Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWWP2700421(1) SewPOSystem Evaluation for Infiltration/I ntlow S- L W BEGINNING OF %r FILE TITLE ewer in r • SEWER SYSTEM EVALUATION FOR INFILTRATION/INFLOW Preparedfor UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER PROGRAM Prepared By flllllllf AMERICAN CONSULTING SERVICES. INC. Minneapolis.Minnesota i, l ; SEWER SYSTEM EVALUATION FOF INFILTRATION/INFLOW ICRIVILMEE Cy PREPARED FOR UNITED STATES ENVIFONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY C TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER PROGRAM C 4 PRESENTED BY LELAND E. GOTTSTEIN, P E. L' PRESIDENT AMERICAN CONSULTING SERVICES, ANC. MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA tI M TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 THE NEW FEDERAL LAW 5 SEWER SYSTEM EVALUATION . . . WHAT IT IS 6 FEDERAL STUDY AND MANUAL OF PRACTICE 6 THE METHODOLOGY OF SEWER SYSTEM. EVALUATION 8 PHASE I - INFILTRATION/INFLOW ANALYSIS 8 a. Patterned Interviews 9 b. Sanitary and Storm Sewer Map Study 10 C. System Flow Diagrams 11 d. Dry vs Wet Weather Flow Determi.iations 12 e. Preliminary Field Survey and Selective Flow Tests 13 f. Determination of Excessive or Non- Excessive infiltration/Inflow 15 g. Establish a Plan o' Action, Budget and Timetable for Execution 16 PHASE II - FIELD INVESTIGATION AND SURVEY 17 a. Physical Survey and Groundwater Analysis 18 b. Rainfall Simulation 19 C. Prepare Engineering Report and Analysis 22 d. Preparatory Sewer Cleaning 24 e. Television Inspection of Preselected Sewers 28 f. . Preparation of the Evaluation Survey Report and Analysis 34 g. Preparation of the Proposed Rehabilitation Program 37 THE NEED FOR PUBLIC RELATIONS 38 PHASE 1TI - REHABILITATION 40 a. Sewer Repair 40 b. Pipe Relining 44 C . Sewer Replacement 45 d. Finalization of Treatment Plant Design 46 SUMMARY 47 APPENDIX 48 Figures 1, 2 , 3 , 4 49 Figure 5 50 Excerpt of Law 51 4� SEWER SYSTEM EVALUATION �y FOR IM. T.NF:LTRATION/INFLOW BY LELAND E. GOTTSTEIN, P. E. R PRESIDENT ■ AMERICAN CONSULTING SERVICES, INC. MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA INTRODUCTION In past yeas, infii;:ration and inflow of extraneous waters �1 into sewer systems were not of much concern to the E:ngineer or y municipal official. Some of the major reasons which trigger desperate corrective measures to solve the extraneous water intru- sion problem are: ItI (1) Flooded basements during period of intensive rainfall 1 ' (2) Excessive power costs for pumping (') Overtaxing of lift station facilities often resulting in frequent electric motor replacements (4) Overloading of treatment plant facilities V (5) Excessive costs of sewage treatment including meter charges R levied by sanitary districts or other jurisdictional L autiLorities (6) Obnoxious odors and health hazards caused with by-passing of raw sewage L -2- (7) A pumping-up action of downstream sewers when excessive r heads and surcharging of manholes occur. When the sur- charging stops and the head over the pipe is relieved r through defective joints, a fine sugar sand enters the pipe with the water. A loss of pipe overburden occurs and the street event -ally settles or collapses. In addition to the above motivators for correction, there are many other sewer system inadequacies which concern the engineer and the municipal official. Pr„blems of infiltration/inflow are often relieved by the construction of relief sewers, larger lift stations and treatment plants, and the use of sewage by- passes throughout the system. Unfortunately, however, this approach results in untreated sewage flows being discharged into rivers, streams, lakes and open ditches . In past years the engineer concerned himself with the best economical design choice of a system which would serve the needs of the community 90 to 95 per cent of the timo. On those rare occasions where the flows were excessive, relief facilities and by-passes provided a con- venient solution to the problem. What were acceptable standards of sewage treatment in the past are not sufficient to meet the sophisticated requirements of treat- ment today. The upgrading of federal and state standards for the 1� -3- c c type and degree of sewage treatment, has rasulted in new problems that the engineer must now face. "Zero discharge" is a new term in the environmental lexicon of today. New federal legislation proposes a zero discharge standard as a national goal. The objective is to eliminate all pollutant dis- r charge to open ditches, lakes, streams , rivers and navigable l., waters. 4 r The engineer is now faced with thc. problem of handling all of 6' the wastewater. The problems connected with infiltration/inflow and overloaded sewer systems must be ;aced. -here is no choice. Past practices of constructing relief sewers and by-pass facilities wil: not solve the problem. Therefore, we must go to the source of the infiltration/inflow problem . . . the sewer system itself. Unfortunately, we have to live with our existing collection systems. We cannot trade them in on new ones. We have huge sums of money invested in our underground .,ewers and the street surfaces above them. The replacement cost of the existing sewers would far exceed what we paid to install them. Complete sewer replacement would not only be too costly but in most cases would not solve the infiltration/inflow problem. V Intrusion of ground water or storm water into the sewer system L r -4- via house laterals and other service connections compound the problem. Often the major contributions to the clear water problem are faulty service connections and direct connections of footing drain tile to the sanitary sewer. Any sewer system evaluation must differentiate between the extraneous water contribution from service connections and those extraneous flows contributed through irregularities or deficiencies in the muni- cipal sewer system. Correction of service connection problems are political in nature and must be handled judiciously. The technology for correcting these problems is also different from that used to correct infiltration/inflow problems in the larger sewer mains. Replacement of municipal sewer mains or grouting sewer joints in the main will not solve the service connection problem. What can we do with our existing sewer systems? We must evaluate these systems and formulate programs to solve the infiltration/ inflow problems. One may ask, where do we start? How do we do it? Who is going to do it? How much will it cost? How long will it take? How are we going to finance it? What assurance do we have that any program will solve the infiltration/inflow problems? What are the alternatives? These and other questions can boggle the mind. The burden is on the engineer and public official to provide answers and solve the problem. This is the real subject of this presentation . . . SEWER SYSTEM EVALUATION. r v ' -5- 4 THE NEW FEDERAL LAW CON OCTOBER 16 , 1972 THE 92ND CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES OVERWHELMINGLY PASSED PUBLIC LAW 92-500 WHICH IS CITED AS THE "FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1972. " IT IS SUGGESTED THAT ANY ENGINEER OR PUBLIC OFFICIAL CONCERNED WITH THE DESIGN, IiAPROVEMENT OR OPERATION OF SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANTS AND/OR SEWAGE COLLECTION SYSTEMS SECURE A COPY OF THE NEW LAW. ■■ MANY CHANGES IN REQUIREMENTS AND ELIGIBILITIES FOR FEDERAL GRANT CASSISTANCr HAVE BEEN MADE. The new act recogni4es that sewer problems can relate to the sewage treatment needs. AMONG THE MANY NEW PROVISIONS IS ONE Gi WHICH PROVIDES FOR FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO SPECIFICALLY DEAL WITH INFILTRATION/INFLOW IN EXISTING SEWER SYSTEMS. Excerpts from Title II of the fe(ieral Water Pollution Control Act Amend- ments of 19-2 are included in the Appendix of this presentation. If you read the excerpts, you will note that it is now mandatory to identify the extraneous water problems and to determine whether the sewer system is subject to excessive infiltration/inflow. Federal grant assistance is available to study the problem and, in turn, to correct or accommodate it provided that all such work V is performed in "accordance with rules and regulations promulgated y by the Administrator" , (EPA) . Copies of the EPA rules and regu- lations are available from each regional EPA office. f -6- SEWER SYSTEM EVALUATION . WHAT IT IS For the purpose of this discussion, we will define sewer system evaluation or system analysis as a systematic approach to evaluating a sewer system which will enable the engineer to: (1) Identify the scope and nature of the infiltration/inflow problem. (2) Establish an end object;.ve. (The amount of infiltration/ inflow that can be economically eliminated) (3) Isolate those neral sections of the sewer system where infiltration/inflow is occurring. (4) Formulate a plan which can be economically justified for investigating and locating specific areas from which the major infilt:ation/inflow emanates. (5) Formulate a plan which will assure correction of the infiltration/inflow problem along with alternatives for rehabilitation and a prediction of the end results that can be expected. (6) Estahlish hydraulic parameters for sewage treatment plant design. FEDERAL STUDY AND MANUAL OF PRACTICE What are the causes, effects and means of ^orrecting excessive extraneous water entering public sewer systems as a result of infiltration and inflow? A very detailed and exhaustive national ,. study examining these factors and their economic impact in the b P I _7_ r� United States has been conducted by the Research Foundation r t . of the American Public Works Association, und-,r contract and r,. in concert with the water quality office of the Environmental Protection Agency. The study involved many public agencies, the American Public Works Association, the American Society Df 1,. Civil Engineers, the Water Foilution Control Federation, an Industrial Advisory Panel , the Associated General Contractors of America azid consulting engineering firms. AS A RESULT OF THIS JOINT EFFORT, TWO DOCUMENTS WERE PUBLISHED. THE FIRST DOCUMENT IS ENTITLED, CONTROL OF INFILTRATION AND INFLOW INTO SEWER SYSTEMS (NO. 11022 EFF 12/70) . THIS REPORT IS A TABULATION AND ANALYSIS OF INTENSIVE FIELD INVESTIGATIONS CARRIED OUT BY THE FULL TIME STAFF OF APWA. THE SECOND DOCUMENT IS ENTITLED, PREVENTION AND CORRECTION OF EXCESSIVE INFILTRATION AND INFLOW INTO SEWER SYSTEMS . A MANUAL OF PRACTICE (NO. 11022 EFF O1/71) . THIS REPORT CONTAINS THE SUGGESTED METHODS, GUIDELINES AND PRACTICES PERTAINING TO THE CONSTRUCTION, TESTING AND ACCEPTANCE OF NEW SEWER FACILITIES AS WELL AS DEALING WITH THE PROBLEMS OF INFILTRATION/INFLOW INTO EXISTING SEWER SYSTEMS. BOTH PUBLICATIONS ARE AVAILABLE FROM THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS, U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON D.C. 20402 AT A COST OF $1. 25 EACH. V r Ir -B- THE REPORTS ARE PART OF THE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL RESEARCH SERIES OF THE WATER QUALITY OFFICE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PRO- TECTION AGENCY. ANYONE WHO IS DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DESIGN ,INSTALLATION OR MAINTENANCE OF SEWER SYSTEMS IS ENCOURAGED TO PURCHASE THESE TIMELY EPA DOCUMENTS AND TO READ THEM THOROUGHLY. THE INFORMATION WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH SOME NEW IDEAS FOR DEALING WITH YOUR OWN SEWER PROBLEMS. THE METHODOLOGY OF SEWER SYSTEM EVALUATION Figure 1 shows the general considerations of an orderly pro- grammed approach to evaluating a sewer system. Each phase of the program will be discussed separately. The following presentation should facilitate the understanding of the rederal Guidelines for control of Infiltration/Inflow in Sewer Systems. Phase I deals with the work involved under the Infiltraticn/Inflow Analysis section of the Federal EPA Guidelines. Phases I7 and III refer to the work involved under the Sewer System Evaluation Survey section. PHASE I - INFILTRATION/INFLOW ANALYSIS Figure 2 shows the essential considerations under this phase of the procras. The first problem is to find the problem. Without identifying how much extraneous water one has to conquer, any program of search and correct would be a shotgun approach without direction. Without a definite objective, no one would know what r -9- l �i portion of the total problem is being solved at any one time nor would one know how much money would have to be spent for correction. a. Patterned Interviews The Patterned Interview involves the first look at the extraneous water problem in the community. An experienced professional ;n the area of infiltration/ inflow should interview e, ,eryone who is, or has been, connected with the sewer system. Subsequent analysis Lof the data will answir questions and give the analyst r a feel of the overall problem, �r + The general objective of the patterned interview is V to focus the problem. The questions should cover a ;y broad spectrum of subjects ranging from technological and geological matters to municipal performance capa- bilities to the socio-economic pr3file of the city. A well planned interview also helps the municipality r to think about its problems in an orderly fashion and tc recognize alternate methods for solution. The ti interviews reveal what the municipality knows and, i i more important, what it does not know about its s^wer Lsystem. It tells both the engineer and municipality what yet remains to be answered before the evaluation L L -.10- program can continue. This is the key to the evaluation process. If you cannot identify the problem you must solve, the system evaluation program should stop. The next step is the collection of all available data such as the treatment plant records, maps, etc, pertain- ing to the infiltration/inflow problem. Many communi- ties have no maps of their sewer system. It is often necessary to gather whatever data is available, however sketchy. Once all this information is gathered, it must be assimilated, and here is where analytical as well as practical experience in sanitary engineering and sewer system maintenance is necessary. Questions and Comments: b. S.^nitary and Storm Sewer Map Study The next step is to study the plot maps of the sanitary and storm sewer systems. If tho maps are not available in r asonably accurate form, system evaluation is diffi- cult if not impossible and efforts must be made to J garner whatever piece-meal information is available. A map should be developed for those areas which need J M r. r L, evaluation since the patterned interviews may dictate r' that the entire sewer system need not be evaluated. i.. CThe study of the plot maps generally reveals relation- ship of storm sewers to sanitary sewers, location of pumping stations, key manhole juncture points, and a host of other valuable data. Without accurate plot maps and flow charts, further study is impossible. fI" Yr r- Questions and Comments: L C. System Flew Diagrams When the appropriate sewer plot maps are developed, it is then possible to divide the system into mini- systems which can be stuAed independently. The Vector Flow diagrams can be prepared which will relate the theoretical sewer capacities to the actual flow conditions. Information from the vector flow diagrams coupled with the study of the sewer plot maps and analysis cf the data collected during the patterned interviews gives -12- the experienced analyst the sense of direction he needs to solve the infiltration/inflow problems in the sewer. system. Questions and Comments: d. Dry vs Wet Weather Flow Determinations Analysis begins with a very careful comparison of the flow records obtained from the municipality. Correlations are drawn between times of high sewage flow and periods of heavy rainfall and/or runoff . � i - ) 1 The difference between the peak industrial anu domestic flow rates and peak we weather flow rate determines what we call "Dcit3-Q" flow rate, or the magnitude of the extraneous water problem. The nature of the infiltration/inflow problem, the sewage treatment requir ments, the industrial sewage contribution, the climatological and seasonal vari- ations, must be considered in determining the scope i of the study and the time of performance. The Delta -13- w Q should be reduced to its contributing components tr by district to facilitate the investigation in the major problem areas. r Questions e.nd Comments: bw rh b r e. Preliminary Field Survey and Selective Flow Tests Flow surveys and other tests can be conducted at selective locations to more accurately determine is the scope of the infiltration/inflow problem. The t 6, engineer should familiarize himself with the subject + of instrumentation relating to appropriate sewer flow Yw measurement techniques. It is safe to say that there has been much time wasted gathering flow data by "V" Is notch or other types of weirs on a 24 hour surveillance i y .oasis. The results have either been useless or E inconclusive. r Flow tests conducted at the wrong time and under the V wrong conditions will lead to fallacious conclusions, and random weiring at key locations in the system may not yield meaningful results. Ineffectual tests can L -14- result in costly corrective measures and provide no solution for the flooded Casement conditions, raw sewage by-passing, or other infiltration/inflow connected problems. The author has found that one of the most practical methods of flow measurement ib simply to measure the depth of flow in pre-determined key manholes with a ruler. r Knowing the hydraulic characteristics of the sewers in these manholes (31ope, pipe size; etc.) a computation will determine the flow rate. It is important that these depth measurements are taken at the proper times, such as dry weather, high groundwater and rainfall situations, so that the relationships between the flo, at these times can be compared. These measurements, coupled with allowances for peak domestic and industrial flow rates, will be the determinant as to whether flows are possibly excessive or non-excessive at these key points. Questions and Comments: -15- f. Determination of Excessive or Non-Excessive Infiltration/ Irflow Information to be obtained and evaluated in making a determination as to whether flows are excessive or r, non-excessive includes: r+ 1. Flow data for all flows in the sewer system Lr including overflows and bypassed flows 2. Location, frequency and cause of overflow conditions in the collection/treatment system caused by r infiltration/inflow L 3 . Relationships of existing population and industrial contribution to flows in the sewer system 4 . Geographical and geological conditions which may affect the present and future quantities or correction costs of the infiltration/inflow 5. A general discussion of age, length, type, macevials of construction and known physical condition of the sewer systems From this information preliminary estimates can be developed for the relative costs (for the design life of the treatment works) both for correcting the infiltration/ inflow conditions, and increasing the treatment works capacity to provide the required degree of wastewater treatment for the quantities of infiltration/inflow. 4 -16- Excessive infiltration/inflow would to present in the sewer system if the cost estimate for its treatment would be greater than the cost estimates for its correction. Questions and Comments: g. Establish a Plan of Action, Budget and Timetable for Execution Having determined in the earlier phases of the infiltration/inflow analysis that the infiltration; inflow problem is excessive, the engineer must now recommend a program that will culminate in the solution o` the problem. A proposed detailed plan for a systematic sewer system evaluation surv,sy would normally be divided into five phases: 1. Physical Survey 2. Rainfall Simulation 3 . Preparatory Cleaning _ 4 . Television Inspection 5 . Analysis -17 - An explanation of the plan would include the tasks to be performed, the method of task accomplishment, data to be obtained and recorded, information and data to be reported and a cost estimate for each phase of the survey which is recommended. An approximate estimate of starting dates and duration of execution of each phase is necessary taking into account the climatological restrictions for performance. r ' Questions and Comments: 4 _i,,a V 4, E"vlJc-��A %/o/� I PHASE II - FIELD INVESTIGATION AND SURVEY The infiltration/inflow problem has now been identified, areas of study established, budget estimates set and expected results determined. Phase II can now be considered. Figure 3 generally outlines the work entailed in this phase of the system in,.esti- gation. It should be pointed out that the physical survey, ground water analysis and rainfall simulation work must be com- pleted before it is possible to prepare an engineering report, analysis and timetable for the performance of the preparatory sewer cleaning and selected television inspection studies. -16- a. Physical Survey and Groundwater Analysis The physical survey of the sewer system involves the descent into every manhole that is within the study ar.3a of the sewer system. It should be emphasized that the mere observation of sewer flows from on the top oL the ground does not constitute a physical survey. Accurate assessments of actual manhole and sewer conditions can only be made from inside the manhole. The physical survey is con- ducted by descending every manhole in the area of study and actually observing the degree and nature of the deposition in all lines into and out of the manhole. Unless each manhole is descended and each pipe Tamped, it is unlikely that the engineer can accurately judge the impact of infiltration on the system as a whole. By actual observation the engineer may be able to eliminate large portions of the system from further study. Inspection by a trained observer during the physical 11Y survey generally reveals sources of inflow that might otherwise go undetected, such as manhole covers U/ w 1 . -1Q- with large holes, obvious deficiencies in the manhole structures, manholes located in natural pondinq areas and other such deficiencies. These sources of inflow are usually the least costly to eliminate. The physical survey provides valuable information for s refining the cist effective rehabilitation estimates. W. Questions and Comments: V b. Rainfall Simulation _- If the infiltration/inflow analysis demonstrates that major inflow problems occur during periods of intense rainfall, a controlled systematic check of all storm sewers that parallel or cross the sanitary sewer system acid/or house services should be initiated. In performing this phase, the percolative capacity of the soil should be taken into account. A Rainfall Simulation study is not simply the flooding of storm sewers with dyed water, but is a geologic and hydrologic study of the assimilative capacity of soil surrounding the storm sewer, coupled with the susceptability of the sanitary sewers to accept U -20- the exfiltration/infiltration phenomenon. In addition, before and after flow rate comparisons are essential to the success of this phase of the work. Unless these flow rates are compared, it is impossible to determine the impact of rainfall on the system as related to '_-he exfiltration/infiltration phenomenon. Without the appropriate engineering considerations, i.e. flow rate comparisons, time of flooding, time lapse for dye transfer, etc. , the results of an impro- perly conducted storm sewer flooding program will yield fallacious results upon which equally fallacious con- clusions and recommendations will be made. Again the reader is cautioned that great care and professional judgement should be exercised in conduct- ing these simulation tests. They should not be con- ducted by the inexperienced or lay person. Diverse field conditions dictate the extent of this phase. The number of open ditches and closed storm sewer conduits to be tested and the availability of water supplies are a few of the major considerations that must be taken into account during this phase of the program. (rr. -21- IW r t. It should be pointed out that rainfall simulation is not always required in every system evaluation C study. Here again whether or not storm sewers are to be tested is dependent upon the pre-determination by the engineer, He must decide whether or not the impact of rainfall on the sanitary sewer system creates excessive inflow conditions. Furthermore, it [p_ should be brought to the engineer ' s attention that this Y work does not include the cleaning and/or televising Cof the storm sewers being tested. Only in very rare and unusual cases, will storm sewers need to be Vcleaned and televised as part of a sewer system evaluation study. Hydraulic testing of storm sewers to determine whether exfiltration and cross connections affect the adjacent sanitary sewers should not be con- fused with the procedure of televising sewers. Questions and Comments: v b !w p , -22- c . Prepare Engineering Report and Analysis The engineering report which summarizes and evaluates all of the findings of the physical survey, groundwater analysis and rainfall simulation studies, provides the basis for the culmination of this pha' e of the program. The engineer must be able to economically justify his recommendations for future work. His conclusions must assure the municipality chat, if the work is carried out as recommended, the infiltration/ inflow problem will be brought under control. The report should further itemize the infiltration/inflow findings by sewer district which then is correlated to the total Delta Q. Television, inspection and cleaning schedules are established and the next phases of the study are determined. Based on the recommendations and analyses from the physical survey and rainfall simulation, meaningful engineering reports can be prepared and budget adjust- ments made. At this juncture in the program, precise locations for televising can be determined and the exact cost of these TV inspections established. Com- pletion dates and end results can be predicted. The engineer can plan the necessary preparatory sewer cleaning and television inspection. Sewer cleaning -23- costs can also be accurately predicted. Because time is usually a critical factor, it should be pointed out that the television inspection generally can be acccmplished much more rapidly than the preparatory sewer cleaning. Many municipalities are not sufficiently staffed to Perform the preparatory sewer cleaning prior to the deadline stipulated by federal and state govern- ments. Generally not they do possess the cleaning equipment which will minimize the time required for w Proper preparatory cleaning. It is the engineei ' s responsibility to advise the municipality on the latest sewer cleaning techniques, the time required to perform the work and the anticipated costs. After a thorough discussion of all of the findings and recommendations as a result of the field investiga- tions, the municipality is now ready to proceed with selective preparatory cleaning and television inspection. Quest'.ons and Comments: w V 1 0• -24- d. Preparatory Sewer Cleaning At this point a reiteratior and further clarification of the preparatcry sewei cleaning program is necessary. The importance of identifying the physical condition of the sewer .ystem was previously discussed. The findings of the physical survey indicate not only the r apparent deficiencies in the system, but also the nature a and degree of the dcposition within the sewers. r In many smaller communities , routine maintenance q may mean rodding of sewers on an as needed basis with ` occasional flushing of the rest of the system once or twice a year. In other communities, routine main- tenance may mean actual cleaning of each section of 6. sewer once every two to three years. The important point to stress is that full gauge instruments must be used in any sewer cleaning preparatory to Tv f inspection. Full gauge instruments may mean rubber squeegees with the use of the conventional bucket machines or they may mean an extra pass or two with the high velocity hydraulic jet machine. Particular attention shoul-1 be paid to root removal . Up to now, the successful removal of roots with the use O -25- O Y of a jet machine and hydraulic roo 'utter has not Oproven successful enough to ! , considered as sufficient Opreparation for TV viewing. Tt is recommended that conventional bucket machines be used with root scarifiers, Obrushes and squeegees where ever heavy root infestations are in evidenc. . These areas are located during the Ophysical survey. OThe preparation of a routine sewer maintenance program Ois included as part of the physical survey report since future costs for sewer maintenance are projected in the report. Intelligent budgeting is now possible rather than basing the sewer maintenance budget on last 1., year' s figures plus 10 per cent which were based on the previous year ' s figures plus 10 per cent, etc . , all of which were really not based on cleanliness, or lack thereof. In analyzing this data, the scope of the sewer cleaning program can re established in terms of crew hours and 4 dollars. Sewer cleaning is a necessary prerequisite f' for any subsequent television inspection that may be required. Many engineers are not aware of the tremendous Otime involved in properly preparing sewers for television y V -26- inspection. They assume that this is a routine function that any municipality is capable of performing. Thorough clean-rg of sewers which will permit. optimum viewing wi*.h television cameras is not routine work in most municipalities. In addition, municipal governments generallv do not provide adequate funds to do the "first time around cleaning" needed to restore full capacity to sewers. Therefore, it is the du^:y of the engineer to not only describe the general condition of the sewer system, including all of the physical deficiencies that can be visually observed, but also to point out the scope of the cleaning program required. Special emphasis should be placed on those locations where infiltration/inflow is known to exist. The data from the physical survey will dictate the most practical scheduling of municipal sewer cleaning crews, and for the first time will permit municipal officials to set realistic budgets for these activities. There are ve.rious ways to clean a sewer. With the advent of the new hydraulic cleaning machines, more efficient sewer cleaning can be accomplished in a fraction of the time required by older methods. Facing up to the cleaning problems has forced many municipalities to reconsider not -z7- only their budgets, but the methods they employ for sewer maintenance. Cleaning costs, however , are a function of the nature of the deposition, volume of debris to be removed and the distance between manholes. It is the engineer ' s responsibility to accurately justify these cleaning costs as part of his estimated budget for system evalu- ation and restoration. Normally more sewers will have to be cleaned than are televised. Depending on the findings of the physica. survey, there are times when extra clearing is necessary to avoid the reclogging of sewers prior to televising, This will assure that the sewers to be internally studied will remain clean long enough for television inspection work. The cleaning process is generally far more time consuming than zhe actual television inspection work, it is not reasonable to have a television camcz" available on site at all times while the cleaning crews are workin5 in attempts to televise right behind the cleaning crews ,. This method will result in much higher costs for TV inspection. The preparatory sewer cleaning will be an allowable Federal cost only where it is necessary prior to any -za- television inspection. WHOLESALE, INDISCRIMINATE AND ECONOMICALLY UNJUSTIFIABLE SEWER CLEANING AND TELE- VISING WILL NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR FUNDING ASSISTANCE. Questions and Comments: e. Television Inspection 3f Preselected Sewers Under the previous phases of the work, the infiltration/ inflow problem was localized. It was identified in terms of approximate quantities and the general areas where the sources originate. The municipality now knows that the sewers in these areas are leaking, but it does not know whether or not such leaks emanate from house services, joints, broken pipe, cross connections, etc. It also does not know the general condition of the pipe, the number of contributing sources , nor their quantitative contribution of extraneous water. The ONLY way to pinpoint the problem is by use of the television camera. The sophisticated use of this inspec- tion tool will produce valuable data which can be con- structively used for analytical purposes. Since viewing r t, -29- r. the monitors also requires field interpretations, the same tool in the hands of the inexperienced, with little or no analytical capabilities can prove to be a great �j waste of time and money. Television provides the only means by which moving water can be instantly observed. This, of cour,e, is the object of a system evaluation. C If the infiltration/inflow analysis indicates that ground water is the major Factor contributing to the infiltration/ inflow problem, televising sewers in the middle of the driest months will not yield the expected results. TV Linspection must be conducted d,,.ring those periods when r the ground water is at its highest level. V Groundwater studies are usually encompassed as part of W the physical survey of the sewer system. Groundwater gages should be installed in key selected manholes as a means of correlating the impact of static heads on `' sewage flows. This procedure will be necessary in order Lto determine the relative significance of infiltration to the total infiltration/inflow problem. Figure 5 shows f a typical static groundwater ga c= installation. r L -30- If it has been pre-determined that inflow is a signifi- cant part of the problem, selected storm sewers should be reflooded so that television irspection can be accomplished under simulated rainfall conditions. Those sections of storm sewers that must he reflooded during the TV inspection are determined during the Rainfall Simulation Study. Experience to date has shown that the use of still photography is neither practical nor advisable for a sewer system evaluation survey. The objective in any study is to identify all of the sources of infiltration/ inflow . . . therefore, one must include the extraneous water contributions from service connections. If, for example, a house service is flowir.- during a TV inspection, the camera travel must be stopped and the possibility of domestic contribut+.on to the observed flow determined. I` no flows are being generated within the house, then it can be assumed that the observed flow is infiltration or inflow. Basement footing drain tile, yard drains and other extraneous water sources entering the house service are further indications that the flow, observed on the TV screen are not domestic contributions. r -31- r� Still photography may indicate (after the film is developed) that a house service was flowing, raising the question, "Were those people using their facilities at three o' clock yesterday afternoon?" No one will ever know. To date, the author' s attempts to conduct infiltration studies using still photography or movie cameras have met with little success. Still photography or the use of movie cameras may have merit if the intent of the sewer inspection is merely for structural purposes. Experience, however, has shown that TV cameras are preferable for infiltration/ inflow st.adies since dc_`iciencies are more discernable and can be evaluated instantly as compared to waiting for film development. It is important that any TV inspection for infiltration/inflow identification include the location and rate of contribution of each leak. Without such quantitative evaluations, extensive repairs based on sealing big leaks, little leaks, drippers, etc. are stri. tly ar:)itrary. Without predetermining the relative contribution of sewer main leaks, house service leaks and manhole leaks, one cannot he assured of an accurate and meaningful_ analysis upon which decisions for correction can be made. V -3't- Polaroid or 35MM pictures taken fror, the TV monitor as permanent records will not always reveal the r necessary information required for an infiltration analysis. The use of video tape recordings during the TV viewing process enables the engineering analyst to revie • the important Findings. Based on his own independent observations along with those of 'he trained TV technician, he will be able to maKe an unbiased and a more accurate evaluation of the extraneous water findings. Tele-ision inspection performed as part of any infiltration/ inflow study usually cannot be successfully accomplished on a bid basis. If such a practice is followed, the successful bidder is interested only in how fast he can go through the sewer at a fixed price. Each time the T�; camera travel must be stopped in order to determine whether the visible source of water flow into the sewer is extraneous water or domestic waste water (i.e. hous-a service flow, etc. ) , the TV operator becomes nervous because he is wasting time. He cannot afford to spend the time to study the flow. The experienced professional can accurately determine a fair and reasonable fee for such infiltration/inflow study work. The engineer is r� -33- i r+ t , cautioned not to confuse volume bid type sewer televising with utilizing the same tool as an aid to engineering evaluation work. Costs of televising sewers for infiltration/inflow studies are generally higher than those for volume viewing for such purposes 6, as TV inspection of new sewer construction, before ► pavirq, etc. t As was pointed out, previously,during infiltration/inflow study viewing, camera travel must often be stopped so + that extraneous water from house services, roof drains, footing tile, yard drains and other possible infiltration/ 4r inflow sources can be accurately identified and quantified. w, It is essential that these types of extraneous water entry be differentiated from those emanating from sewer joints in the main sewers. r r. Viewing sewers above 24" and below 8" diameter may r higher in cost. Televising pipe smaller than 8" presents a higher degree of risk since protruding serv;ce W connections, horizontal or vertical misalignment, offset t joints, etc. could easily prohibit passage of the TV to camera. Conversely, attempting to televise large diameter 4 sewers which handle heavy flows often requires special setups and rigging to float the camera through the line. t 6 -34- Depending upon the distance between manhole stations, the setup and rigging costs could substantially increase the costs . Questions and Comments: f . PE paration_of the Evaluation Survey Report and Analysis All TV engineering reports should include the engineering analysis and recommendations, final map preparation and cost estimates for rehabilitation. The sewer system evaluation report is the basis for formulating the rehabilitation. program. It represents the culmination of all the investigative procedures. At this stage of the program definite decisions can be made based on positive recommendations for rerlarement and/or repair . It is now possible to compare the extraneous water f-ndings of the TV investigation to the original estimated Delta Q aeterminations that were made during the infiltration/inflow analysis. It s also possible C -35- C r" �d to accurately predict the end results that the municipality can expect in the way of extraneous water reduction if the recommended rehabilitation r program is carried out, r it is important to stress the difference between a f" TV repert and ar analytical evaluation A TV report lr contains log sheets showing field data along with Y" L, polaroid pictures of obvic ,;s physical deficiencies and apparent leaks . A conventional TV report generally LO describes leaks as big leaks, little leaks, drippers, house service flowinq or apparent break, etc. V These reports often include comments at the bottom v of the page indicating leaks should be sealed without any quantitative explanation. In other words, a TV report still leaves the evaluation of t:ie data to the municipality or its engineer who may or may not be experienced in the interpretation of the data. Without an accompanying video tape showing move- ment of water such evaluation would be valueless especially if the engineer did not have the opportunity to be in the field during the viewing operations. Attempts to e% aluate a video tape in a remote office by an engineer U -36- with no first hand knowledge of field operations could lead to interpretations of data that result in erroneous evaluations and marginal rehabilitation results. It is not possible to achieve meaninaful interpretive results ty having a TV inspection firm video tape every foot of sewer. This does not constitute a sewer system evaluation survey. It is also a waste of time to have to view video tapes which depict foot after foot of good sound sewer pipe. Recording all of the good pipe on video tape is very expensive and is not worth the cost. A useful engineering report (analytical evaluations) will not only include standard log sheet data, P olaroid pictures, house service locations,etc . , but also a quantitative analysis of each leak in terms of gallons per. minute. These quantitative judgements are based on laboratory simulations, the combined judgements of a competent TV technician and an experienced reviewing engineering specialist. With this flow data, the engineer is able to make a sound judgement as to whether the infiltration/inflow sources should be rehabilitated. y r Summary tables should be prepared which indicate the rehabilitation needed; differentiating between those repairs which will reduce the infiltration/inflow and those that should be made from a structural point r ► 1 P I , -37_ i , of view. The engineer should be able to point out the difference between excessive and non-excessive infiltration/inflow conditions. Therefore, based on the P recommendations, interpretations and evaluations of p+ the engineering report, an intelligent rehabilitation program can be prepared which will serve as a basis for funding requirements. H 6► Questions and Comments: t g. Preparation of the Proposed Rehabilitation Program TV reports can be voluminous. A municipality is not usually interested in all of the details. It is the job of the evaluating engineer to summarize the findings of the W inspection, and to present the findings, recommendations and a rehabilitation program. y Questions and Comments: V r I 1r Ir _3g- THE NEED FOR PUBLIC RELATIONS The municipality now knows its entire problem. It is able to witness the problem on video tape. It now has a budget, it feels comfortable in what it has to do . . . but not so comfortable in raising the necessary money or seeking the support of the taxpayers. Bere again, the engineer must take an active part in presenting the repair and rehabilitation program to the public. No matter how justified the project nay be, the public must feel the urgent need for the work and must feel that the projects, as recommended, a.re worthomile. It has been found that most munici, al councils are more than willing to hold a public meeting on this matter. Announcing these meetings in the news media and inviting any and all interested parties to hear and see the result= of the TV inspection are excellent civic public relations gestures. It is becoming more and nore apparent that the consulting engineer must become cognizant of the importance of public relations in his work. A well conducted presentation of an infiltration/inflow study using video tape equipment, large color-coded oxrp,- .ay maps and layman oriented engineering reports can serve as valuable tools at any l.ublic meeting. Showing selected portions of the video tapes which depict significant infiltration/inflow, structural deficiencies and as well as sound sections of pipe gives the interested citizen an opportunity to witness first hand the need for a rehal litation program. Such meetings can be held in a t� -39- n council chamber, school auditorium or some other appropriate place where a large group of people can gather. The engineer can explain to the public the findings of his report and the recommendations for rehabilitation. :rt In the case of new treatment: works , the design consultant can explain his phase of the work and how it correlates to the 4W collection system evaluations. The mayor or some other municipal �W official can explain the position of the council and the course of action they plan to take. An appropriate question and answer period stimulates further interest . In this way, the general public can recognize thr need for money to be expended in correcting the infiltration/inflow problem. The pictorial, graphic and docu- mented evidence is available for all to see. Questions and Comments: -40- PHASE III - REHABILITATION Figure 4 refers to Phase III of the program. A decision has now been made, based on the findings of the engineers' reports, as to which sewers will not need any work, which sewers can be successfully grouted, relined or replaced to eliminate the sources of infiltration/ inflow, the amount of street repair that will be required, and a total program whereby the engineer will hN ah, _ t, prepare plans and specifications for each class of vorl It shoo d be the responsibility of the engineer to give r.erlov, c .ir -1 eration to all methods of rehabilitation. These cnnsidRrat ;.ot.R a-a a part of the analytical work encompassed in the enginer.rinU report for television inspection. a. Sewer Repair Sewer repair is defined as the partial physical replace- ment, internal or external grouting, or relining of the sewer pipe. The cost of rehabilitation varies ever a wide range. Engineers should take into account local e7onstruction costs, availability of local contractors, etc. to determine meaningful costs for rehabilitation of the sewer pipe. Grouting ~ In those cases where sewer grouting is recommended, a word of caution is in order. Not all soils will accept grout. The engineer should familiarize himself with the limitation of all available -41- Q Y grouting technology. If he is not acquainted with the latest techniques available, he should y make it his professional duty to learn. There are limitations as to the types of soil that will readily accept grout and remain permanent. There are some grouting materials that are definitely Qnot recommended for sewer rehabilitation. OA recent innovation in sewer sealing technology, involving the use of elastomeric polymer grouts has been developed. This technique involves internal E in-place application of a new gasket to the pipe 1r structure itself as compared to the common accepted procedure of grouting the soil surrounding the sewer pipe. However, at this date the methods involving elastomeric po-.ymer compounds are new and untested in the field as to permanence, wearing ,aality, permeability factors, adhering quality, :stant to root penetration, etc. The new method does show promise in time but should not be confused with the proven soil grouting techniques in common use today. The engineer should be forwarned that basic unit grouting costs quoted generally do not reflect the Lcost of the chemical grout needed which could -nflate L -42- unit costs by 100% to 150% or more, depending upon the geological characteristics of the soil. such as percolation rates, void ratios, etc . The engineer must include the cost of the chemical grout in his rehabilitation estimates. Grouting should be accomplished by only experienced and qualified personnel. Attempts to restrict the bidders as to the maximum amount of grout to be pumped per joint can result in future joint failure. On the other hand, excessive use of grout can be a gross waste of money. It is possible to pre- determine the reasonable amount of grout expected to be pumped per joint that will still assure a permanent repair job. Proven technology and time- tested materials are the standards by which the engineer must judge this work. CAUTION: SEWERS TO BE GROUTED SHOULD NOT BE DONE ON A"TEST AND/OR SEAL" EVERY JOINT BASIS WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF' SYSTEM EVALUATION. SEALING EVERY JOINT IN ANY ONE MANHOLE REACH CAN RESULT IN COTS THAT COME CLOSE TO, OR EXCEED, C""DLETE SEWER REPLACEMENT. The engineer must also include in his estir:ate the cost for correcting the sources of excessive inflow. These types of corrections would include, but not fa -43- r �* be limited to, such items as disconnecting roof f drains that are directly connected to sanitary �r sewers, replacement of manhole covers that contain Ch3les, raising manhole covers above the flood plain, plugging of yard and driveway drains that are connected to sanitary sewers, changing grades to eliminate ponding situations, etc. IN CONSIDERING ANY REHABILITATION WORK, THE ENGINEER SHOULD ALWAYS KEEP IN MIND THE QUESTION, "HOW MUCH INFILTRATION/INFLOW, IN PERMS OF G.P.M. , R'TLL BE R ELIMINATED FOR THE DOLLARS OF REHABILITATION MONEY 4 SPENT AND . . . WHAT PER CENT OF THE TOT'.L INFILTRATION/ INFLOW PROBLEM IS BEING SOLVED BY SUCH WORK?" Le It would require a separate presentation and lengthy discussion to adequately cover the technology and b methodology of sewer grouting. At this point it is 1` L, safe to emphasize that there are many responsible 1 - sewer grouting firms throughout the country with Lexpertise from whom the consulting engineers can obtain reliable information. The consultant mur� obtain this information and seek the advice of s.,ch firms Lin preparing the rehabilitation costs for the proposed rehabilitation program. It is the responsibility of Lthe engineer to accurately determine the costs of the 14 60 -44- rehabilitation work he proposes. Questions and Comments: b. Pipe Relining Another alternative for the rehabilitation of existing sewer systems is the recently developed technology of pine relining. The location, type and condition of sewer to be rehabilitated will determine the feasibility of this method. To date, relining technology has not progressed to the point where unit costing procedures can be s;.andardized. Complications arising from the reconnection of house services or the backfilling of the void between the lines and the existing pipe can result in added costs not anticipated in the rehabilitation estimate. Relining is a method fox achieving the rehabilitation objective and should be (-impared w'.th other alternati-?zs on a cost effective basis. P !. -a s- 1$ Questions and Comments: Is lb �I i C . Sewer Replacement The latest standards for new sewer construction need not be explained here. Modern methods of acceptance of new sewer work, such. as low pressure air testing, have been Cwell publicized. 14 In those cases where complete sewer ztplacement is to r/ recommended, consideration must be given to dealing with 1v the reconnection of existing house services, the proximity of other utilities, the traffic disruption, anu a host of other factors tha , normally become involved in this fort of rehabilitation. Again, the costs for this work it will depend on local experiences. 1 Questions and Comments: `r a " -46- d. Finalization of Treatment Plant Design Once tti.e quantity of excessive infiltration/inflow has been identified, the consultant can begin to seriously consider finalizing the hydraulic design parameters Lot the wastewater treatment Yorks. He can be comfortable that he has a handle on the infiltration/ inflow problem and that it will be brought under control. The engineer can now prepare plans and specifications for the sewer system rehabilitation work along with those for the construction or expansion of the treatment works. There is assurance that the new treatment works will accept all of the waste water. Intensive rainfalls will not cause basement flooding raw sewage by-passing, lift stations will not be - overloaded ind the groundwater infiltration will be a+ controlled. The wastewater treatment works will funct '.on and serve the needs of the community. Questions and Comments: -47- SUMMARY Infiltration/inflow of extraneous waters in sewer systems cause many problems _,icluding raw sewage by-passing. The "Zero Dis- charge" federal goal for pollution control has created new considerations that the engineer must now face in dealing with the design of wastewater treatment works. The recent advent of television inspection cameras, sewer relining, plus external and internal grouting equ.ipm.-it, has provided the engineer with useful a:.d valuabl.+ tools for _,nplementation of sewer system rehabilitation. However, the use of such equipment to solve the infiltration/inflow problem without the benefit of a logical and systematic approach can prove to be costly and ineffective r ,.i ro , S R FIGURE 1 A "PHASED" PROGRAM FOR SEWER SYSTEM EVALUATION AND REHABILITATION INFILTRATION/:-FLOW STUDIES PHASE I INFILTRATION/INFLON ANALYSIS PHASE II FIELD INVESTIGATION AND SURVEY PHASE III REHABILITATION FIGURE 2 FIGURE 3 PHASE I PHASE IZ INFILTRATION/INFLOW ANALYSIS FR ESTIGATION AND SURVEY a. Patterned Interviews rvey and Groundwater Analysis b. Sanitary and Storm sewer Map Study imulation 11 c. System Flow Diagrams ineering Report and Analysis A d. Dry vs Wet Weather Flnw Determinations d. Preparatory Sewer Cleaning e. Preliminary rield Survey and Selective Flow Tests e. Television Inspection of Preselected Sewers f. Determination of Excessive or Non-Excessive f. Preparation of the ..valuation Survey Report Infiltration/Inflow and Analysis g. Establish a Plan of Action, Budget and g• preparation of the Proposed Rehabilitation Timetable for Execution program FIGURE 4 PHASE III REHABILITATION a. Sewer Repair b. Pipe Relining C. Sewer Replacement I Finalisation of Treatment Plant Desun eti*.I. -�f FIGURE 5 STATIC GROUNDWATER GAGE INSTALLATION MEASURE FROM THE TOP OF EACH PIPE TO THE WATER LEVFL IN THE TUBE INSTALL GAGE AS NEAR AS POSSIBLE TO THE TOP OF THE LOWEST PIPE IN THE MANHOLE. SECURE TUBE N TO STEPS GROUNDWATER GAGE r r ---- --- - -- - - - - - -- --- --- IN VERT ,d r. Pn Co 27 Law 92-5 ' 00 92nd Congress, S. 2770 Octobert�18, 1972 JOB L Tits` 06 STAT. 916 To aruend the Pederal water Pollution Crutrul Act. t>• Be it enacted by the Senate awi Pome of Representatives of the United States o America in Congreea nambl.3,That this Act may be iedenl Water cited as the "Fe ee "Federal {Pater Pollution Control Act Amendments of Pollution Con- 19T2". trot Act Amend- Sac.2.The Federal Rater Pollution Control Act is amended to read otnu of 1972. as follows: 70 stat. 498; 64 Stet. 91. 33 USC 1151 "TITLE 1—RESEARCH AND RELATED PROGRAMS note. C ••nxCL%RA71l0N Or OOAU AND POLICY Sec. 101. (a) The objective of this Act is to restore and maintain G the chemical,physical,and biological integrity of the Nations waters. in order to acliieve this objective it is hereby declared that,consistent with the rovisionsof this Act— "(11) it is the national goal that the discharge of pollutants into the navigable waters be ehmmated by 1985; t� "(2) it is the national goal that wherever attainable,an interim 11r goal of eater quality which provides for the proteo*on and propagation of lush,ahe)lfish,and wildlife+nd provides for recrea- tion in and oil the water be achieved by July i,19&3; "(3) it is the national policy that the dir•'serge of toxic pollut- ruts in toric amounts be prohibited; "(4) it is the national policy that Federal financial aQsistance Ira provided to construct publicly owned waste treatment works; "(5) it is the nationaF policy that areawide waste treatment management planning processes be developed and implemented to assure adequate control of sources of pollutants in each State; and "(8) it is tbo national policy that a major research slid demon- stration effort be made to develop teehnologl�necessary to elimi. nate the discharge of pollutants into the navigable water.,waters of the contiguous zone,and the oceans. "(b) It is the policy of the Congress to recognize. preserve, and IMAM the prime-v respponnsibilities and rights of States to prevent. re(luce,and slim i its imI lotion.tq plan the development and ass (in- eluding restoration. preservation, and enhancement) of land and water resourves,and to consult with the Administrator in ti.e exercise of his anthority and"r this AM.It is further the poliev of the Congress to support and aid researth relating to the pprevention,reduction.and elimination of pollution,and to provide Federal technical services and financial aid to State and interstate agencies and municipalities in con• nection with the prevention. reduction, and elimination of pollution. "(c) It is further the policy of Congress that the President. aM- ' irg through the Secretary of State and such national and international organizations as he determines appropriate,shall take sash action as may be necessary to insure that to the hdlert extent possible all for- :ign countries shall take meaningful action for the przvention,reduo- ;ion.and elimination of pollution in their waters and in international waters and for the achievement of goals regarding the elimination of V lscharge of pollutants and the improvement of water quality to at Inset the same extent as the United States does under its laws. •`(d) Except as otherwise expressly provid(vl in this AM.the Ad- Adninietntion. romistrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (hereinafter in L this Act called 'Administrator') shall ndminister this AM. f ' V V October 18, 1972 .19- Pub. Law 92-500 86 ST4T. B34 "(1) -the recyclillh of potential sewage pollutants through the production of ngricu ture,sih•iculture,or nquacultuie products,or any combination thereof; "(3) the confined and contained disposal of pollutants not recycled; "(3) the reclamation of wastewater;and "(4) the ultinmtc disposal of sludge ill a manner that will not result in environmental hazards. "(e) The Administrator shall e•teourage waste treatment manage- ment which results m integrating facilities for sewage treatment and recycling with facilities to treat,dispose of,or utilize other industrial Jul d mmncipal wastes, inclutimg but not limited to solid waste and waste beat and thermal discharges.Such integrated facilities shall be designed and operated to produce revenues in excess of capital and operation and maintenance costs and such revenues shall be used by the designated regional management agency to aid in financing other environmental improvement programs. "(f) The Adnnstrator shall encourage waste treatment manage- ment which combims`open apace'and recreational considerations with such management. 11(g)(1) The Administrator is authorized to make grants to any State, municipality, or intermuniclpal or interstate agency for the conso, fppubliely owned treatment works. The Administrator shall not make grants from funds author---Bckditimu. ized for any fiscal year beginning after June 30, 1974,to any State, municipality,or intermnnicipal or interstate agency for the erection, building, acqusition, alteration, rennoaleling, improvement. or exten- sion m treatment unless the grant applicant has satisfactorily demonstrated strated to theeAd Administrator that— "(A) alternative waste management techniques have been stud- ied and evaluated and the works proposed for grant assistance ' will provide for the application of the best practicable waste trng tent technology over the.ideof the nnc tfac auiiiitent w"the purposes of this title;and """—M apprviprtite the works proposed for grant assistance will take into axonnt and allow to the extent practicable the i application of technology at a Inter de`e which will Provide for the reclaiming or recycling of water or otherwise eliminate he � > ( discharge of pollutants. ti.. \ c`(3) 11 Administrator shall not npirmye any grant after Jtily 1. 1973. for treatment work] under this section nnle�c tbN annlicentspypyi�_.. y'-----r-r- o the satisfaction of the .Uministrfator Mul each setter collection s era discTrtrging into such treatment .corks is not subject to exc:essiye uticna. "(4) The Adntinisti at•ir is authorized to make grants to applicants for treatment works, graults ender thiF. section for such sewer system G G/ 'iet-aluat.ion studies as may be accessary to carryout tile. requirements of paragraph (5) of tills subsection. Snell grants shall be made in accordance With t'11109 and 1eglllatloriF promnigated by the Adminis- trator. Initial-t'u"--rated Mtulations shall be promulgated nadc _,t11is Ruled and T rft ra It not later than 120 days after the date of enactment of fhe._. regulatioru. Federa PollutionControlActAmendmentsof197.2. .t FFbF.RAL SHARE 4I ".ties•. 2011. (a) The am,tint of any grant. for teatrllent, .corks made c Lander this Act from folds authorized for any fiscal year beginning after June 30, 1971, shall be 75 per centnin of the test of construction , r' .1 i w 96 6TAT. 835 Pub. Law 9Z-500 -20- October 18, 1972 r thereof (as approved by the Administrator). Any grit (other than lY^ for reimbursement) meae prior to the date of enactment of the Federal Rater P llmtion Control Act Amendments of 1972 from any funds authorim,1 for any fiscal year beginning after June 30, 1971. shall, upon the request of the applicant,be increased to the applicable per- cantage under this section. "(b) The amount of the grant for any project approved by the ->,dministrator after.January 1,1971,and before July 1,1971,for the construction of treatment works, the actual erection, building or acquisition of which was not commenced prior to July 1, 1971,shall, upon the request of the applicant,be increased to the applicable per- centage under subsection (a) of this section for grants for treatment works from funds for fiscal years beginning,after.lune Ni. 1971, with respect to the cost of such actual election,building,ur acquisition.Such C increased amount shall be paid from ally funds allocated to file State in which the treatment works is located without re$arl to the fiscal year for which such funds were authorized. Such increased amount shall be paid for such project only if— '•(1) a sewaga collection system that is a part of the same total waste treatment system as the treatment works for which such grant leas approvid is under construction or is to be constructed for use in conjunction with such treatment woks,and if the cost of such sewage collection system exceeds the cast of such treatment works,and "(2) the State water pcdlution control agency or other appro- priate State authority certifies that the quantity of avnlsble ground water will ln, insufficient, inadequate, or unsuitatle for public use,including the ecological preservation and recreational use of surface water ladies, unless elHnents from public) owned NNN treatment works after adec note treatment are returned to the }ti ground water consistent witfr acceptable technological standaris. L it PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS,ESTIMATES, AND PAYMENTS "SEc. 203. (a) Each applicant for a grant shall submit to the Administrator for his approval,plans,specifications,and estimates for each proposed project for the construction of treatment works for which a grant Is applied for under section 201(g)(1) from funds allotted to the State under section 205 and which otherwise meets the requirements of this Act,The Administrato-shall act upon such plans, Vificitti(mis, and estimates as soon as practicable after the same. have b submitted,and his approval of any such plans,specifications.and estimates shall be deemed a contractual obligation of the United States for the payment of its proportional contribution to such project. "(b) The Administrator shall, from time to time as the work pro- gresses. make payments to the recipient of a grant for costs of con- Limitation. stru^tion incurred on a project.These payments shall at no time exeeerl the k edeaul share of the cost of construction incurred to the date of the voucher coverjng such payment plus the Federal share of the value of the materials which have been stockpiled in the vicinity of such con- struction in conformity to plans and specifications for the project. "(c) After completion of a project and approval of the final voucher by the Administrator, he shall pay Out of the appropriate sums the unpaid balance of the Federal share payable on account of such project. "LIMITATIONa AND PONDITIONA "Site, '-N4. (a) Before approving grants for say project for any treatment works under section 201(g)(1) the Administrator shall determine— M 86 STAT. 843 pub. Law 92-500 -28- October 18, 1972 "(3) Each applicant for a grant under thir sul section shall submit to the Administrator for his a`I(/mCAI each proposal for which a grant is applied for under this su Ilion, The Administrator shall act ,limn such proposal as soon as practicable after it has been submitted. .. and his apprmal of that proposal shall he deemed a contractual obligation of the f-nited Stntes for the payment of its contribu- Appropriation, lion to such proposal. There is authorizd to he apppropriated to curry n»t this subsection not to exceed S50,000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1973, not to exceed $1(1(1,000.1701 for the fiscal i-Par ending .lute 30, 1974, and not to exceed $iAOM,(M for the fiscal cent, endingJune3o 1975, Tcohnioal • (g) The.\�miuistratorie anthorixed,uponnvt»estnfthe('imetnor aasiataaaa, fir the designated planning agency,and without reimbursement,tocon. cult kith,and provide technical assistance to,ant• ugeney designated colder subsection (a) of this section in the development of areawlde waste treatment management plans under sulpartion (h) of this Wtion. yh)(1> The Secretary of the -\run•, acting th,fillph the Chief of Engineers, in cooperation with the Administrator is authorized and directed. nlmn re•gnest of the Governor or the designated planning o-ganization,to consult with,and provide technical assistance to.an: ngem•y designed under subsection (a) of this section iu deve',aping And operating a continuing areawide waste treatment nunngement piannnn t•• process under subsection (b) of this section. Appropriation. "(2) There is authorized to be^opmpriated to the Secretary-of the Army.to carry ant this subsee' .rot to exceed:Fid1,INMI,IMN1 per ha•al year for the 1.1 0 years ending ..tine 30, 1973,and June 30. 1974• "ansis PLAssixn '`Sac. 309 (a) The President, acting through thr Walec Rrwp»rcc,. ('ovucil,shall,as soon as practicable, prepare a Level R plan under the 79 $tat, gas. Water Resources Planning Art for basins in the I'nited States.-1.11 42 tSC 1962 such plans shall be completed not later than Jaumt 1, 1980,except note, that priority in the preparation of such plans shall be given to those hasins and portions thereof which are within these areas designated — ander peragraplis (2). (3),and (4) of subsection (A) of w•ction 20x of this Art. Alaalai rport •'(h) The President, acting through the Water Resources Council. to Congnaa. ,hall report annually to Congress oil progress being made in carrying out this section.The first such report shall be submitted not later than .lanuary 31,1973. Appropriation. "(c) Thereibanthorizedtolwnppmpriatedtocnrrymdthissertion tint to exceed$7Wn ow,(NMNI. "A]]rAL 6Ca\7.Y "SrA•210.The Administrator shall annually make a survey to deter. mine the efficiency of the operation and msintrnonce of treatment works constructed with grants made under this Aft.as compared to the e15- 6ency planned at true time the grant was .node. The results of such annual survey shall be 'neluded in the report. mquired under action 31R(n)of this Act. .9SEWAGE COIJ.ECTIO\ SYMMS 211. No grant shall he made for a sewage collection system under this title unless such grant (1) is for re larenlent or major reha- .?s" hilitarion of an existing collection system anti is necessary to the total °"�! integrity and perfornlaliee of the waste trentment works servicing snrh October 18, 1972 _29- Pub. Law 92-500 96 VAT. 8" cmumunity or (2) is for a new collection system in an existing coin- enmity will'!sufficient existing or plarmed capacity adequately to treat such collected sewage and is consistent with section 201 of this Act. f 44DEFINMONa ff4,JJi "SEc.212.As used in this title— "(1) The term 'construction' means any one or more of the follow- ing: preliminary planning to determine the feasibility of treatment works, engineering, architectural, legal, fiscal, or economic investiga- tions or studies, surveys, designs, plans, Working drawings. slxxifica- tions, proceohuesy or other necessary actions, erectior, building, acquisition, alteration, remodeling, improvement, or extension of treatment works, or the inspection or supervision of any of the r foregoing itemr,. w •'(2) (. ) The term `treatment works'means an)-derives and systems Used in the storage,treatment, recycling,and reclamation of municipal nr sewage or industrial wastes of a liqquid nature to implement section 201 of this Act, or necessary to trcycle or reuse .cater iLt the most eco- nomical cost over the estimated life of the works, including intercept- ,' jag servers, outfall sewers,seNvage collection systems, pumping,power, and other equipment, and their appurtenances; extensions, improve- ments, remot eling, additions, anti alterations thereof; elements essen- tial to Fro-ide a reliable recycled supply such its standby treatment ` units and clear well facilities; and any works,including site acquisition o; the land that will be an integral part of the treatment process or is I sed for ultimate disposal of residues resulting from such treatment. "(B) In addition to the definition contained in subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, 'treatment !corks' means any other method or sys- wm for preeventing, abating, reducing, storing, treating, separating, or dislx)sing of municipal waste, including storm water runoff, or industriai waste, including waste in combined storm water and sani- tor server systems. Any application for construction grants which includes wholly or in part such methods or systems shall, in accordance with guidelines published by the Administrator pursuant to subpars- graph (C) of this paragraph, contain adequate data and analysis demonstrating such proposal to be. over fie life of such works, the most cost efficient alternative to comply with sections 301 or 302 of this Act, or the requirements of section 201 of this Act. "(C) For the purposea of subparagraph (B) of this paragraph,the Methods, Administrator shall, within one hundred and eighty days Iter the evaluation slate of enactment of this title, publish and thereafter revn.le no less buideliness -' often than annually, guidelines for the evaluation of methods, publication., including cost-effective analysis, descriixd in subparagraph (B) of this paragraph. 11(:3) The term 'rep,acement' as used in this title means those expenditures for obtaining and installing equipment, accessories, or appurtenances during the useful life of the treatment works necessary to maintain the capacity and performance for which such works are lesigned and constructed. "TITLE III--STANDARDS AND ENFORCEMENT 11EF7LCENT LIMITATIONS t "SEc. Sol. (a) Except as in compliance with this section and sec- tione M.Ms.307,318,402,and 404 of this Act,the discharge of any It 4 pollutant by any t*raon shell be unlawful. 11(b) IIl order to carry out the objective of this Act there&hall be i achieved— : y 4l .. ENDING 0 - OF FILE FP-E TITLE • ' ', A too Ir iq 45 va ow AL �'