compare D > 0 in Table A.11).
Interestingly, Saltonstall also experienced coliform activity in February
and March which was followed by a period of no coliforms through spring
picking up again during the summer and fall (figure A.1-14).
Distribution coliform activity in this system is probably due to regrowth.
Inspection of the effluent concentrations shows that there were only three
times when the coliform density was measurable, compared to 29 in the
distribution system (Table A.11 and Figures A.1-10 and A.1-14).
Furthermore, effluent densities did not rise above 1 cfu/lOOmL, while
distribution's exceeded 50 cfu/lOOmL during five events (Table A.12).
It is not likely that raw influent coliforms could have contributed to the
distribution population. Comparison of the trajectory plots for the
effluent and influent shows high densities for the influent while the
effluent densities are either 0 or 1 cfu/lOOmL (figures A.1-5 and A.1-10).
It is more frequent that the distribution and influent have high
densities. This combination may indicate that there are situations when
coliform growth is favorable, however, the population is eliminated at
the treatment station and then regrows in the distribution system.
Sleeping Giant - Mt. Carmel Wells. Three groundwater sources (N. Sleeping
Giant, S. Sleeping Giant, and Mt. Carmel) supply this system. Each well
field is equipped with on-site treatment facilities. The distribution
system is monitored with six sanpling locations. Water from this system is
apparently able to pass into the Gaillard - Whitney - Wells system and vice

237
versa. We assume that mixing is negligible based on our consultation with
SCCRWA regarding system configurations (Table A. 8).
Marginal coliform events first appeared in late February and March
in the distribution system during 1985 (Figure A. 1-11). After several weeks
during which coliforms were absent from the distribution system, these
events became more frequent and larger in magnitude (5/22/85 through
10/9/85). As in other systems, the events continued into October.
More than 52% of the distribution coliform outbreaks were also
detected in the effluent (D > 0 = 42, D > 0 & E > 0 = 22, table A.11), and
30% in both the effluent and influent (D > 0, E > 0 & R > 0 = 13).
Comparison of the trajectory plots for the distribution system and the
Sleeping Giant well fields (Figures A.1-2, A. 1-7, and A.1-11) shows a large
overlap in coliform densities through time (Mt. Carmel wells was not
sampled frequently enough to carry much weight in our results (see Table
A.16).
The results for differences, E - R, and percent increases, E over R,
indicate that effluent MFTC was often larger than influent MFTC (table
A.11). It is plausible that raw coliforms escaped treatment and
contributed to the effluent population during 13 of the 42 distribution
events.
The importance of distribution regrowth and infiltration of effluent
coliforms is about equal (48% and 52% respectively). That live coliforms in
the influent pass safely into the effluent also appears to be a highly
significant source. Overall, this system's ineffectual treatment may be
responsible for about one half of the 1985 coliform events.
West River. West River is a surface-supplied system monitored at two
distribution system sampling locations. All water is treated at the West
River treatment facility.
Measurable coliform densities in the distribution system are not closely
spaced in time during 1985, although outbreaks occurred during February and
March, and then throughout the summer as in other systems (figure A.1-14).
Despite one MFTC count of 149 cfu/lOOmL, most are less than 15 cfu/lOOmL.
Out of 20 coliform outbreaks in the distribution system, only one was
detected simultaneously in both effluent and influent (table A. 11). The
poor overlap of the distribution and effluent trajectory plots (figures
A.1-9 and A.1-14) indicates that very few events in the distribution system
are driven by those in the effluent on a day-by-day basis. This leads to
the conclusion that distribution regrowth is predominant in this system.
The comparison of influent to effluent shows the capability of the
treatment station to reduce coliform concentrations (figure A.1-4 and A.l-
9, table A.11). While the influent often contains large numbers of
coliforms the effluent maintains zero counts with the exception of one
episode.

238
A.4.3 Scatter Plots and Contingency Tables of Grouped Data
In addition to a system-by-system investigation, as was done above, we
checked the MFTC data for patterns between distribution, effluent, and
influent without partitioning it according to system. First we inquired at
the daily level, and then at the weekly level. Scatter plots were used for
this part of the analysis. As a means of determining significance for any
patterns or lack thereof in the plots, we also analyzed three 2x2
contingency tables.
A.4.4 MFTC Scatter Plots
Nine scatter plots were constructed from distribution, effluent, and
influent MFTC data without distinguishing systems from one another (figures
A.2-1 through A.2-9). Figures A.2-1 through A.2-3 are of daily averages:
figures A.2-4 through A.2-6 are of daily maxima, and those remaining are of
weekly averages.
The first six plots suggest it is equally likely for the ordinate to be
zero when the abscissa is positive and vice versa. Therefore, we conclude
there is only a weak pattern between the variables. A hyperbola would
probably provide the best fit for these data as it is closest to the 'L 1
shape. Note that there are very few points which lie away from the
dominant 'L' shape in a direction consistent with simultaneous MFTC
excursions in distribution, effluent, and influent.
Plots in Figures A.2-7 through A.2-9 are similar to previous plots except
weekly averages are plotted in place of the daily data. Here we have
removed the strong 'L 1 shape by smoothing the data into weekly averages.
The large numbers of points away from the axes are more consistent with
models suggesting that there are events during which distribution is driven
by effluent (Figure A.2-7), and by influent (Figure A.2-8), and during which
effluent is driven by influent (Figure A.2-9). The lines plotted on each
figure were computed by least squares simple regression, the results of
which are given in Table A.14 and discussed below.

239
A. 14

Simple Linear Regression Using MFTC Weekly Averages

D = Distribution, E = Effluent, R = Influent


Regression Equation R-squared F Value Prob > F
D = 0.69 + 0.17*E 0.115 5.15 0.0290
D = 1.00 + 0.01*R 0.003 0.117 0.7345
E = 0.61 + 0.04*R 0.030 1.214 0.2772

The regression of distribution on effluent has a statistically


significant positive slope and intercept, whereas the others can not be
distinguished from zero (although they do in fact have positive slopes and
intercepts). The poor fit of a linear regression to the data indicates
that coliform outbreaks are more complicated than simple regression is able
to resolve, but the regression of distribution on effluent does account for
17.8% of the variance in distribution MFTC.
The resolution of a linear pattern was brought about by averaging
over one week intervals. The pattern was absent in the daily averages. We
suspect the pattern was concealed in the daily data due mostly to a large
amount of random noise, though, time lags may also have played a role. The
random noise is predominantly a product of coliform growth (distribution
regrowth, effluent growth, and influent growth), and sampling and counting
error. It is obvious, from a lack of more detailed pattern in the scatter
plots, that nonlinear modeling would not be a noticeable improvement.
A.4.5 Contingency Table Analyses
The simultaneity of MFTC positives was tested among distribution, effluent,
and influent in pairs. If it can be shown that there is a joint
relationship between pairs of variables, then our linear patterns discussed
above are further supported. The contingency tables are given in table A. 15.

240
MFTC DAILY MEANS cfu/100ml
DISTRIBUTION VERSUS EFFLUENT

30

60

50

30

• *

* *

« * • *

10 * * *

* * * *

* *

. f.-.*__.^ *...._-. )-__..-.--.-. *-.. -.I... -,- I _____....-... | --.----- I -, -, -.----»__-.-.----»--

0 ' '20 "' <•'() ' * '60 ' ' " 8U ' 'UJU 1 20 1 M) 160

EM

NOTE: 1737 OBS HIDOEN

FIGURE A.2-1

241
MFTC DAILY MEANS cfu/100ml
DISTRIBUTION VERSUS INFLUENT
OM I
I
90 *

80

60

50

40 +
I-
I •
I*
I •
30 +• •
I
I
I •
I<
20
I<
I<

10

50 " 103 "'"150* 200 ?50 300 550 4U<) '• '> 0 V.)U 550

NOTE : 1 71 3 OBS HI DOEN

FIGURE A.2-2

242
MFTC DAILY MEANS cfu/lOOml
EM EFFLUENT VERSUS INFLUENT
1 80

160

1 40

1 20

1 00

80

60

* * *

* t *• *

* ft • * *

Q +*«****»•*••**•**» • * * • • * • • « *
• •*-

0 " 50 fOQ ' ' 1 5l3 '20b'' ^5*0 ' 300 $">() 4 JH '. SO 50-J 530

RM

NOTE : 1 743 OBS HI OOEN

FIGURE A. 2-3

243
ox i MFTC DAILY MAXIMUMS cfu/100ml
DISTRIBUTION VERSUS EFFLUENT
225

200

175

1 50

125

100

75

50

25

0 20 '<Jo ' 60* 80 ' 100 120 HO 160 1 80 200 220


CX
NOTE: 17J2 DBS HIDDEN

FIGURE A.2-4

244
MFTC DAILY MAXIMUMS cfu/100ml
Bx
DISTRIBUTION VERSUS INFLUENT

zoo

1 75

1 50

1 35

100

75

50

25

-• «-
o 100 2UO 500 400 ' 500 ft-li)
nx

NOTE: 1709 08S HIDDEN

FIGURE A.2-5

245
MFTC DAILY MAXIMUM cfu/100ml
EFFLUENT VERSUS INFLUENT

Ex
225

200

1 75

1 50

1 25

100

75

50

25

o foo " ' 2*00 " 'soo ' ton 500 6 JO 7'JO «00

R X

NOTE: 1746 OSS HIDDEN

FIGURE A.2-6

246
MFTC WEEKLY AVERAGES cfu/100ml

3J

FIGURE A.2-7

247
MFTC WEEKLY AVERAGES cfu/lOOtnl

FIGURE A.2-8

248
MFTC WEEKLY AVERAGES cfu/100ml

P _ .-
10 20 30
INFI.UF.HT

FIGURE A.2-9

249
TABIE A.15
MFTC Contingency Table Analyses

Cell frequencies were determined with daily observations.


Observed Expected Residual
Table 1
Distribution and Effluent > 0 72 23.10 48.90
Distribution and Effluent = 0 1443 1394.10 48.90
Distribution = 0 Effluent > 0 67 115.90 -48.90
Distribution > 0 Effluent = 0 229 277.90 -48.90

Table 2
Distribution and Influent > 237 210.75 26.25
Distribution and Influent = 479 452.75 26.25
Distribution = 0 Influent > 1031 1057.25 -26.25
Distribution > 0 Influent = 64 90.25 -26.25

Table 3
Influent and Effluent > 0 107 97.32 9.68
Influent and Effluent = 0 511 501.32 9.68
Influent = 0 Effluent > 0 32 41.68 -9.68
Influent > 0 Effluent = 0 1161 1170.68 -9.68

G-squared Prob > G-squared


Table 1 101.1 0.0000
Table 2 13.8 0.0002
Table 3 3.654 0.0560

The important results of these analyses are the positive residuals


for both-variables-zero and both-variables-positive. The residuals are
positive only when both variables are alike which indicates that the
variables behave similarly more frequently than can be attributed to
chance. This finding is further supported by the G-squared statistic which
tests the significance of the fit for the contingency table. The low
probabilities for a value greater than the G-squared computed shows that the
lack of fit is most likely not by chance. Thus, patterns found in the table
are statistically significant. The weakest case occurs in table 3 where
there is a chance of 56 out of a 1000 (5.6%) that we could have a table
with as poor of a fit when actually there was not a pattern. For tables 1
and 2 it is essentially impossible that by chance we could generate tables
with such poor fits unless there is a real pattern to the cell frequencies.

250
The contingency table results are corroborative to our interpretations of
the scatter plots as they also suggest a relationship between the
variables. The relationships are positive in both cases since patterns in
the scatter plots are positive (positive slope) and in the contingency
tables residuals of alike MFTC (both zero, both positive) have the same
sign.

251
Appendix A.5 Comparison of Groundwater and Surface Water; Treated
Effluent and Raw Influent.
There are nine treatment sites at which the influent and effluent were
saitpled during 1985 and for which it is unambiguous as to where the
influent has its source—ground or surface. We have used these sites in
our analysis. They are: 1) N. Cheshire Well Field, 2) S. Cheshire Well
Field, 3) N. Sleeping Giant Well Field, 4) S. Sleeping Giant Well Field, 5)
Mt. Carmel Well Field, 6) West River, 7) Gaillard, 8) Saltonstall, and 9)
Whitney. The first five treatment sites are for groundwater supplies,
whereas the latter four sites are for surface water supplies. By referring
to Tables A. 17-2 and A. 17-3 it is possible to ascertain the frequency at
which these sites are sampled. For our analysis we used all the data
collected at each site for the year 1985.
We pursued two steps to the analysis: 1) construction of simple histograms
and 2) a chi-square test to determine significant differences, if any,
between the effluent MFTC distributions for the two groups—ground and
surface. The histograms are shown in Figures A.3-1 and A.3-2. The upper
histogram of Figure A.3-1 was prepared by SCCRWA to demonstrate the
difference between groundwater and surface water treated effluents. In
terms of the frequency of positive MFTC, groundwater entering the
distribution system is more contaminated than surface water entering the
pipe system.
To investigate the magnitude of the coliform density, we constructed the
lower histogram (Figure A.3-1) which shows the annual average MFTC in the
effluent at each site. The difference between groundwater and surface
water remains. However, a comparison of the two graphs indicates that the
MFTC magnitudes and frequency of positives are strongly correlated for the
effluent in this case.
Results from the chi-square test also show a significant difference between
groundwater and surface water treated effluents. The results of the
chi-square test are given below. Only two divisions were selected (MFTC <=
10 and MFTC > 10) in order to attain cell frequencies at which the test
statistic, Q, is better approximated by the chi-square distribution. The
hypothesis that the effluent MFTC distribution in groundwater is identical
to that in surface water is rejected with 95% certainty (at the 0.05
significance level) for all values of Q greater than 3.84.
MFTC <= 10 MFTC > 10
GROUNDWATER 1010 34

SURFACE WATER 1238 6

test statistic, Q degrees of freedom probability of a


value greater than Q
25.4 1 0.000

252
Figure A. 3-2 is similar to Figure A. 3-1 except the data are for raw
influent. The groundwater influent supplies are nearly coliform free. As
expected, the surface water coliform density are much greater than those of
the effluent (Figure A.3-1).

253
TABLE A.16

MUNICIPAL DISTRIOUT ION s Y s r i; 'i 1 9 R 5 SA '1°t. [ NT, 3CHl:. oiji. ;; /\ NO r HI;:HII: "ICY

Brackets enclose frequ ?nc i es on r C'lU t or s ,TTI Dl ing diys. •u I nth o r


frequencies are considered resamp IPS.
RAY OF TH E WE UK
SYSTEM SAMPLE LOCATION SUN MON TUE wao THU FRI SAT

CHESHIRE WELLS 75 7 5 [403 4 [ 403 3 [403


112 5 [3S3 4 [403 5 [403 6
131 3 [403 4 [411 S [391
146 /S 1 1 [39) 3°3 7 [413
GAILLARO (16 3 [353 /, C393 3 C401 6
72 S 4 [413 393 ^ [411
73 9 [333 [413 C [403 a
i c
77
"^
3 CA13 "> f 4-03 1
105 3 4 [403 393 5 [413
115 3 1 [333 3^3 [383
;> f "*0 1 4
1 1 S
">5 4 [403 [41 3
117 [353 1 [403 [4.03 2
123 7 3 CA13 1 [ 3^3 [401
124 7 [393 1 [ 3?, 3 I [393
5 C393 6 [41.1 r3Hi 6
2 [333 [413 1 [403
14.? [3<53 0 [413 1 [403 7

GAILLARD-WEST RIVER (,1 3 [393 2 [413 0 [3^3 3


70 1 [333 2 [413 ^0 [A 03 0
71 S [413 1 f 'o 1 [413
111 0 24 1 T /I p 7 0
1V) ? 34 [>;n r 351 [391
~> r. 3 6 1
11 5 3 2•^ [403 0 [ 3^3 [41 3
118 4 [403 •> r 403 2 [403
1 1 9 /^ r 3 r)1 3 [411 1 [393
123 3
">
[413 o [ 403 [401
1 H? [393 3 [401 1 [403 3
GAILLA90-WHITNF.Y r>4 0 [ 3 .'. 3 [393 C3>1 C 393 [391 [401
65 2 [373 3 [401 1 [403 3
1?.S 3 [333 3 [403 f [A03 t,
140 £ [593 1 [413 7 [403 5
141 3 [403 3*3 [413
170 [393 4 C401 [403 1
GAILLARO-WHITNEY-WELLS 101 7 [363 21 [413 ?0 [363 10
10A 2 [393 1 6 C403 ^
10? 3 7 [363 9 [ 373 [373
137 4 [393 3 [393 [403 6
143 8 o [403 3*3 [403
SALTONSTALL 67 10 7 [413 0 '[ 391 5 [403
11 5 [353 3 [413 [393 5
ft 3 6 6 [A 11 2 [ 303 [403
106 6 S [403 373 7 C^1 3
107 4 [393 [All [403 6
12J 4 [393 1 [413 •j [333 4
SLEEPING GIANT-MT CARMEL 74 4 [37] 1 [401 4 [393 3
79 ^ [403 3 [ 303 [403
r>
393
1 ?7 f, 5 C401 [403
1 ? '? I 4 [41 J ? [ 1g i 6 [403
7 H t r
130 C401 6
1 .',9 4 T403 [411 >
WEST RIVER 62 6 4 C393 4 [ 19 ] A [403
121 4 2 [403 4 [ 2 [41 3

254
TABLE A. 17-1

1985 WEEKLY FREQUENCIES OF 03 S E TV A T I ON 3 FQ1 THE D I S Tl? I'ljT I CN SYSTEMS


Distribution system codes: 1> Cheshire Welts/ 2) GjilljrJ,
3) Ga i I I ar d- We s t River/ '. ) fi a i I I <i r if- Wh i t n e y , <~, a i I I .1 r .-) - w i t no y- We I ( •
6 ) Saltonstall/ 7) Sleeping Giant- '1 1 Carmel 'Jells/ ' 3 ) West 3i ver .
ft i S t r ibut ion Sy stems
WEEK 3 4 5
1 0 0 0 0 n 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 T 1
3 0 0 0 0 0 0 T
i 8 26 ia 14 3 12 1 T.•» /,
5 12 59 27 21 12 i ;t 1 3 6
6 12 39 27 21 12 1^ 13 6
8
7 12
12
39 27 21
"?1 11 in 13 h
39 27 15 18 13 6
9 12 38 29 21 15 13 18 6
10 12 39 29 21 15 18 1 S /,
11 12 39 29 21 15 13 13 f>
12 12 38 25 '1 1 5 18 13 6
13 12 ?7 26 21 15 18 13 6
14 12 39 28 20 1 5 17 13 6
15 12 37 23 20 15 13 13 C.
16 12 33 29 21 15 18 13 6
17 12 38 23 ?1 14 17 13 6
18 12 39 29 ?1 1 4 18 1 3 fi
19 11 39 29 20 1 4 18 13 5
20 12 39 27 21 1 5 16 16 5
21 12 35 ?9 2T 1 4 18 1 3 6
22 12 18 29 1 7 1 3 17
23 12 33 29
•> >•> 21 1 5 17 116'> 6
6
24 11 39 ?1 1 4 17 1R 6
25 3 33 23 16 1 3 16 13
,-

26 10 31 23 19 14 14 15 5
27 10 31 24 19 13 15 14 3
28 12 39 29 21 1 5 13 1 3 6
29 12 38 27 ?1 1 5 1a 1 3 6
30 12 38 29 21 14 18 13 6
31 12 38 23 21 15 18 13 6
32 12 39 29 21 1 5 13 1 3 6
33 12 39 29 21 15 13 13 ,'j
34 12 39 29 21 15 13 13 6
35 11 33 24 15 1 2 15 17 6
36 12 39 29 21 15 18 13 >)
37 12 38 ?9 21 14 18 13 6
38 12 38 29 ?1 14 1 3 13 6
39 9 33 24 16 10 1 5 16 6
40 12 39 29 20 14 18 1 3 6
41 10 33 23 16 1 1 15 16 6
42 12 38 29 21 15 17 17 6
43_ 12 38 29 21 15 18 1 3 ',
44 12 38 29 21 15 1 7 1 7 6
45 4 12 10 7 5 6 6 p
46 0 0 0 0 } 0 T !)
47
48
0
0
3
0
0 0 1 T 0 n
0 0 T T T 0
49 0 0 0 0 0 0 n 0
50
51
0
0
0
0
nn 0 0 0 n n
52 0 n 0
0
0 ,")T (5
0
T M

T 0

255
TABLE A.17-2

1935 WEEKLY FTEQUENCIE S for; rue £ FfLUENT S/VMfL IN', S T .\ T I 0 N 5

Ef f I uent samolin q S t a t i on co-Jes : 1 ) N , Cheshire We I I Fi el ij.


2 ) M t Carmel Wel I Field, 3 I eeo i n q Giant Well Fie I <i, A > S . S I eeo i n'i G i .1 •• '
Well Field, 5 ) S . Cheshire Well F ie I n , ' 6 > West R i v e r , ,' ) G -3 i 11 ,ird,
3) S a \ t on stall. 9) Uh i t ney Low.

I ue n t Sa mo linn S t ^ t i on s
WEEK 1 2 4 3 6 7 3 9
1 0 0 0 0 n 0 0 n nj)
2 0 0 0 0 0 n 0 D
3 0 0 n 0 0 n r) 0 0
4 5 0 5 5 T 5 5 5 5
5 7 0 7 7 0 7 7 7 7
6 7 0 7 7 T 7 7 7 7
7 7 o 7 7 7 7 7 7
8 7 0 7 3 T 7 9 ^ 7
9 7 0 7 7 0 7 7 7 7
10 7 0 7 7 2 f 7 7 7
11
12
7 n 7 7 2 7 7 7 7
7 0 7 7 0 7 7 7 7
13 7 0 7 7 n 7 7 7 7
1 4 7 0 7 7 n 7 10 7 7
1 5 7 0 7 7 n 7 14 7 7
16 7 0 7 7 i 7 U 7 7
17 7 0 7 7 T 7 1 4 7 7
1 R 7 0 7 7 1 7 13 7 7
1 9 7 0 7 7 3 7 13 7 7
20
21
7 0 7 7 7 n 7 7
7 0 7 7 6 7 13 7 7
22 7 0 7 7 4 7 13 7 7
23 7 0 7 7 4•^ 7 13 7 7
24 7 0 7 7 7 13 7 7
25 7 9 7 6 3 6 13 7 7
26 7 0 7 7 0 7 1 3 7 7
27 7 Q 7 7 7 7 12 7 7
28 7 1 7 5 3 7 1 3 7 7
29 7 3 7 7 7 7 13 7 7
30 7 7 7 6 3 7 13 7 7
31 7 7 7 6 5 7 13 7 6
32 7 5 7 6 5 7 13 7 7
33 7 7 7 7 7 7 13 7 2
34 7 7 7 7 7 12
35 7
7 7 0
7 7 7 5 7 12 7 0
56 7 7 7 7 5 7 13 7 0
37 7 7 7 7 1 1 3
38 7 7 0
7 7 7 7 4 7 13 7 0
39 6 1 6 6 1
40 6 10 6 0
<JT
7 0 7 7 1 7 1 3 7 n
42
7 2 7 7 n7 7 1 ? 7 n
7 6 7 7 7 13 7 0
43 7 7 7 5 /, 7 13 7 0
44
45
7 7 7 6 J 7 13 7 o
2 2 2 2 1 ?. 4 7
0
46 0 0 0 0 0 n T
f)
47 0 0 0 0 n 0 r\ n
0•1
48
49
0 0 n 0 n n "i T
'0•]
50
0 °0 G 0
p n •i
0 0 0 0
57 0 0 0 -^ '1
0 T 0 d
52 0 0 0 3 0 0 .1 1 o

256
TABI£ A.17-3

198S WEEKLY FREQUENCIES FOR RAW WATER SAMPLING S f A T M 'I S

Raw influent sampling station codes: 1) N. Cheshire Well Fi«M/


2) Mt Carmel Well Field/ 3) N. SU-coing G i .1 n t Well Field/ 4>S.
Well Field/ 5) S. Cheshire Well Field/ 6> West Rwor/ 7) G .1 i I I a r i
8) Saltonstall/ 9) Uhitney Low.
Raw 'Jater S i f P I ' n <j Stations

2 3 4 5 6 7 T o
WEEK 1 0 0 n
0 0 3 0 0 0
1
2 0 0 0 0 n 0 1 n 0
n
3 0 0 0 0 T 0 .T nr,
4 5 0 5 S n 5 j s
5 7 n 7 7 n 7 7 7
7
7
7
6 7 0 7 7 T 7 7
7 7 0 7 7 T 7 7 7 7
•in
7 7 7 7 7 7
n0
8 7 7
9 7 7 7 7 7 X
10 7 0 7 7 ? 7 7 7 7

11 7 0 7 5 1 7 7 7
7
7
7
12 7 0 7 7 0 7 7
13 7 0 77 6 0 7 7 7 77
1 1. 7 n 7 n 7 in 7
15 7 0 7 7 i1 7
7
13
1 /,
7
7
7
6
16 6 0 7 7
17 7 0 7 7
->
L. 7 14 7 7
18 7 0 7 7 1 7 13 7 7
19 7 0 7 7 3 7 13 7 7
20 7 0 7 7 2 7 13 7
21 10 0 9 7 6 7 13 77 7
22 11 0 9 7 t, 7 1 3 7
23 9 2 9 7 4 7 13 7 7
24
25
9
12 0
o 10
14
7
6
3
5
7
6
13
13
7
7
7
7
26 14 0 14 7 1 7 113•> 7 7
7
16 2 13 2 7 7
II
da 14 1 5 4 7 13 7 7
29 14 16 | 8 7 13 7 7
30 14 6 23 6 4 7 13 7 7
31 14 6 19 6 5 7 13 7 7
32 14 5 1 5 6 5 7 13 7 7
33 14 7 21 6 6 7 1 3 7 7
34 14 7 20 6 7 7 12 7 7
35 14 7 20 4 5 7 12 7 7
36 14 7 1 7 6 4 7 12 7 7
37 14 7 19 7 1 7 13 7 7
38 14 7 19 7 4 7 13 7 7
39 12 1 15 4 1 6 1 T A 6
1 3 7
40 13 19 ')1
0 6 7 7
41 14 2 17 6 7 12 6 7
42 14 3 13 6 ? 7 1 5 7
43 14 5 13 2 4 7 1 3 7 7
44 14 12 17 /,•> 3 7 13 7 7
45 4 3 5 c 1 2 4 2 ?
46 0 0 0 n 0 0 0 T n
47 0 0 nP 0 n 0 0 1
"
X
48 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0
49 0 0 0 0 0 T
'i .-\
50 0 0 j 0 0 0 T
;i
51 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0pi
52 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

257
MFTC PERCENT POSITIVE
TREATED EFFLUENT
1985
15
LJ
>

£ io
iz:—
Ld
O
Ld 5-
Q_
CJ

0 I I T

12345 6789
GROUNDWATER SURFACE WATER

AVERAGE MFTC
TREATED EFFLUENT
1985

E
o
o
3H

o
Qi
LJ

\ i i \ i r
12345 6789
GROUNDWATER SURFACE WATER

FIGURE A. 3-1

258
MFTC PERCENT POSITIVE
RAW INFLUENT
1985
150

LJ

CO
o 100

o
on
LJ 50-
Q_
O
u_

12345 6789
GROUNDWATER SURFACE WATER

AVERAGE MFTC
RAW INFLUENT
1985
60

E
o
o
40-

CJ
Lu
2
LJ 20H

a:
LJ

12345 6789
GROUNDWATER SURFACE WATER

FIGURE A.3-2

259
Appendix A.6
A.6.1 Validation of the MFTC-Day of the Week Pattern
More information concerning the MFTC - day of the week pattern can be
obtained from studies aimed at verifying the pattern, to discover if the
pattern is real (is statistically significant) and if it could be an
artifact of the sampling schedule, as we first suspected. In the case
where the pattern is due to the sampling schedule, there is only one
question to answer: are there distribution system sampling stations which
more frequently maintain a positive MFTC and which are sampled only later
in the week or more often later in the week? If so, the pattern relates to
the less interesting correlation between sampling schedule and day of the
week. Additionally, it is of value to determine if MFTC and day of the week
have similar patterns in each of the eight distribution systems.
To test if the pattern is significant, we used a contingency table analysis
on the three variables system, day of the week, and MFTC (table A. 18). The
variable "system" was included to inquire if the pattern existed in each
individual system, which is discussed below. Considering the model (system,
day of the week), (MFTC) we find that the lack of fit to the table is
significant (there is a 0.0% chance that as poor of a fit could result when
no pattern existed) and that the residuals are negative on Monday through
Thursday and positive on Friday and Saturday, confirming the existence of a
pattern between MFTC and day of the week. Figure A.4-4 shows the residuals
for MFTC positive, which were computed by summing over all systems by day
(summing down the columns of table A.18).
For the answer to our question concerning the effect of stations with
frequently positive MFTC being sampled more often later in the week, we
constructed a bar chart in which this effect was corrected (figure A.4-1).
To make such a correction we used the following algorithm: 1) the annual
percent positive was computed for each station, 2) the annual by-day-of-
the-week percent positive was computed for each station (eg. a value for
each station on Monday, Tuesday, etc., respectively), and 3) the deviations
for each station (annual by-day-of-the-week percent positive minus annual
percent positive) were computed and summed (over stations) for each day,
Monday through Saturday, respectively. Therefore, if Xdi is the 1985
percent positive for station i on day d and Xi is the annual percent
positive for station i, then the corrected fraction positive on day d is the
sum of all deviations (Xdi - Xi). The number of deviations summed is equal
to the number of stations sampled that particular day of the week, and is
either 26 or 27 during 1985. By making this correction, we eliminate the
possibility for the station effect to influence the relationship between
MFTC and day of the week. The results (figures A.4-1 and 5.4.2) indicate
that a station effect of this nature does not exist. Figure A.4-2 shows the
percentages of stations by day of the week for which the deviation Xdi - Xi
was positive and negative. These bar charts support figure A.4-1 (lower
plot), and confirm that indeed a greater number of stations have a positive
MFTC on Friday and Saturday. This is true for all stations, since the groups
sampled Friday are different from those sampled Saturday.

260
The MFTC - day of the week pattern is realized in all systems except West
River (figure A.4-18) and possibly Gaillard - West River (figure A.4-13),
according to the bar charts. If we consider the pattern shown in the plots
corrected for the station effect (figures A.4-11 through A.4-18 lower
plots), it can be described as two groups separable by time (Friday and
Saturday versus Monday through Thursday) and sign (positive or negative
bars). All systems conform to this pattern in general with the exception
of West River. The Gaillard - West River system appears to be slightly
aberrant since on Monday the majority of its 13 sampling locations have
positive deviations. These interpretations can be checked by the
contingency table residuals (table A. 18). If the pattern we identify is
strong in all systems, each should have negative differences (observed -
expected) for Monday through Thursday, and positive differences on Friday
and Saturday. This is not exactly the case, in detail, but it is the
general pattern, indicating that the day of week effect is less distinct on
the individual system scale. Recall that when we summed the residuals over
all systems, by day, the pattern is clear .

261
TABIE A. 18
Contingency Table Analysis: Differences Between Observed and Expected

Dimensions:
D = Day-of-the^week, S = Distribution system, C = MFTC
Levels:
D: Monday through Saturday, S: systems 1 through 8, C: zero or positive
Model: SD,C
Values for C positive (level 2 of dimension C) are provided.
Note that values for C zero are identical to those for C positive except
the sign is reversed.
Blanks occur on system-days which were not sampled.
Systems: 1^3ieshire Wells, 2=Gaillard, 3=<3aillard-West River,
4=<3aillard-Whitney, 5=<3aillard-Whitney-Wells, 6=Saltonstall, 7=Sleeping
GiantHtft. Carmel Wells, 8=West River.
System Day-of-the-jweek
MON TUB WED THU FRI SAT

1 0.5 1.4 -0.7 0.4 4.4 3.3


2 -6.0 -11.8 -8.2 -1.2 9.1 10.3
3 -4.5 -8.5 -11.3 -6.6 -1.0 -3.0
4 -3.5 0.4 -4.2 1.5 0.9 3.3
5 0.9 -1.4 -0.4 -0.3 6.8 10.5
6 -5.0 -7.6 -7.7 2.8 4.7 10.4
7 -3.6 3.6 -0.7 2.1 1.4 11.7
8 1.4 3.4 2.3

A.6.2 The MFTC-Day of the Week Pattern in Other Variables


Bar charts of all variables measured in the distribution systems and
at the effluent of the treatment stations were constructed to identify a
pattern related to day of the week (figures A.4-5 through A.4-10). The
distribution system variables include turbidity, pH, free chlorine, total
chlorine, true color, and temperature; the effluent variables consist of
true color, turbidity, pH, free chlorine, and temperature. No variables
show a pattern as well defined as that for MFTC, however, effluent
turbidity and pH (figures A.4-8 and A.4-9) increase by day towards the end
of the week.
One analysis which may provide insight into the mechanism driving this
phenomenon would be a discriminant analysis. One could designate the groups
based on day of the week (eg. Monday through Thursday could be one group and
Friday and Saturday the other). Inclusion of hydraulic variables would be
preferred, since the variation in the variables comprising our data base
appears to be mostly seasonal and not related to day of the week.

262
MFTC PERCENT POSITIVE
OVER ALL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS
1985

I']

MFTC FRACTION POSITIVE CORRECTED FOR STATION EFFECT


OVER ALL. DISl'KIBirilON SYSTEMS
1985
2-
LiJ

(.n
O
Q_
2;
O
I -•
o

Q
0-
%m
UJ
I—
-1
O
UJ
rr
a:
o
o -2

FIGURE A.4-1

263
PERCENT STATIONS WITH POSITIVE MEAN DEVIATIONS
BY DAY OF WEEK
1985
100

®m
UJ
0 50H

PERCENT STATIONS WfTH NEGATIVE MEAN DEVIATIONS


BY DAY OF WEEK
1985
100

(_> 50-
CE
ui
a.

FIGURE A.4-2

264
MFTC PERCENT POSITIVE MFTC PERCENT POSITIVE
cn
cn tn o K) O) 00 o
i 1 I

I 5
gffl
Ol

u>
S
com

O
CO
OBSERVED - EXPECTED
i
Ol en o
o o o
i

00
-°i
ai
CD
IV)
CD CO
O> cn

00

^ I
TURBIDITY
AVERAGED OVER ALL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS
1985
0.55

0.50-

0.45-

\'
^ <&> ^5> ^ ^ c,^

ACIDITY
AVERAGED OVER ALL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS
1985
7.25

7.20-

7.15-

7.10

FIGURE A.4-5

267
FREE CHLORINE RESIDUAL
AVERAGED OVER ALL DISIRIBUTION SYSIIMS
1985
1.50

O)
E
1.45H
ID
Q
(/)
UJ
o:
1.40H
o:
O
_i
1C
o
1.35-

TOTAL CHLORINE RESIDUAL


AVERAGED OVER ALL. DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS
1985
1.65

O)

9
CO 1.60-
UJ
o:
LU
2
DC
O
_i
X
o
1.55

FIGURE A.4-6

268
TRUE COLOR
AVERAGED OVER ALL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS
1985

13
CJ

TEMPERATURE
AVERAGED OVER ALL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS
1985
14.2

LJ
Q
< 14.H
QL
O

O
C/)
LJ
LJ
a:
o
LJ
Q

FIGURE A.4-7

269
ACIDITY
AVERAGED OVER ALL TREATED EFFLUENTS
1985
7.30-

7.25-

7.20-
Q.

7.15-

7.10

FREE CHLORINE RESIDUAL


AVERAGED OVER ALL TREATED EFFLUENTS
1985

FIGURE A.4-8

270
TRUE COLOR
AVERAGED OVER ALL TREATED EFFLUENTS
1985

3.5

TURBIDITY
AVERAGED OVER ALL TREATED EFFLUENTS
1985
0.50

0.45-

I- 0.40-

0.35-

0.30-

FIGURE A.4-9

271
DEGREES CENTIGRADE
NJ N) ro ro
NJ CM In
I I

sfc
B

IV)
•~4
IV3

I
M rSm
O

m
?
MFTC PERCENT POSITIVE
CHESHIRE Wkl-LS SYS I KM
1985
15-

(/>
O 10
IX

UJ
o
cc
L<J =j
a. 5-

MR'C FRACTION POSITIVE CORRECTED FOR STATION EFFECT


CHESHIRE WF1LSSYSII-M
1985
0.10-

O 0.05 J
a_

< 0.00

-0.05-
a:

O

-0.10

FIGURE A.4-11

273
MFTC PERCENT POSITIVE
GAILI.ARD SYSTEM
1985

MFTC FRACTION POSIWE CORRECTED FOR STATION EFFECT


GAILLARD SYSIEM
1985
UJ
0.4
>
c/o
o 0.2-
Q_

o 0.0

Q
LJ
-0.2-
o

O
o -0.4

FIGURE A.4-12

274
CORRECTED FRACTION POSITIVE
i I I MFTC PERCENT POSITIVE
o o o O
O

(V)
^1
en >

£>•
Co t^'O
CO ^i 7D
(-•
U>

Q
MFTC PERCENT POSITIVE
GAILLARD-WHITNEY SYSTEM
1985

Ld

MFTC FRACTION POSRTVE CORRECTED FOR STATION EFFECT


GALLARD-WHITNEY SYSTEM
1985
0.8
LJ

oo 0.5-
o
Q_

o
— 0.4-
o
CxL
0.2-
Q
Ul

O
LjJ
o;
cc
o
o

FIGURE A. 4-14

276
MFTC PERCENT POSITIVE
GAILLAKD-WI ilTNLY-WKLLS SYSTEM
1985

o-

MFTC FRACTION POSITIVE CORRECTED FOR SIATION EFFECT


GAIU-ARD-WHriNI-JY-Wf-LLS SYSi }-\/\
1985
0.4
Ld
>

<s>
o
n_
z: 0.2-
O
i~
o

O 0.0-
LJ

LJ
(X.
or
O
o -0.2

FIGURE A. 4-15

277
CORRECTED FRACTION POSITIVE
I I
MFTC PERCENT POSITIVE
o o O
N) O
I

to
~J
oo

JO

>i
MFTC PERCENT POSITIVE
SLEEPING GIANT-MT CARMEL WELLS SYSTEM
1985

MFTC FRACTION POSmVE CORRECTED FOR STATION EFFECT


SLEEPING GIANT-MT CARMEL WELLS SYSTEM
1985
Ul
0.2
>

O 0.1-
Q_

O
0.0

Q
Ul
-0.1-
O
Ul

O
(J -0.2

FIGURE A.4-17

279
MFTC PERCENT POSITIVE
WEST RIVER SYSTEM
1985
15

Ul

in
o 10
o.

LJ
o
LU 5-1
Q_
O

MFTC FRACTION POSmVE CORRECTED FOR STATION EFFECT


WEST RIVER SYSTEM
1985
0.04

00
O 0.02 J
Q_

< 0.00

LJ -0.02
o:
o:
O
o
-0.04

FIGURE A. 4-18

280
Appendix A.7

A.7.1 Principal Components Analyses


Principal components analyses are useful for understanding patterns in
large ntultivariate data sets and for disclosing information concealed by
multicollinearities. The configuration of the data set is mapped out in
skeletal form by determining new axes, all mutually orthogonal, which pass
through the data "cloud" when it is plotted in original variable space.
(Original variable space is a p-dimensional space where each of p original
variables is represented by an axis and each observation from the data set
is represented by a point). The new axes are new variables called principal
components, which have the favorable property of being uncorrelated. Each
principal component is potentially influenced by all original variables of
the data set. Variables with a strong influence on a particular component
are weighted heavily in that component, much like a variable is weighted in
multiple regression by its regression coefficient. However, the
interpretation of the weighting in a principal component is not focused on
prediction of a response variable but on the variance of the data set
accounted for by the principal component. Thus, original variables with high
weightings in a component are responsible for the bulk of the variance which
the component describes. This variance is measured in a direction parallel
to the component.
When principal components are used as the independent variables in multiple
linear regression, they are given partial regression coefficients
indicative of their predictive power. The magnitudes of the regression
coefficients are no longer confounded by multicollinearities, and it is also
possible that the components may filter out some of the measurement error
which occurred during observation of the original variables. However, it is
likely that several original variables will be weighted heavily in a
principal component. Therefore, the predictive power of the principal
component cannot always be mapped one-to-one to the original variables; but
it does indicate the predictive power of the cluster of variables weighted
heavily in that component. Interpretationally, no attempt is made to
partition the predictive power of the component among the original
variables, since they are colinear.
Two analyses were performed using principal components. One was designed to
reveal the configuration of the data set, whereas the other uses
principal components as independent variables to predict distribution
MFTC. The results of these analyses follow.

A.7.2 Configuration of the Data Set


A principal components analysis was performed on all 18 variables included
in our data set. The data are de-meaned weekly averages over all
distribution systems and treatment stations. The results of this analysis
are given in Table A.20. Our intention for completing the analysis was to
gain an understanding of the variance of the data set in terms of the
variables which vary together and which contribute most to the total
variance.

281
The proportion of variance accounted for (Table A. 20) is a measure of the
length of the component through the data "cloud". The longest component
passes through the data "cloud" in a direction parallel to its longest
"cross-section" and so on. By the sixth principal component 83.5% of the
variance was accounted for. If we assign the remaining 16.5% of the
variance to uninterpretable noise, we can focus our analysis on the first
six components.
The variables weighted roost heavily in each component vary together
(denoted by asterisks), either positively or negatively depending on the
signs of their coefficients. Variables weighted heavily in the components
accounting for most of the variance normally are strongly correlated (Table
A.19).

282
TABLE A. 19

Multiple Linear Regression: Backward Elimination. All variables were


standardized prior to analysis.

Initial Model Eliminated Final Model


Variables
Distribution
pH
total chlorine—
free chlorine X
turbidity X
temperature X
true color X
Effluent
pH ————- — X
free chlorine
turbidity—— — X
temperature X
true color X
MFTC————- X
Influent
pH X
turbidity— ™™™. V

temperature X
true color X
MFTC X

Independent Regression Sequential F Value Prob > F


Variable Coefficient Sum of Squares
Effluent MFTC 0.589** 5.46 8.56 0.006
Effluent Turbidity 0.347 2.10 3.29 0.078
Effluent pH -0.527 10.62 16.65 0.000
Distribution Total
Chlorine 0.338 3.82 5.99 0.019
Influent Turbidity 0.288 2.92 4.59 0.039

Model R-squared = 0.521, Model F Value = 7.82, Prob > F = 0.0001


Model Intercept = 0.876

** All regression coefficients are significant to at least the 0.04


level, including the intercept.

283
The R-squared term indicates the fraction of the total variance of the
response variable accounted for by the regression. The R-squared value of
0.521 indicates that the regression model accounts for 52.1% of the
variance of distribution MFTC. The sequential sums of squares indicate the
relative influence of a predictor variable on the R-squared term according
to the sequence of elimination. Thus, effluent pH had the most influence on
distribution MFTC and effluent turbidity the least.
The F statistic indicates that the probability of a value greater than the
F value (7.82) of 0.0001 for this model means that there is a 0.01% chance
that our regression is not a true predictor and only arose by chance.
Simple regressions were performed on each predictor variable in the
multiple regression model. The most important observations drawn from these
regressions are that distribution total chlorine and effluent turbidity are
relatively unimportant predictors.

284
TABLE A. 20
Principal Components Analysis

Varible Codes
Distribution Systems Raw Influent Treated Effluent
CMFTC MPTC RMFTC MFTC EMFTC MFTC
DCOIR Color RCOLR Color ECOIR Color
DPCL Free Chlorine RTURB Turbidity EPCL Free Chlorine
DTCL Total Chlorine RPH pH ETURB Turbidity
DIURB Turbidity RTEMP Tenperature EPH pH
DPH pH ETEMP Temperature
DTEMP Ternperature

Percent Variance Cummulative


Accounted For Percent
PRIN1 30.2 30.
PRIN2 16.9 47.
PRIN3 14.2 61.
PRIN4 10.4 71.7
PRIN5 6.8 78..3
PRIN6 5.1 83..4
PRIN7 3.9 87..3
PRIN8 3.2 90..5
PRIN9 2.4 93..0
PRIN10 2.0 95.0
PRIN11 1.6 96.6
PRIN12 1.1 97..7
PRIN13 .9 98..6
PRIN14 .5 99.,1
PRIN15 .5 99.6
PRIN16 .3 99.9
PRIN17 .0 99.9
PRIN18 .0 100.0

285
A.7.3 Interpretation of the Components: Eigenvector Coefficients
Component 1. Component 1 is predominantly a temperature component (high
weightings for temperature in raw, effluent and distribution) with the
added contribution of effluent free chlorine. This is probably a
seasonality component, reflecting the long term covariation of the three
temperature measurements, with a probably coincidental correlation for
effluent free chlorine (perhaps chlorination followed a seasonality similar
to that reflected in temperature). It is worth noting that distribution
chlorine (free and total) did not figure in this component, and so did not
participate in the same pattern of seasonality.
Component 2. Component 2 is dominated by color (high weightings for
distribution and raw color, with a modest contribution of the same sign
from effluent color), and distribution free chlorine, on the one hand, and
a negative weighting of distribution MFTC. This indicates that
distribution MFTC excursions tended to occur at times when the color value
was unusually low and the distribution free chlorine was unusually low;
and that this pattern of MFTC association was independent of the
temperature-indicated seasonality. It is interesting that the weightings of
the raw and effluent MFTC were quite low in this component (though they are
of the same sign as disribution MFTC) showing that this association of
distribution MFTC was only minimally associated with the breakthrough
pattern we had discovered earlier. Note also that distribution total-
chlorine had a negligable weighting in this component, not withstanding the
large weighting of distribution free-chlorine. A modest weighting of raw
turbidity with the same sign as distribution MFTC, and effluent and
distribution pH with sign opposite distribution MFTC (and the same sign as
distribution free chlorine) might also provide environmental clues that are
worth pursuing in the future.
Component 3. Component 3 is dominated by effluent turbidity, distribution
turbidity and raw water pH, all with the same sign, indicating that these
variables tend to vary together, to an extent; but that as a group they are
independent of the previous clusters (the temperature component and the
color- MFTC component). Distribution MFTC has a positive weighting on this
component that is too small to merit substantive interpretation.
Component 4. Component 4 is dominated by distribution total chlorine and
effluent MFTC, with opposite signs. This indicates a tendency toward
strong negative correlation between these two variables, largely
independent of the rest of the variation in the system. There is also a
modest contribution of distribution MFTC with the same sign as effluent
MFTC, and effluent free-chlorine with the same sign as distribution
total-chlorine, which is readily interpretable, suggesting some measure of
distribution MFTC control achieved by chlorination; but a sizable
contribution from distribution free-chlorine, with a sign opposite that of
the other chlorines confuses the matter.
Component 5. Conponent 5 is dominated by raw influent MFTC.
Component 6. Component 6 is dominated by distribution and effluent
turbidity, distribution free-chlorine and distribution MFTC, on the one

286
hand, while effluent pH and effluent MFTC have the opposite sign from
these. The positive association of distribution free-chlorine and
distribution MFTC in this component, while they were negatively
associated in component 2, suggests that conponent 6 is beyond the level of
interpretation in this decompostion of the pattern in the data, though the
agreement among the two turbidities indicates some meaningful mechanism.
A.7.4 Summary of the principal components analysis
Overall, only component 2 showed promise of revealing a relation between
distribution MFTC and other variables (namely a negative relation with
distribution free chlorine and color). Other aspects of the pattern
resolved by the principal component analysis did not involve distribution
MFTC in an obviously interpretable way.
A.7.5 Multiple Linear Regression of Principal Components
The mutual independence of principal components makes them favorable for
regression analyses. Furthermore, multiple regression on principal
components does not conceal variables which may have been eliminated from
the model by selection techniques, such as backward elimination, due to
multicollinearities. In our analysis we assumed that components describing
small fractions of the variance represent measurement error and other types
of noise, so these higher order components (which generally do not lend
themselves to interpretations) were eliminated from the regression.
A multiple regression analysis of distribution MFTC on principal components
was conducted. The components were determined from weekly averages of all
variables except distribution MFTC. In the first regression model,
components 1 through 6 were included (these accounted for 85.6% of the
variance). Components 1, 5, and 6 were not significant for regression in
this model, prompting us to rerun the regression using only components 2, 3,
and 4. The results of this analysis are provided in Tables A.21 (components)
and A.22 (regression).

287
Principal Components 2, 3, and 4

2 3 4
Effluent Color 0.193 -0.295 -0.121
Effluent MFTC -0.011 0.098 -0.568*
Effluent Turbidity 0.214 0.447* -0.106
Effluent Temperature -0.152 0.093 0.017
Effluent pH 0.363* 0.167 0.090
Effluent Chlorine -0.096 0.066 0.218
Distribution Color 0.277 -0.382* 0.243
Distribution Free Chlorine 0.308* -0.351* -0.236
Distribution Total Chlorine -0.144 -0.037 0.630*
Distribution Turbidity 0.238 0.368* 0.228
Distribution pH 0.386* 0.167 0.042
Distribution Temperature -0.168 0.092 0.012
Influent Color 0.389* -0.046 0.102
Influent MFTC -0.117 0.111 0.027
Influent Temperature -0.146 0.076 0.071
Influent Turbidity -0.167 0.349* -0.110
Influent pH 0.334* 0.280 0.041

Regression Coefficients -.232 0.209 -.255

TABLE A.22

Multiple Linear Regression of Distribution MFTC on Principal Components 2,


3, and 4.

Principal Regression Sequential F Value Prob > F


Component Coefficient Sum of Squares
2 -0.232(a) 6.14 7.16 0.011
3 0.209 4.44 5.18 0.029
4 -0.255 4.69 5.46 0.025

Model R-squared = 0.319, Model F Value = 5.93, Prob > F = 0.002


Model Intercept = 0.8762

(a) All regression coefficients including the intercept were


significant to at least the 0.03 level.

288
Results from this regression are interpreted similarly to those from
multiple regression on the original variables. This regression accounts
for 31.9% (R-squared) of the total variance of distribution MFTC and is
significant to the 0.002 level. The regression coefficients are very close
in absolute magnitude; however, those for components 2 and 4 are negative,
whereas that for component 3 is positive.
To interpret the principal components there are two questions to
answer. First, which components of the variance have predictive value, and
second, which original variables influence this variance. The original
variables of a component which have the highest weightings all possibly
contribute to the predictive power of the component. Recall that variables
weighted heavily in a component are normally strongly correlated, thus,
making it ambiguous as to which variable is the better predictor.
The regression coefficients are essentially equal in magnitude indicating
that unit changes in each component while holding the other components
fixed, affects distribution MFTC by about the same amount. However, the
components account for decreasing quantities of variance (from 2 to 4), so
the influence of component 2 on the predicted MFTC exceeds that of
component 3, which exceeds that of component 4. Note that component 2 has
the largest sequential sum of squares indicating that it contributes most
to the model's predictive power.
Component 2, which has a negative regression coefficient in the predicting
distribution MFTC, is dominated by positive weightings from pH (raw,
effluent and distribution), distribution free-chlorine, and raw color. In
other words, this complex of variables which correlate positively among
themselves, functions as a predictor by correlating negatively (as a group)
with distribution MFTC.
Component 3, which has a positive regression coefficient, is dominated
by positive weightings from turbidity (raw, effluent, and distribution) and
negative weightings from distribution color and distribution free-
chlorine. In other words, circumstances leading to high values for this
component (high turbidity, low color and low distribution free-chlorine)
are associated with high values for distribution MFTC.
Component 4, which has a negative regression coefficient, is dominated
by a positive weighting for distribution total chlorine and a negative
weighting for effluent MFTC. Thus the negative correlation between
distribution total-chlorine and effluent MFTC is embedded in a mutual
correlation with distribution MFTC, such that high values for distribution
MFTC are predicted when distribution total-chlorine is low and effluent
MFTC is high (with no presumption, statistically, as to which of these, if
either, is causally responsible).
It may appear that the ambiguity of several variables having predictive
power in one component is troublesome, but, this is not necessarily true,
especially when the effect one variable has on another is known. For
example, in component 4 we see that effluent MFTC varies negatively with
distribution total chlorine, in this case it is likely that controlling
distribution total chlorine also controls effluent MFTC (effluent chlorine

289
and distribution total chlorine are positively correlated), and
consequently, has an effect on distribution MFTC. Hence, the formulation
of relationships among the variables heavily weighted in a component can
direct the approach to controlling the response variable.
A.7.6 Discriminant Analysis
Discriminant analysis is a form of multiple linear regression where the
response variable takes on only discrete values. In our analysis, the
response variable was distribution MFTC. The observations of the
independent variable distribution MFTC, were separated into two groups,
those corresponding to distribution MFTC positive and zero. The analysis,
for the case of two groups, determines one linear function which attempts
to fit the observations into their respective group. The fitting procedure
maximizes the ratio of between-group variance to within-group variance. In
the discriminant function, variables are weighted according to their
ability to predict the correct group. Those that are effective at group
prediction are given heavy weightings, whereas variables with little input
to the prediction will have weightings close to zero. (Subject to the same
confounding effect of co-linearities in predictor variables, as in multiple
regression).
The analysis was performed on weekly averages over all systems and
treatment stations and the results are provided in table A.23. The
analysis presented here does not include effluent or influent MFTC. These
variables were included in a previous analysis which was less significant,
and were eliminated from the present analysis. The total number of
observations was 42. Ten observations fit into the group of MFTC equal 0
and 32 into the group of MFTC > 0. The best predictors of these groups are
temperature, and color. The standardized discriminant function gives
strong weightings to influent, effluent, and distribution temperature. All
other variables are given weightings close to zero with the exception of
influent and effluent color, which received moderate weightings.

290
TABIE A. 23
Results of Discriminant Analysis

Variable Standardized Coefficient


Effluent Color 1.077
Effluent Turbidity 0.650
Effluent Temperature -3.426
Effluent pH -.426
Effluent Free Chlorine -.489
Distribution Color -.272
Distribution Free Chlorine -.491
Distribution Total Chlorine -.041
Distribution Turbidity 0.421
Distribution pH -.005
Distribution Temperature -4.360
Influent Color -1.89
Influent Temperature 7.096
Influent Turbidity 0.335
Influent pH 0.052
Canonical Correlation = 0.711
Squared Canonical Correlation = 0.506
Eigenvalue =1.02
F value = 1.776, Prob > F = 0.0964

291
There are several ways to assess the utility of the discriminant function.
Of most concern is the ability of the discriminant function to predict the
correct group. Ihe correlation of the discriminant function scores (values
produced by the discriminant function which determine the group
classification) with the response variable indicates how well groups are
predicted. This correlation is not the conventional correlation, but one
for which the values are first parameterized (canonical correlation), in
this case to 0 and 1. The canonical correlation and the squared canonical
correlation are 0.711 and 0.506 respectively for this analysis. Ihe
squared canonical correlation is identical to the R-squared of multiple
linear regression, and indicates the fraction of the variance accounted for
by the discriminant function. From these values we can deduce that 35.4% of
the variance in the discretized MFTC score was accounted for.
The ratio of between-group variance to within-group variance also indicates
the quality of group prediction. This measure is given by the eigenvalue of
1.02. To interpret the eigenvalue it is helpful to consider a plot of
distribution MFTC versus the discriminant function scores (figure A.5). The
eigenvalue of 1.02 is represented geometrically by the distance between
groups relative to the average width of a group. From figure A. 5 it appears
that the distance between group means is approximately equal to the width of
a group, giving the eigenvalue near unity.
The significance of the analysis is determined by a conventional F
statistic. This analysis was significant to only the 0.096 level, which is
not impressive. This level indicates that there is a 9.6% chance that the
correlation coefficients are actually zero.
The most important result of this analysis is that the variables weighted
most heavily differ from those in the multiple regression where actual
distribution MFTC averages were used. This indicates that the magnitudes
of the averages are important, and that at least a few variables in the
data set have a more subtle covariation with distribution MFTC than can
be detected when MFTC is defined as zero or positive.

292
DISTRIBUTION MFTC VERSUS DISCRIMINANT FUNCTION SCORES, 1985
DMFTC

3- O
o

o o

0- oo oo
-1
SCORES

Analysis was per for.r.c^ on wecKly averages

FIGURE A.5

293
APPENDIX B DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM MODELLING

Appendix B.I Sensitivity Analysis


A sensitivity analysis is conducted to determine the percentage change in a
dependent variable caused by a given percentage change in an independent
variable in s system or process. A sensitivity index, SI, is defined:
SI = ( fi/fi)/( Xi/xi) (4. la)
where f^ is the dependent variable and x-^ is the independent variable. The
sensitivity of the chlorine residual, Cj_, was determined as a function of
(1) skeletonization of the pipe system, i.e., change in the number of
pipes, n, (2) the global demand flow, Q, and (3) the first order reaction
coefficient, k. The respective sensitivity indices are:
Sln= (
Slg = ( Ci/Ci)/( Q/QO) (4. ic)
SIk = ( Ci/Ci)/( kAo) (4- 1C)
where the reference value of each parameter, indicated by the subscript o,
is the magnitude of the greater value of the parameter used in obtaining
the difference x^.
Examples:
1. Skeletonization ; Jet 33, Co = 3.9 ppm, k = 0.002 min~l
( refer to data in Table 3.2)
No. pipes 8.25 mgd 1.24 mgd
Chlorine residuals
74 1.30 1.51
180 1.13 1.16
Effect of increasing number of pipes from 74 to 180 for
a. 8.25 mgd: SIn = [ (1.13-1. 30)/1.13]/[ (180-74)/180] = - 0.26
b. 1.24 mgd: SIn = [ (1.16-1. 51)/1.16]/[ (180-74)/180] = - 0.51

2_._ Global flow demands: Jet 16, Co = 10.0 ppm, k = 0.002 min"1
(refer to data in Table 3.3)
Flow, mgd C\2 residual, ppm
1.24 0.37
8.25 4.18

294
Effect of increasing demand flow from 1.24 to 8.25 mgd:
Slg = [(4.18-0.37)/4.18]/[(8.25-1.24)/8.25] =1.07
3_.. Reaction rates; Jet 16, Co = 10.0 ppm, 1.24 mgd
(refer to data in Table 3.3)
Reaction rate
coefficient, Cl2 residual,
min""1 ppm

0.002 4.18
0.008 0.31

Effect of increasing k from 0.002 to 0.008:


SIk = [(0.38-4.18)/4.18]/[(0.008-0.002)/0.008] =-1.21

295
Appendix B.2 Calibration Calculations
A. Chlorine residuals at non-junction points. Water quality sampling
points 0067S, 08IS ,0833, and 128S were not located at junctions used in
the schematization of the 180-pipe model of the Saltonstall system used in
the steady state analysis. The exact locations of these stations were not
known until a significant portion of the preliminary analysis was
completed. To compare the predicted with the observed values of the
chlorine residuals at these stations, the residuals at the non-junction
points were calculated from the following relations:
a* = Cu [exp(-]cti) ] (4.2a)
ti = tp(x/Ip) = (lp/60 Vp) (x/Ip) (4.2b)
where C^ - chlorine residual at sampling station, ppm,
CQ = chlorine residual at junction upstream from the sampling
point, ppm,
k = first order reaction rate coefficient, min"1 ,
Ip = length of pipe between junctions containing the sampling
point, ft,
tj^ = travel time from the upstream junction to
the sampling point, min.,
tp = travel time in pipe of length Lp, min.,
Vp = flow velocity in pipe, fps,
x = distance from upstream junction to sampling point, ft,
Example; Sample calculation for residuals listed in Table 3.7. Sampling
station 067S is downstream from jet 9 one quarter the length of the pipe
connecting jet 9 to jet 3. The chlorine residual predicted for jet 9 by
the steady state model is 2.69 ppm; the travel time, tp, from jet 9 to jet
3 is 157.4 min.
The travel time, tj_, from jet 9 to 067S by Eq. (4.2b) is
tj^ = 157.4/4 = 39.35 min.
The chlorine residual at station 067S is

GX = 2.69exp[(-0.002)(39.25)] = 2.48 ppm


The total travel time from the source to station 067S used to calculate the
modified first order reaction rate in Table 3.7 is the sum of the travel
time from the source to jet 9, 353.3 min., plus t± calculated above, 39.3
min., equalling 392.6 min.

296
B. Modification of reaction rate coefficients for individual pipes. The
method for modifying the first order reaction rate coefficients for
individual pipes based on preliminary results from the steady state model
was developed from examining the initial residual predicted for sampling
station 08IS (refer to Table 3.7). The predicted chlorine residual was
1.97 ppm; the observed was 0.75 ppm. The ratios of the predicted to the
observed values at sampling stations 067S and 106S (refer to Fig. 3.2) were
0.93 and 0.89, respectively, after the global value of the first order
reaction coefficient was modified from 0.0020 to 0.0015. Station 08IS was
hydraulically more distant from the source than 067S and the flow was from
jet 8, near 067S, through pipe 82 to jet 64 to pipe 83, in which 081S was
located, to jet 15, near 106S. A large main, pipe 12, connecting jet 8
directly with jet 15, was parallel to the smaller pipes (nos. 82,83)
containing 081 and offered a more direct route from between 067S and 106S.
It was postulated that the first order reaction rates for pipes 82 and 83
were greater than the global value because of the lower velocities and
greater surface to volume ratio in these pipes as compared with these
parameter in pipe 12.A modified first order reaction coefficient for pipes
82 and 83 was calculated as follows.
The flow to 081S is from jet 8 through pipe 82 and through one third of
pipe 83. The travel time in pipe 82 is 85.8 min.; the travel time in one
third of pipe 83 is 27.8 min. At jet 8 the chlorine residual, adjusted to
the modified first order reaction rate of 0.0015 min"1 , is 3.00 ppm. Using
the observed chlorine residual of 0.75 ppm at 081S, the adjusted value of
3.00 ppm at jet 8, and the travel time from jet 8 to 081S of 113.6 min.
(85.8 + 27.8), the first order reaction rate coefficients for pipes 82 and
83 are calculated from rearranging Eq. (4.2a):
R! = -(l/tr)ln(C081s/C8 ) (4.2c)
K! = -(1/113.6)In(0.75/3.00)
R! = 0.0122
Using this value for pipes 82 and 83 and 0.0015 for all other pipes, the
180-pipe model predicted a chlorine residual of 0.67 ppm for sampling
station 08IS (as shown in Table 3.7).

297
Appendix B.3 MSU Chlorine Demand Study

298
no.l

MSU Chlorine Demand Study

LOCATION: SA-Q42-T - Snltonstall Treated Efflnpnf

Time of Free Total Temp. Collected


Date Collection Chlorine Chlorine PH by

7/29/86 8:00 „, 2.0 2.27 7.15 22.5 R. Walters

15:05 pH 1.85 2.0 7.13 22.5 R. Walters


9:00 AH 2.0 2.2 7.14 22 R. Walters
7/30/86
15:06 pH 2.05 2.3 7.0U '> ')
K . W.i It i- r s

a:0 ° AH 2.0 2.16 1 .2S 2J K. W.i 11. cis


7/31/86
15:00 pM 2.1 2.2 7.23 23 R. W.i It or:-.

8:00 AH 2.02 2.31 7.14 22.5 R. Walters


8/01/86
15:05 PH 2.0 2.2 7.08 22 R. Walters

7:30 AH 2.02 2.18 7.15 22 R. Walters


8/02/86
14:50 PH 2.0 2.2 7.08 22 R. Walters

7:00 AH 1.85 2.08 7.12 22.5 R. Walters


8/03/86
14:53 PH 1.90 2.1 7.11 23 R. Walters

8/04/86 8:00 AH 2.05 2.3 7.11 23 R. Walters


15:03 PM 2.0 2.25 7,13 23 K . W;i 1 1 C f 5 ;

8/05/86 8:00 AH 1.89 2.18 7.20 22 R. Walter?


15.07 PH 2.05 2.25 7.15 22 K . W,-i 1 c c r s

AH

PH

299
no.2

HSU Chlorine Demand Study

LOCATION: 11061 - 475 Forbos Avenue. New Haven____

rime of Free Total Temp. Collected


Date Collection Chlor ine Chlor ine pn ,c by

8:39 AM 1.20 1.40 7.3 21 R . Walters


7/29/86
15:20 PH 1.00 1.20 7.3 21 R. Walters

8:32 AM 1.30 1.50 7.3 20 R. Walters


7/30/86
15:22 PM 0,90 1.10 7.4 21 R. Walters

9:03 AM 1.30 1.50 7.4 20 R. Walter:;


7/31/86
15:15 PM 1.00 1.20 7.2 20 R. Walters

8/01/86 8:36 AH 1.30 1.50 7.4 21 R. Walters

15:16 PM 1.10 1.30 7.0 20 R, Un leers

8:35 AM 1.20 1.40 7.3 20 R. Walters


8/02/86
15:03 PM 1.00 1.20 7.3 20 R. Walters

0/03/86
8:52 AM 1.00 1.20 7.4 21 R , Wa 1 1 e r s
15:05 PM 1.00 1.20 7.3 20 R. Walters

8/04/86
8:40 AM 1.30 1.50 7.1 20 R. Walters

15:24 PM 0.90 1.10 7.1 21 N . Wa 1 1 e r r.

8/05/86 8:41 AM 1.20 1.40 7.4 20 R . Wa 1 1 n r s

15:23 PM i .in 1 .30 7.4 20 R . Wnl rrr<:

AM

PM

300
no. 3

MSU Chlorine Demand Study

LOCATION: 0081 - 120 Woodward Avenue, New Havon

rime of Free Total Temp. Collected


Date Collection Chlor ine Chlor ine PH . by
7/29/86 8:53 AM 0.30 0.50 8.4 22 R. Walters

15:34 PM 0.40 0.60 8.1 22 R. Walters

7/30/86 8:45 AM 0.30 0.50 8.2 22 R. Walters


15:39 PM 0.30 0.50 8.6 21 R. Walters

9:15 AM 0.40 0.60 8.0 21 K. Walters


7/31/86
15:28 PM 0.70 0.90 8.1 21 R. Walters

8/01/86 8:50 AM 0.50 0.70 8.1 21 R. Walters

15:35 PM 0.40 0.60 8.2 21 R. Walters

8/02/86 8:49 AM 0.40 0.60 8.5 21 R. Walters


15:17 PM 0.50 0.70 8.4 21 R. Walters
9:05 AM 0,40 0.60 8.4 21 R. Walters
8/03/86
15:16 PM 0.50 0.70 7.9 20 R. Walters

8/04/86 8:55 AM 0.30 0.50 7.8 20 R. Walters


15:34 pn 0.40 0.60 7.6 22 R. Walters

8/05/86 8:51 AM 0.40 0.60 7.8 21 R . Wa 1 1 e r s


15:41 PM 0.40 0.60 7.9 21 R. Walters

AM

PM

301
no. 4

MSU Chlorine Demand Study

LOCATION: ff083 - 200 North Main Street, Branford

rime of Free Total Tenp. Collected


Date Collection Chlor ino Chlor ine PH by
9:56 AM 1.20 1.40 7.2 22 R. Walters
7/29/86
16:31 PH 1.10 1.30 7.3 22 R. Unit era

7/30/86
9:44 AM 0.60 0.80 7.3 22 R. Walters
16:37 PM 1.00 1.20 7.3 22 R. Walters
10:14 AM 0.90 1.10 7.3 21 R. Walters
7/31/86
16:56 PM 1.30 1.50 7.6 21 R. Walters

8/01/86 9:48 AM 1.30 1.50 7.6 21 R. Walters

16:34 PH 1.40 1.60 7.6 21 R. Walters

8/02/86 9:50 AM 1.20 1.40 7.2 21 R. Walters


16:16 PM 1.10 1.30 7.3 21 R. Walters

8/03/86 10:06 AM 1.30 1.50 7.5 22 R. Walters


16:15 PM 1.10 1.30 7.4 21 R. Walters

8/04/86 9:52 AM 1.20 1.40 7.5 21 R. Walters


16:32 PM 0.90 1.10 7.4 20 R. Walters

9:51 AM 0.90 1.10 7.4 20 R. Walters


8/05/86
16:47 PM 0.80 1.00 7.4 20 R. Walters

AM

PM

302
no. 5

MSU Chlorine Demand Study

LOCATION: 0106 - 510 lighthouse Road. New Hnven

rime of Pree Total Temp. Collected


Date Collection Chlor ine Chlor Ine °C
pn by

9:05 AM 1.00 1.20 7.5 T> R, Walters


7/29/86
15:45 PM 1.10 1.30 7.6 2? R. Walters

8:55 AM 1.20 1,40 7.6 22 R. Walters


7/30/86
15:49 PM 1.20 1,40 7,5 21 R, Walters

9:26 AM 1.20 1.40 7.4 21 R. Walters


7/31/86
15:40 PM 1.00 1.20 7.8 20 R. Walters

8:59 AH 1.00 1.20 7.6 21 R. Walters


8/01/86
15:46 PH 1.00 1.20 7.7 21 R, Walters

9:00 AM 1.10 1.30 7.6 20 R. Walters


8/02/86
15:22 PM 1.00 1.20 7.6 21 R. Walters

9:18 AM 0.80 1.00 7.8 21 R. Walters


8/03/86
15:25 PM 1.10 1.30 7.6 21 R. Walters

9:03 AM 1.10 1.30 7.4 20 . R. Walters


8/04/86
15:46 PM 1.00 1.20 7.5 20 R. W.i 1 tors

9:04 AM 1.00 1.20 7.5 20 R. Walters


8/05/86
15:50 PH 1.10 1.30 7.8 21 R. Walters

AM

PM

303
no. 6.

MSU Chlorine Demand Study

LOCATION: 0128 - 80 Shore Drive. Brnnford________

Time of Free Total Temp. Collected


Date Collection Chlorine °C
Chlorine pH by
9:24 AM 0.90 1.10 7.3 21 R. Walters
7/29/86
16:00 PM 1.30 1.50 7.2 22 R. Walters

9:10 AM 1.30 1.50 7.3 21 R. Walters


7/30/86
16:04 PM 1.30 1.50 7.4 21 R. Walters

9:43 AM 1.40 1.60 7.3 20 R . Wn 1 1 c r s


7/31/86
15:55 PH 1.20 1.40 7.3 21 R . W2 1 1 e r s

9:17 AM 0.90 1.10 7.4 21 R. Walters


8/01/86
16:03 PM 1.40 1.60 7.4 21 R . Wa 1 1 e r s

9:17 AM 0.90 1.10 7.3 20 R. Walters


8/02/86
15:43 PM 1.70 1.90 7.4 21 R, Walters

9:34 AM 1.20 1.40 7.5 21 R. Walters


8/03/86
15:44 PM 1.50 1.70 7.3 21 R. Walters

9:21 AM 1.20 1.40 7.2 20 R. Walters


8/04/86
16:03 PM 1.20 1.40 7.1 21 R. Walters

9:26 AM 1.10 1.30 7.3 21 R. Walters


8/05/86
16:07 PM 1.20 1.40 7.3 21 R . W.n L t o r s

AM

PM

304
Appendix B.4 Twenty-four Hour Measurements of Chlorine Residuals in the
Saltonstall System

305
co
o
CO
co
GJ
§
co
o
CD
Fig. 10
OBSERVED RESIDUALS
Sta. SI28

09
CO
OBSERVED RESIDUALS
Sta. SI28

CO
APPENDIX C - Microbiological Analysis and Testing
(not included)

315
APPENDIX D PIDDT PIANT EXPERIMENTS

Appendix D.I Various Data Tables from Chapter 5

TABLE D.I
Characteristics of the Pilot Filters and Treated Water at the West River
Treatment Plant

Pilot Filters
Diameter 12 in. (0.31 m) ID
Media 20 in. (0.51 m) anthracite
10 in. (0.25 m) sand
4-6 in. (0.10-0.15 m) pea stone
8-10 in. (0.20-0.30 m) gravel
Mean particle size
anthracite 0.80-0.89 mm
sand 0.35-0.45 mm
Hydraulic loading rate
pilot filters 1.7 gpm/ft2

Treated Water (influent to Pilot Filters will be drawn from unfiltered


water at West River)
Hydraulic loading rate
West River filters . 2-3 gpm ft2
Filter Run Time 24-30 h
Chemical dosage
alum 4-5 mg l"1
polymer 2 mg I"1
Chemical feed chamber
chlorine 2 mg I"1 (after
filtration)
fluoride 1 mg I"1
NaOH 8 mg I"1
phosphate 1 mg l"1

316
TABIE D.2-1
PH and Color (Co/Pt Color Units) in Waters of the RIS Pilot Plant
date PH PH PH pH pH color color color color color
1986 FT FAE FEE RTAE RTBE FI FAE FEE RTAE RTBE

03/18 7.1 7.3 7.0 7.2 7.2 20 10 10 10 10


03/24 7.3 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.3 15 05 05 05 05
03/26 7.6 - - - - 15 - - - -
03/31 6.5 7.1 7.1 7.2 7.2 20 00 00 00 00
04/04 7.4 7.0 7.0 7.3 7.4 20 00 00 05 00
04/07 7.2 7.1 7.0 7.1 7.1 25 00 00 00 05
04/09 7.4 7.1 7.1 7.2 7.0 15 00 00 00 00
04/11 7.7 6.9 6.9 7.2 7.3 15 00 00 00 00
04/14 7.6 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.6 10 10 10 05 05
04/16 7.7 6.9 7.0 7.3 7.2 20 00 00 00 00
04/18 7.4 7.1 7.2 7.1 7.2 20 00 10 00 00
04/21 7.7 7.4 7.6 7.3 7.5 15 00 00 00 05
04/23 8.1 7.3 7.5 7.2 7.4 15 00 05 00 00
04/25 7.5 7.2 7.1 7.4 7.4 15 00 00 10 05
04/28 7.9 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.2 15 05 00 05 00
04/30 7.1 7.2 7.2 7.0 7.2 10 00 00 00 00
05/02 7.6 6.9 7.1 7.2 7.0 15 00 00 05 05
05/05 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.4 7.4 15 05 05 05 05
05/07 7.3 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.1 15 00 00 05 05
05/09 7.4 7.2 7.2 7.4 7.2 15 00 00 05 05
05/12 7.5 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 15 00 00 00 00
05/14 7.4 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.2 15 00 00 05 00
05/16 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.1 20 00 00 00 00
05/19 7.3 7.3 7.2 7.5 7.3 10 00 00 00 00
05/21 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.1 7.2 20 00 05 00 00
05/23 7.2 7.1 7.2 7.1 7.2 15 05 00 00 00
05/28 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.0 7.1 15 00 00 00 00
05/30 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.3 15 00 00 00 00
06/02 7.3 7.1 7.2 7.1 7.1 15 00 00 00 00
06/04 7.1 7.0 7.1 7.0 7.0 15 00 00 00 00
06/06 7.3 7.3 7.0 7.3 7.2 10 00 00 00 00
06/09 8.5 7.6 7.6 7.5 7.5 10 00 00 00 00
06/11 7.1 7.0 7.0 6.7 6.9 10 00 00 00 00
06/13 7.5 7.7 7.6 7.9 7.6 10 00 00 00 00
06/16 7.3 7.3 7.2 7.2 7.3 15 00 00 00 00
06/18 7.3 7.2 7.2 7.1 7.2 10 00 00 00 00
06/23 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 10 00 00 00 00
06/25 7.5 7.4 7.3 7.5 7.4 10 00 00 00 00
06/30 7.3 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 15 00 00 00 00
07/02 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 10 00 00 00 00
07/07 7.3 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 15 00 00 00 00
07/09 7.4 7.3 7.3 7.2 7.3 15 00 00 00 00
07/14 7.1 7.3 7.2 7.1 7.3 10 00 00 00 00
07/16 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.2 7.3 15 00 00 00 00
07/23 7.3 7.1 7.2 7.1 7.1 15 00 00 00 00
07/30 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.1 10 00 00 00 00

317
TABLE D.2-2

Turbidity (NTU) and Tenperature (°C) in Waters of RTS Pilot Plant


date NTU NTU NTU NTU NTU TEMP TEMP TEMP TEMP TEMP
1986 FT FAE FEE RTAE RTBE FI FAE FEE RTAE RTBE

03/18 1.00 - 0.50 0.25 0.30 6.0 - - - -


03/24 0.85 0.20 0.20 0.25 0.30 7.0 — — — —
03/26 0.95 - — — — 7.5 — — — —
03/31 0.75 0.45 0.50 0.25 0.25 9.0 — — — —
04/04 0.60 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.30 10.0 - — — —
04/07 0.90 0.75 0.55 0.55 0.50 10.0 - — — —
04/09 0.50 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.30 10.0 — — — —
04/11 0.80 0.55 0.50 0.55 0.55 10.0 — — — —
04/14 0.75 0.25 0.20 0.15 0.10 10.0 — — — —
04/16 0.55 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 11.0 — — — —
04/18 1.00 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 11.0 - — — —
04/21 0.55 0.30 0.25 0.30 0.20 11.0 12.0 12.5 18.0 18.0
04/23 0.60 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 12.0 12.0 12.0 18.0 18.0
04/25 0.55 0.25 0.30 0.85 0.25 12.0 12.5 12.5 19.0 19.0
04/28 0.55 0.45 0.40 0.30 0.25 13.0 13.0 13.0 19.0 19.0
04/30 0.50 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.20 14.5 15.0 15.0 20.0 20.0
05/02 0.55 0.25 0.25 0.20 0.20 14.0 15.0 15.0 20.0 20.0
05/05 0.50 0.20 0.25 0.40 0.20 15.5 15.0 15.0 20.0 20.0
05/07 0.50 0.25 0.25 0.30 0.25 16.0 16.0 16.0 21.0 21.0
05/09 0.50 0.30 0.30 0.25 0.20 16.0 16.0 16.0 21.0 21.0
05/12 0.50 0.50 0.40 0.15 0.15 17.5 16.0 16.0 21.0 21.0
05/14 0.50 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 16.0 14.5 14.5 21.0 21.0
05/16 0.60 0.15 0.30 0.20 0.20 14.0 14.0 14.0 21.0 21.0
05/19 0.55 0.30 0.20 0.20 0.25 14.0 15.0 15.0 21.0 21.0
05/21 0.50 0.20 0.60 0.20 0.20 16.5 15.5 15.5 20.0 20.0
05/23 0.50 0.20 0.30 0.20 0.20 17.0 16.0 16.0 20.0 20.0
05/28 0.60 0.30 0.30 0.20 0.20 19.0 18.0 18.0 20.0 20.0
05/30 0.55 0.25 0.20 0.25 0.20 22.5 21.0 21.0 21.5 21.5
06/02 0.50 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 22.5 22.0 22.0 23.0 23.0
06/04 0.50 0.20 0.20 0.15 0.20 20.0 20.0 20.0 21.0 21.0
06/06 0.50 0.30 0.30 0.35 0.50 22.0 20.0 20.0 22.0 22.0
06/09 0.65 0.50 0.35 0.45 0.25 21.0 20.0 19.5 21.0 21.0
06/11 0.60 0.25 0.20 0.20 0.15 22.0 20.5 20.5 22.0 22.0
06/13 0.60 0.20 0.20 0.15 0.15 21.0 19.5 19.5 21.0 21.0
06/16 0.70 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.15 22.0 20.0 20.0 22.0 22.0
06/18 0.70 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 21.0 20.5 20.5 22.0 22.0
06/23 0.60 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 22.6 21.0 21.0 22.0 22.0
06/25 0.65 0.25 0.25 0.20 0.20 22.0 20.5 20.5 22.0 22.0
06/30 0.60 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 23.0 22.5 22.5 22.7 22.7
07/02 0.70 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 22.7 22.1 22.0 22.6 22.6
07/07 0.70 0.30 0.30 0.20 0.20 24.1 22.5 22.5 23.3 23.3
07/09 0.70 0.20 0.25 0.20 0.20 25.1 23.9 23.9 23.7 23.7
7/14 0.70 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.20 24.2 22.7 22.3 23.6 23.4
7/16 0.80 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 25.0 22.8 22.8 23.0 23.0
7/23 0.90 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 25.1 24.5 24.4 24.1 24.1
7/30 0.70 0.20 0.20 0.15 0.15 26.6 25.3 25.2 24.8 24.8

318
TABLE D.2-3

Ammonia (mgN/L) and Nitrate (mgN/L) in Waters of RTS Pilot Plant


date NH3 NH3 NH3 NH3 NH3 N03 N03 N03 NO3 N03
1986 FI FAE FEE RTAE RTBE FI FAE FEE RTA RTBE
03/18 0.13 0.21 0.13 0.07 - 0.338 0.351 0.292 0.280
03/24
03/26 0.19 0.22 0.23 0.33 - 0.324 0.317 0.260 0.234
03/31 0.11 0.23 0.02 0.74 - 0.297 0.312 0.240 0.354
04/04
04/07 0.24 0.18 - 0.273 0.262 -
04/09
04/11
04/14
04/16 0.12 0.25 0.20 0.19 - 0.272 0.277 0.250
04/18
04/21
04/23 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 - 0.211 0.217 0.189 0.196
04/25
04/28
04/30 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.314 0.327 0.317 0.142 0.279
05/02
05/05 - - - - - - - - - -
05/07 0. 045 0.164 0.061 0.053 0.051 0.166 0.176 0.167 0.152 0.176
05/09 - - - - - - - - - -
05/12 - - - - - - - - - -
05/14 0. 032 0.045 0.077 0.047 0.039 0.171 0.171 0.173 0.160 0.178
05/16 - - - - - - - - - -
05/19 - - - - - - - - - -
05/21 - - - - - 0.189 0.199 0.202 0.202 0.194
05/23 - - - - - - - - - -
05/28 0. 022 0.023 0.013 0.035 0.013 0.137 0.134 0.127 0.158 0.139
05/30 - - - - - - - - - -
06/02 - - - - - - - - - -
06/04 0. 462 0.487 0.475 0.520 0.484 0.090 0.487 0.092 0.081 0.098
06/06 - - - - - - - - - -
06/09 - - - - - - - - - -
06/11 0. 05 0.09 0.09 0.07 0.10 .078 0.088 0.088 0.065 0.104
06/13 - - - - - - - - - -
06/16 - - - - - - - - - -
06/18 0. 017 0.007 <0.02 0.025 <0.02 0.125 0.097 0.106 0.134 0.106
06/23 - - - - - - - - - -
06/25 0. Oil 0.013 0.055 0.030 0.034 0.126 0.150 0.138 0.196 0.169
06/30 - - - - - - - - - -
07/02 0. 015 0.010 0.010 0.054 0.011 0.084 0.090 0.085 0.078 0.089
07/07 - - - - - - - - - -
07/09 0. 105 0.126 0.106 0.327 0.170 0.172 <0.002 <0.002 0.098 0.039
07/14 — - - - - — - — - -
07/16 <0 .02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.050 0.096 0.099 0.087 0.105
07/23 0. 02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 <0.02 0.067 0.062 0.062 0.036 0.067
07/30 0. 987 0.894 0.993 0.839 1.01 0.120 0.130 0.121 0.169 0.148

319
TABLE D.2-4

Nitrite (mgN/L) and TKN (mgN/L) in Water of RTS Pilot Plant


date NO2 N02 NO2 NO2 NO2 TKN TKN TKN TKN TKN
1986 FT FAE FEE RTAE RTBE FI FAE FEE RTAE RTBE

03/18 - <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 -----


03/24 ----------
03/26 - <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 -----
03/31 - <0.002 <0.002 <O.002 <0.002 -----
04/04 ----------
04/07 - <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 ------
04/09 ----------
04/11 ----------
04/14 ----------
04/16 - <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 -----
04/18 ----------
04/21 ----------
04/23 - <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 -----
04/25 - - - - . -
04/28 ----------
04/30 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 -----
05/02 ----------
05/05 ----------
05/07 <O.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 -
05/09 ----------
05/12 ----------
05/14 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 -----
05/16 ----------
05/19 ----------
05/21 0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 -----
05/23 - - - --
05/28 <O.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 0.294 0.327 0.467 0.277 0.279
05/30 ----------
06/02 ----------
06/04 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 -
06/06 ----------
06/09 ----------
06/11 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 -----
06/13 ----------
06/16 ----------
06/18 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 0.91 0.24 0.15 0.66 0.75
06/23 ----------
06/25 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 1.03 0.63 0.19 0.67 0.17
06/30 ----------
07/02 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 0.81 0.42 0.58 0.25 0.01
07/07 ----------
07/09 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 0.005 0.004 0.23 <0.04 <0.04 0.04 0.07
07/14 ----------
07/16 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 0.23 0.15 0.15 0.12 0.18
07/23 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 <0.002 0.24 0.08 0.01 <0.04 0.13
07/30 <0.038 0.045 0.039 0.060 0.069 -

320
TABLE D.2-5
TOG (mgC/L) and TPHOS (mgP/L) in Waters of RTS Pilot Plant
date TOC TOC TOC TOC TOC TPHOS TPHOS TPHOS TPHOS TPHOS
1986 FT FAE FEE RTAE RTBE FI FAE FEE PTAE RTBE

03/18 - 2.33 2.08 2.28 2.39 - 0.15 0.02


03/24 - 2.13 2.03 2.27 2.34 -----
03/26 ______ o.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
03/31 ------ o.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
04/04 - 1.92 1.88 2.16 2.12 -----
04/07 - - - - - - 0.02 0.02 -
04/09 - 1.25 1.87 2.08 2.04 -----
04/11 _---__-__-
04/14 ----__-_--
04/16 - 2.02 1.97 2.17 2.11 - 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02
04/18 _-___-_-_-
04/21 __-______-
04/23 - 1.91 1.89 2.12 2.03 - 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02
04/25 _---__-__-
04/28 _--___--_-
04/30 2.80 2.02 1.95 2.24 2.05 0.34 - 0.08 0.08 0.15
05/02 _-_______-
05/05 ________--
05/07 2.85 2.16 2.03 2.32 2.08 -----
05/09 __-____--_
05/12 __-_____--
05/14 2.75 1.96 2.01 - 1.92 0.07 0.07 0.11 - 0.07
05/16 ___-____--
05/19 __________
05/21 2.90 2.58 2.44 2.19 2.09 0.09 0.12 0.04 - 0.04
05/23 __-____---
05/28 2.60 1.99 2.57 1.86 1.96 -----
05/30 2.60 -
06/02 __________
06/04 __________
06/06 - - - - - <0.01 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01
06/09 _-___-___-
06/11 - 0.09 <0.01 0.07 0.03 0.07
06/13 _-_____---
06/16 _____ o.06 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04
06/18 ___-____-_.
06/23 ---____---
06/25 _____ <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.03 0.02
06/30 _--__--__-
07/02 - - - - - 0.05 0.04 0.02 0.03 0.02
07/07 _-_-_---__
07/09 - - - - - <0.01 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
07/14 __-__----_
07/16 _____ <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
07/23 - - - - 0.02 0.02 <0.01 0.02 <0.01
07/30 ----- <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 <0.01

321
TABLE D.2-6
MFTC (cfu/lOOmL) and HPC (cfu/mL) in Waters of RTS Pilot Plant
date MFTC MFTC MFTC MFTC MFTC HPC HPC HPC HPC HPC
1986 FI FAE FEE RTAE RTBE FI FAE FEE RTAE RTBE

03/18 13 0 0 0 0 14 2 10 >5700 92
03/24 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 4000 2900
03/26 0 0 0 0 0 10 54 52 632 2564
03/31 3 0 0 0 0 24 0 0 0 0
04/04 0 0 0 0 0 >5700 8 >5700 >5700 >5700
04/07 0 0 1 0 0 136 2 2 >5700 >5700
04/09 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 2 >5700 >5700
04/11 25 0 0 0 0 166 6 8 1444 1070
04/14 1 0 0 0 0 74 0 6 >5700 >5700
04/16 3 0 0 0 0 62 0 4 28 >5700
04/18 13 0 0 0 0 110 0 0 350 386
04/21 0 0 0 0 0 110 0 48 >5700 >5700
04/23 3 0 0 0 0 142 2 48 >5700 >5700
04/25 12 0 0 0 0 76 18 6 132 920
04/28 2 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 318 356
04/30 - 0 0 0 0 — 48 16 134 168
05/02 0 0 0 0 0 12 4 0 1482 486
05/05 - 0 1 0 0 - 36 6 454 350
05/07 21 0 0 0 0 38 74 30 >5700 >5700
05/09 2 0 0 0 0 122 44 26 1540 1370
05/12 2 0 0 0 0 6 68 14 1350 1870
05/14 1 128 0 0 0 12 8 0 260 142
05/16 2 0 0 0 0 6 68 14 1350 1870
05/19 0 0 0 0 0 74 0 54 1962 1724
05/21 11 0 2 0 0 50 224 78 654 788
05/23 3 1 0 0 0 42 112 82 1480 1250
05/28 2 0 0 0 0 10 1 1 1 2
05/30 1 0 0 0 1 54 92 >5700 2 570
06/02 2 6 0 1 0 324 1020 460 >5700 2620
06/04 2 0 1 0 0 >5700 468 112 5020 1820
06/06 1 0 0 0 0 144 390 370 3190 710
06/09 0 0 0 0.3 0.3 >5700 28 78 5100 216
06/11 7 0.3 0.3 0 0.3 92 441 447 845 320
06/13 33 0.6 0.6 0.3 0.6 198 127 170 5100 1080
06/16 6 0 0.3 0 0.3 76 0 805 940 102
06/18 20 0.6 1 0.3 0.6 96 1360 700 1870 130
06/23 0 0.6 0 0 0 506 210 580 670 400
06/25 0 0 0.3 0.3 0.3 204 370 184 680 1430
06/30 10 0.6 1 0.3 0 288 1230 690 2160 1310
07/02 24 3 2 0 0 404 26400 25400 20200 2390
07/07 6 0 0.3 0 0.6 >5700 20 84 2940 530
07/09 1 0.3 0 0 0 242 12800 7000 1400 8000
07/14 14 0 1 0 1.3 366 860 1700 2840 1940
07/16 60 0.3 0.3 0.3 1 1360 3900 200 5500 3000
07/23 200 0.3 0 0 200 396 8600 1140 1780 3090
07/30 0 0 0.3 0 4 1780 2400 420 900 690

322
TABLE D.2-7

Alkalinity (itgCaO03 ) in Waters of RIS Pilot Plant

date ALK ALK ALK ALK ALK


1936 FI FAE FBE RTAE RTBE

03/18 _ 13 13 13 13
03 / £4 - IE 12 16 16
03 / £6 - - - -
03/31 - 11 11 15 14
04/04 - 12 13 13 17
04/07 - 11 11 15 15
04/09 - 12 IE 13 13
04/11 - IE IE 13 12
04/14 - 11 11 14 14
04/16 - 13 13 16 15
04/18 - 12 13 16 16
04/£l - 13 11 16 16
04 /£3 - 12 IE 15 13
04 / £5 - 10 10 16 13
04 / £8 - 13 13 14 14
04/30 14 IE IE 15 14
05/0H - 11 11 15 15
05/05 16 13 15 20 16
05/07 14 16 14 15 13
05/09 14 10 11 14 12
05/12 15 12 13 15 14
05/14 14 IE 14 15 14
05/16 12 13 IE 15 14
05/19 14 13 13 16 14
05/21 13 15 IE 15 15
05/23 13 13 IE 16 16
05/28 12 13 13 12 15
05/30 14 11 13 16 14
06/02 15 13 13 17 15
06/04 13 10 13 13 13
06/06 13 10 10 14 7
06/09 21 13 IE 16 13
06/11 13 10 11 12 13
06/13 15 12 11 IE 13
06/16 16 IS 10 18 13
06/18 14 11 10 11 15
06/23 14 11 10 17 IE
06/25 14 9 12 12 10
06/30 15 14 13 16 14
07 /0E 15 13 13 13 15
07/07 23 18 13 18 14
07/09 16 13 14 13 15
07/14 18 17 17 17 18
07/16 14 15 14 15 17
07 / £3 17 15 16 15 18
07/30 17 16 11 16 15

323
TABLE D.3
Bacterial Analysis of Filter Media

date filter medium A filter medium B comments


6/11/86
HPC 2.5*104 1.3*106 filter media consist
of a mixture of sand
COLTPOKMS 0 0 and anthracite.
results are based on
(cfu/g) (cfu/g) blotted weight.

324
TABIE D.4

Biof ilm Analysis

date sample TOC HPC COLIFORMS comments


1986 mgC/m e cfu/m E cfu/m=

05/88 4A 52.5 1.2*10 ia> 0 the samples were recei


ved uncooled on a very
4B 76.0 2.7*10 1IB 0 warm day

06/11 1A 267 1.2*10'" 0 the samples were recei-


2A 9.8 1.4*!©' 0 ved frozen on dry ice

3A 34.3 l.Stt^P 0
4A 237 1.1*107 0

IB 215 2.9*10S 0
2B 76.0 1.6*10B 0
3B 15.5 1.3*10e 0
4B 2.8 1.0*!©7 0

06/1? 4A 127 6.8*10 a 0

4B 49.6 2.2*10' 0

07/02 1A 767 7.8*10 118 0


2A 107 2.2*10 IIB 0
SArep 89.9 1 .2* 1 0 IB> 0
3A 85.3 5.9*10' 0
SArep 174 2.2*10 11B 0

IB 512 4.2*10 11B 0


2B 127 1.4*10" 0
3B 102 1.7*10 1B> 0

07/16 1A 919 3.3*10 la 0


lArep 1074 1.9*10»» 0
2A S05 2.9*10* 0
2Arep 172 6.5*10* 0
3A 58.9 1.9* 10s 0
SArep 65.9 1.6*10e 0
4A 55.8 3.6*109 0
4Arep 115 4.0*10* 0

325
TABLE D.4 (CONTINUED)

date sample TOC HPC COLIFORMS comments


1986 mqC/me cfu/ma cfu/m =

07/22 IB 653 3.3*10* 1.2*10 7 the coliforms we're ar


IBrep 601 4.2*10* 1.3*10 T tificially introduced
2B 130 2.9*10= 1.7*10*
2Brep 156 2.8*10a 1.6*10*
3B 91.5 2.6*10* 7.6* X 0=
SBrep 94.5 1.6*10* 8.7*10=
4B 63.6 1.6* 10s 2.0*10=
4Brep 43.1 4.7*10° 2.0*10°

07/28 IB 2.3*10* 5.1*10°


2B 3.8*10° 1.0*10°
3B 1.6*10*
1.2*10°

326
TABU D.5
Chlorine Concentration in the Backwash Water

backwash total free combined total


time chlorine chlorine chlorine
(min) (mg/1) (mq/1) (mg/1)

0 <=start)
1 0.0 0.06 0.06
10 1.06 0.15 1.21
20 1.25 0.16 1.41

initial 1.33 0.16 1.48


cone.

327
TABLE D.6

Results of the Chlorine and Biof ilm Detachment Experiment

date time [chlorine] turbidity HPC


1986 (hr) ( rag / 1 ) ( NTU ) (cfu/ml)

3/4 10:00 0.00 0.13 600

8/5 3:30 0.00 0.14 580


11:00 CHLORINE CONCENTRATION TO 0.3 MG/L
12:00 0.3 0.14 240
12:30 0.3 0.13 200
15:00 0.3 0.14 220

a/6 8 : 00 0.3 0.14 430


12:00 0.3 0.14 4630
4:00 0.3 0.14 6120

a/? 8:00 0.3 0.14 11400


4:00 0.3 0.17 4960

3/8 4 : 00 0.3 0.15 1380

a/ 11 12:25 CHLORINE CONCENTRATION TO 0.9 MG/L


13:25 0.9 0.30 17400
13:40 0.9 0 . 29 12400
13:55 0.9 0 . 30 14800
14:10 0.9 0.32 1500
14:25 0.9 0 . 32 260
15.25 0.9 0.23 140
16:25 0.9 0 . 26 90

8/12 8:00 0.9 0.30 420


13:00 0.9 0.32 3040
16:00 0.9 0.35 3030

3/13 8:00 0.9 0.32 3530


9:00 CHLORINE CONCENTRATION TO 1.2 MG/L
10:00 1.2 0.45 2290
10:15 1.2 0.35 2360
10:30 1.2 0.39 2250
10:45 1.2 0 . 36 1680
1 1 : 00 1.2 0.34 1780
11:30 1.2 0.33 3220
12:00 1.2 0.36 840
1 3 : 00 1.2 0.35 520
14:00 1.2 0.36 800
15:00 1.2 0.37 1200
16:00 1.2 0 . 37 3200

328
TABLE D.6 (CONTINUED)

date time [chlorine] turbidity HPC


1986 (hr) (mq/1) ( NTU ) (cfu/ffil ;

a/14 3:00 1.2 0.36 300


12:00 1.2 0 . 36 400
16:00 1.2 0.35 0

3/15 3:00 1.2 0.36 0


12:00 1.2 0.35 0
1 6 : 00 1.2 0.35 0

3/13 10:00 1.2 4.30 20


11:00 1.2 0.93 0
1 2 : 00 1.2 3.50 0
1 3 : 00 1.2 1 . 50 20
14:00 1.2 1.00 0
15:00 1.2 0 . 66 20
16:00 1.2 0.5S 0

8/20 10:00 CHLORINE CONCENTRATION TO 5.0 MG/L


1 1 : 00 5.0 0 . 35 0
11:15 5.0 0 . 30 2
11:30 5.0 0 . 30 0
11:45 5.0 0 . 30 0
12:00 5.0 0 . 30 0
12:15 5.0 0.30 0
12:30 5.0 0 . 30 0
12:45 5.0 0.30 0
13:00 5.0 0.30 0

8/21 14:00 5.0 0.30 0


15:00 5.0 0 . 40 0
16:00 5.0 0.35 0

329
TABLE D.7

Hydraulic Pressure of Pilot Filters Immediately Before and After


Backwashing. Filter FA was backwashed with chlorinated water while FB
backwash water was chlorine-free.
date pressure FEE pressure FEE pressure FAE pressure FAE
1986 before bw after bw before bw after bw
(ft water) (ft water) (ft water) (ft water)
7/29 10.8 11.9 11.3 12.1
7/30 10.6 11.9 11.5 12.2
7/31 10.6 11.8 11.6 12.0
8/01 10.6 11.9 11.5 12.2
8/02 10.6 11.9 11.6 12.2
8/03 10.7 11.9 11.6 12.1
8/04 10.8 11.9 11.7 12.1
8/06 8.2 11.8 11.1 12.2
8/07 10.5 11.7 12.0 12.2
8/08 9.9 11.7 10.8 11.9
8/09 9.9 11.7 11.0 12.0
8/10 10.0 11.7 10.6 11.9
8/11 9.8 11.6 10.7 11.9
8/12 10.0 11.7 11.0 12.0
8/13 10.0 11.6 11.0 12.0
8/14 10.1 11.0 11.2 11.7
8/15 10.0 11.7 11.1 12.1
8/16 10.1 11.7 11.2 12.0
8/17 10.1 11.8 11.1 12.0
8/18 10.1 11.7 11.2 12.1
8/21 10.2 11.7 11.2 12.0
8/22 10.0 11.7 11.1 12.1
8/23 10.0 11.7 11.1 12.1
8/24 10.0 11.7 11.2 12.0
8/26 10.0 11.7 11.6 11.9
8/27 9.9 11.7 10.5 11.9

330
TABLE D.8
Results of the Shearstress Excursion

RT # flow turbidity-
velocity
(m/s) (NTU)

4A 1.14 0.86
1.37 0.24
1.74 0.20
2-10 0.E3
2.52 0.50
2.88 1.40

3A 1.14 0.19
1.37 0.29
1.74 0.E9
2.10 0.37
2.52 0.77
2.83 1.40

2A 1.14 0.48
1.37 0.48
1.74 0.48
2.10 0.61
2.52 0.95
2.88 1.00

1A 1.14 0.60
1.37 0.60
1.74 0.65
2.10 2.50
2.52
2.88 5.50

331
TABLE D.9

HPC Bacteria in the Biofilm and the Water Phase of RTS B (Low Chlorine
Concentration)

co
CO
ro RT IB RT 2B RT 3B RT 4B
biofilm water biofilm water biofilm water
Date biofilm water
1936 (cfu/m e ) (cfu/ml) (cfu/m e ) (cfu/ml) (cfu/m e ) (cfu/ml) (cfu/m=) (cfu/ml)

S/E5 START OF THE EXPERIMENT

9/11 I.£xl0= E.3xl0= 7.0xl0 a 8.6x10= 1.4x10* E.3xl03 4.5x10* E.lxl03

1.6x103 E.9xl03 3.3xl03 — 4.3xl03


9/13

£.4x10= 4.1x10* 3.5xl03 1.3x10° 1.3x10** 1.3x10° 1.3x10**


9/24 2.6x10=
10/3 7.7x10* 2.8x10° E.3xl0e 1.3x10* 1.2x10* 1.2x10° 8.1x10° 5.0x10**

10/28 3.9X107 1.3x10° 6.9x10 6.5x10


TABLE D.10

HPC Bacteria in the Biofilm and in the Water Phase of RTSA ("High" Chlorine
Concentration).

RT 1A RT EA RT 3A RT 4A
Date biofilm water biof i 1m wate; biofilm water biofilm water
1936 (cfu/m e ) ( cfu/ml) (cfu/m e ) dcfu/i

8/25 START OF THE EXPERIMENT

9/11 0 0 1.6x10" 0 000 0


CO

9/18 0 0 0 10 000 0

10/1 1x6x10* 113 2.0x10* 93 0 185 4.7x10" 142

10/15 1.2x10* 1 3.1x10= 199 7.8x10* 502

10/23 9.9x10= .— — — 1.4x10* — 1.1x10*


1P-8C-90532-1 /88-TC ISBN 0-89867-418-2