System Partnership Solutions to

Improve Public Health Protection

— Volume II —

The following are examples of case studies designed to show how

partnerships can help small systems enhance their ability to

provide safe and affordable drinking water
System Capacity Challenges and Partnership Solutions Overview

Water system capacity is the ability to plan for, achieve, and continually provide safe and affordable drinking

water to customers, thereby increasing public health protection. Capacity development is the process through

which drinking water systems acquire and maintain the technical, managerial, and financial capabilities to

consistently provide safe drinking water. All states are currently implementing state-specific capacity

development programs tailored to meet their water systems’ needs. One tool for building capacity is system

partnership solutions.

The case studies featured within this brochure identify successful partnership solutions available to these

specific water systems. Partnership solutions may not be appropriate in all cases, but should be considered as

an option. Public water systems that may be experiencing similar situations in meeting the challenges towards

the provision of safe drinking water may find the ideas highlighted in this brochure useful.

Internal

Changes

Informal

Cooperation

Contractual

Assistance

Joint Powers

Agencies

Ownership

Transfer

Completely

self-sufficient,

relies mainly

on internal

organization

partnering

Coordinate

with other

systems, but

without

contractual

obligations

Utilities contract with

another system or

service provider, but

contract is under the

system's control

Creation of a new

entity designed to

serve the systems

that form it (Public

Service Authority,

Regional Water

Authority, etc.)

Owned by an

existing entity

or a newly

created entity

System Partnership Spectrum

Small System

Challenges

System

Partnership

Solutions

Technical echnical

• Inadequate & deteriorated infrastructure

• Limited/poor source quality/quantity

• Lack of operations & maintenance expertise/certified operator

Managerial Managerial

• “No time” or limited part time management attention

• Lack of expertise in long-term water system planning/operations

• Lack of focus - providing water is not the system’s primary purpose

Financial Financial

• Diseconomies of scale (fewer households = higher costs)

• History of low rates = resistance to full-cost pricing

• Limited knowledge of financing options

• Located in economically disadvantaged areas

• System partnership solutions can range from informal cooperation, such as

mentoring programs, to ownership transfer with managerial and/or physical

consolidation

• The following system partnership solutions serve as examples of these

capacity building tools and involve changing the operational, managerial or

institutional structure of a water system. The changes serve to meet the

increasing costs and responsibilities of consistently providing safe water that

meets the Safe Drinking Water Act standards

Increasing Increasing Transfer of Responsibility
Potential

Outcomes

Opportunities

for System

Partnerships

System Capacity Challenges and Partnership Solutions Overview

Technical echnical

• Shared, new, or upgraded infrastructure

• Locate higher quality/quantity source water

• Access to a certified operator and additional expertise

• More efficient treatment technologies available

Managerial Managerial

• Expertise in water system planning/operations

• Accelerated path to obtaining the managerial skills and

 structure required to adequately oversee the water system

Financial Financial

• Reduced costs = safe and affordable water at full cost pricing

• Greater economies of scale achieved through shared services

• Increased access to funds

• 84% of America’s 53,000 community water systems are small systems serving

fewer than 3,300 people

• 86% of these small systems are within 5 miles of another system*

• The proximity of these systems to potential partners demonstrates many

opportunities for small systems to form cooperative agreements, share

services, or join together under common management

• The feasibility of physical interconnection should be analyzed carefully and

compared with the economic savings that other partnership solutions may

achieve

Distance to next closest

Community Water System*

1 to 5

Miles

86%

10 to 20

Miles

2%

5 to 10

Miles

12%

*Source: Source: Source: “Feasibility of Small System Restructuring to Facilitate SDWA Compliance,” AWWA

90720. Denver, CO: American Water Works Association, 1997
Atoka County Rural Water District #1, Wardville, Oklahoma, 2003 – 2005

System Capacity Development Case Study

Questions about Oklahoma’ Questions about Oklahoma’s Capacity Development Program? Cont acity Development Program? Contact Brad Cook act Brad Cook • Oklahoma Department of Environment artment of Environmental

Quality Quality • P.O. Box 1677 .O. Box 1677 • Oklahoma City, OK 73101-1677 , OK 73101-1677 • (405) 702-4178 (405) 702-4178 • Brad.Cook@deq.st Brad.Cook@deq.state.ok.us

Background

The Atoka County Rural Water District (RWD) #1 in Wardville, OK used nearby Wardville

Lake as its water source. In 2003, when water levels in the lake began to drop due to a

prolonged drought, the system's ability to provide safe drinking water to its 75 customers

was jeopardized.

Public Health Challenges

Due to frequent turbidity violations, the system was under a boil water order for more than

a year. In 2003, the system was placed under a regulatory consent order from the

Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality.

Actions: Contractual Assistance

✓ The National Guard began to haul drinking water to the community, serving as an emergency

water source.

✓

For a longer term solution, Atoka County RWD #1 first considered extending a pipeline to

Stringtown, OK's water system. This solution was not pursued because it would have

required construction of several miles of 6-inch-diameter water line plus other improvements

costing an estimated $680,000.

✓

Atoka County RWD #1 instead chose to build a 4-inch-diameter pipeline that tied into

Pittsburg County RWD #11, which had a distribution main only 3 miles away, and entered

into an agreement to purchase water from Pittsburg County RWD #11. This alternative cost

only $86,000, which was mostly funded through an Oklahoma Water Resources Board

emergency grant.

✓ In 2005, three miles of 4-inch-diameter PVC piping was laid to connect the system to

Pittsburgh RWD #11. A master meter was installed to measure water usage and assess

losses due to leakage.

Outcomes

 The agreement to purchase water from the neighboring water system has resolved Atoka

County RWD #1's water shortage and ended the system's health violations, providing the

system's customers with a reliable source of safe drinking water.

 The residents are now paying reasonable rates that will cover the cost of the purchased

water and sustain the system.

Capacity Issues

Technical

 The system's water source was almost depleted.

 The system's surface water treatment plant did not have a settling tank,

which led to high turbidity.

 The treatment plant had not been upgraded since the 1980s.

 The treatment plant was designed to process 12,000 gallons per day, but was

treating over 20,000 gallons daily.

 40-year old distribution lines caused the system to lose approximately half of its

finished water to leaks.

Managerial  A lack of long term planning resulted in no alternative water source being

identified until the issue became extremely urgent.

Financial  The system had inadequate rates, no reserve funds, and no access to capital

financing.

+
Region 18 School District, Connecticut, 2004

System Capacity Development Case Study

Questions about Connecticut’ Questions about Connecticut’s Capacity Development Program? Cont acity Development Program? Contact Steve Messer • Connecticut Department of Public

Health • 410 Capitol 410 Capitol Avenue • Hartford, CT 06134-0308 • (860) 509-7333 • Steve.Messer@po.st teve.Messer@po.state.ct.us

Background

The Region 18 School District in Connecticut owned and operated three separate nontransient non-community public water systems – Old Lyme High School, Old Lyme Middle

School, and Old Lyme Center School – with a combined population of approximately

1,500.

Public Health Challenges

Each school's water system experienced recurring violations of the maximum contaminant

level (MCL) for total coliform bacteria. Deficient wells and storage facilities contributed to

the recurring water quality violations.

Capacity Issues

Technical

 The Old Lyme Middle School and Center School were supplied by dug wells

that had several construction defects.

 The atmospheric storage tank for the Old Lyme High School did not have

access ports for routine cleaning. The quality of the water from the tank was

also suspect because the wells supplying the tank tested negative for total

coliform.

 All schools had limited or no atmospheric storage capacity to meet the

average daily water usage demands.

Managerial

 The water systems were operated by conditional operators (grandfathered staff)

who were not water system professionals with full knowledge of all drinking

water regulations.

 The systems had several monitoring/reporting violations for failure to submit

required water quality samples in a timely fashion.

Financial  The Region 18 School District faced significant cost constraints and could not

afford to make the necessary infrastructure improvements to each system.

Outcomes

 The new Region 18 School District consolidated water system is now in compliance with

water quality standards for total coliform bacteria and is capable of meeting the daily

demands of all three schools.

 The new water system is managed and operated by a professional water utility operations

company. The Region 18 School District can now focus on the education of children instead

of the daily responsibilities of complying with state and federal drinking water regulations.

Actions: Contractual Assistance (and system consolidation)

✓ Through consultations with the Connecticut Department of Public Health, the Region 18

School District entered into a consent order to design and construct a consolidated water

system to serve all three schools.

✓ Four new wells were drilled to supply the consolidated water system. The new water system

includes a 121,000-gallon storage tank, which meets the needs for potable water and fire

protection.

✓ The Region 18 School District was able to secure reimbursement funding from the

Connecticut Department of Education to cover approximately 36 percent of the consolidated

water system project.

+
Public Wholesale Water Supply District #23, Kansas, 1997 – 2006

System Capacity Development Case Study

Background

Kansas allows systems to form public wholesale water supply districts (PWWSDs) where

members buy water at wholesale rates from the PWWSD while retaining autonomy over

their own systems. Representatives of each member system work with the PWWSD Board

of Directors to make decisions for the entire PWWSD.

In the late 1990s, various water quality issues, such as drought, confronted many small

water systems in southeastern Kansas.

Public Health Challenges

Like many small systems in southeastern Kansas, 20 water systems in and around Fredonia

suffer from water shortages made worse by drought. Several of these systems are under

consent orders due to noncompliance with the Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR). In

addition, some systems' finished water exceeds the maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for

trihalomethanes and haloacetic acids.

Capacity Issues

Technical

 Many of the surface water systems' treatment plants are outdated and not in

compliance with SWTR requirements.

 The plant capacity of many of the 20 water systems is not adequate to meet

demand.

Financial  Many of the systems did not have the reserves, rate base, or access to capital

required to finance the necessary treatment plant upgrades.

Actions: Joint Powers Agencies

✓ Twenty neighboring small systems joined to finance a feasibility study of creating a public

wholesale water supply district (PWWSD) to help address their water supply and quality

issues.

✓ The study determined that the creation of a PWWSD by the 20 systems was feasible and

would help address the systems' issues.

✓

Fredonia's surface water treatment plant, which needed significant upgrades to meet new

SWTR requirements, will be purchased by the PWWSD, expanded, and upgraded to provide

wholesale water to the entire district. The project has received funding from the U.S.

Department of Agriculture's Rural Development Loans and Grants Program.

Outcomes

 Completion of this project will result in the expansion and upgrading of Fredonia's surface

water treatment plant so it can provide reliable and safe water to all 20 of the district's

member systems in a cost-effective manner.

 Member systems will be in compliance with the SWTR; outstanding consent orders will be

closed.

Questions about Kansas’ Questions about Kansas’ Capacity Development Program? Cont acity Development Program? Contact Cathy act Cathy Tucker Vogel • Kansas Department of Health and

Environment Environment • 1000 SW Jackson St., Suite 420 t., Suite 420 • Topeka, KS 66612-1367 opeka, KS 66612-1367 • (785) 368-7130 (785) 368-7130 • CTuckerv@Kdhe.st uckerv@Kdhe.state.ks.us

+
Brookfield and New Milford, Connecticut, 2005

System Capacity Development Case Study

Background

Located along Route 7, one of the state's major transportation and commercial corridors,

the western Connecticut towns of Brookfield and New Milford have experienced numerous

contamination issues with their water systems. A reliable water supply was needed to

satisfy the rapid development and growth of this area, while providing a solution to

Brookfield and New Milford's contamination issues.

Public Health Challenges

At one time Brookfield and New Milford had over 300 small public water systems. The

contamination issues that plagued many of these systems included E. coli and coliform

bacteria, volatile organic chemicals, radioactive compounds, and nitrates.

Capacity Issues

Technical

 Lack of a water supplier with an adequate residential, commercial, and fire

protection supply for the Route 7 corridor in New Milford and Brookfield.

 An inordinate amount of point sources of contamination spread across the

entire corridor that limited available sites for suitable water supply sources.

Managerial

 The Route 7 corridor is divided into three Exclusive Service Areas managed

by three separate private entities, complicating the identification of a solution to

the issues. (Connecticut assigns an "Exclusive Service Area" to an existing

water utility using an area-wide planning approach in which the utility accepts

responsibility for all new water systems in its service area.)

Financial

 The funds necessary to extend a reliable water supply to New Milford,

Brookfield, and the Route 7 corridor were not available under conventional

means of financing for the rate-regulated private utilities that were assigned the

Exclusive Service Areas.

Actions: Contractual Assistance and Ownership Transfer

✓ The solution to the issues facing Brookfield and New Milford was arrived at after Faith

Church, a school and 1,200-seat ministry located on the Brookfield/New Milford border,

requested water service.

✓

United Water Connecticut (UWC), Faith Church, and the Connecticut Department of Public

Health reached an agreement to extend a United Water main to the church, which would also

allow for expanded water service along Route 7 into Brookfield. Faith Church agreed to fund

approximately 50 percent of the water main extension.

✓ UWC requested and received approval from the Connecticut Department of Public Utility

Control to modify the standard refund agreement for water main extensions, allowing UWC to

advance the balance of the funds necessary for the construction of the water main extension.

Outcomes

 The Faith Church water main extension, completed in 2005, has allowed for expanded water

service along Route 7 and Brookfield.

 The development, growth, and fire protection needs of the Route 7 corridor are now being

met.

 Several small public water systems that had serious contamination issues have been

eliminated, with water now being supplied through UWC's distribution system.

Questions about Connecticut’ Questions about Connecticut’s Capacity Development Program? Cont acity Development Program? Contact Steve Messer • Connecticut Department of Public

Health • 410 Capitol 410 Capitol Avenue • Hartford, CT 06134-0308 • (860) 509-7333 • Steve.Messer@po.st teve.Messer@po.state.ct.us

+
Isle of Pines Water System, South Carolina, 2000 – 2006

System Capacity Development Case Study

Background

Isle of Pines is a small water system with 18 connections in Lexington County, SC. In 2000,

the owner of the system for 20 years died and left the operation of the system to his

widow, who faced many challenges in operating the failing system.

Public Health Challenges

Along with a poor-quality groundwater source that was not monitored for contaminants,

distribution line breaks were common. This led to constant interruptions in service and

numerous boil water orders, and resulted in the system's customers relying on purchasing

bottled water for drinking.

Capacity Issues

Technical

 Low-quality water source.

 Frequent distribution line breaks.

 Leaking storage tank.

Managerial

 The widowed operator was unable to comply with relevant drinking water

regulations.

 No properly trained and certified operator.

Financial  Insufficient revenue, reserves, and access to capital needed to replace aging

infrastructure.

Actions: Ownership Transfer

✓ The owner petitioned the South Carolina Public Service Commission (PSC) to abandon the

system and was told to find a replacement owner.

✓ South Carolina Capacity Development staff coordinated two community meetings to explore

the failing water system's options and to assess the possibility of connecting with the nearby

town of Chapin.

✓ In 2004, the Lexington County Public Works Department received a $106,000 Drinking

Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) loan to extend drinking water service to the Isle of

Pines system from the town of Chapin.

✓ In 2005, Lexington County installed over 4,000 feet of drinking water lines to connect the

smaller system to the town of Chapin, which operates the system and will assume ownership

once the DWSRF loan has been repaid.

Outcomes

 Through the combined efforts of town, county, state, and PSC staff, the system now has a

high-quality water source and is operated by a properly trained and certified operator.

 Customers have consistent, high-quality drinking water, and boil water orders have been

eliminated.

Questions about South Carolina’ Questions about South Carolina’s Capacity Development Program? Cont acity Development Program? Contact David Price • South Carolina Department of Health

and Environment and Environmental Control al Control • 2600 Bull Street • Columbia, SC 29201 • (803) 898-3993 • PRICEDC@adhec.sc.gov

+
Eastern Wyoming Public Service District, West Virginia, 2000 – 2008

System Capacity Development Case Study

Questions about West Virginia’ irginia’s Capacity Development Plan? Cont acity Development Plan? Contact Richard Watson • West Virginia Bureau for Public Health irginia Bureau for Public Health • Capitol Capitol

and Washington Streets • 1 Davis Square, Suite 200 1 Davis Square, Suite 200 • Charleston, WV 25301-1798 Charleston, WV 25301-1798 • (304) 558-6747 (304) 558-6747 • richardwat richardwatson@wvdhhr.org

Outcomes

 Upon completion, the EWPSD will replace 15 small, failing water systems with a single

larger, viable water system providing 6,500 eastern Wyoming County residents safe, reliable

drinking water.

 The EWPSD will also extend drinking water service to several previously unincorporated

areas.

Background

Many drinking water systems in eastern Wyoming County, WV, were built by coal

companies during the first half of the 20th century. Residents struggled to keep these water

systems viable after the mining companies left the area and turned over control of the

systems. Many systems were maintained by local volunteers, resulting in erratic service,

deteriorating infrastructure, and potentially unsafe drinking water. The Eastern Wyoming

Public Service District (EWPSD) is a new regional water system formed by the county

commission that will eventually consolidate 15 of these systems with a total population of

about 6,500 persons.

Public Health Challenges

The 15 aging water systems suffered from serious microbiological contamination, irregular

water service, inadequate disinfection, and aging distribution systems subject to frequent

line breaks. The systems had numerous health-based and monitoring and reporting

violations, and several systems had been under boil water orders for years. Recent flooding

exacerbated many of the public health challenges facing these systems.

Capacity Issues

Technical

 Aging distribution systems and treatment plants.

 Frequent distribution line breaks.

 Inadequate raw water treatment.

Managerial  After mining companies left, the systems had no certified or properly trained

operators to oversee operations.

Financial  Inadequate rates and bill delinquency led to a lack of funds to rehabilitate the

aging systems.

Actions: Ownership Transfer

✓ In 2000, the Public Service Commission of West Virginia placed five systems into

receivership. Neighboring Logan County Public Service District assumed the operation of

the five systems.

✓ The West Virginia Capacity Development team assessed the five systems and four others

close by and recommended physical consolidation of the systems to address their capacity

issues.

✓

EWPSD was formed to consolidate the 15 drinking water systems through physical

interconnection and construction of a single regional water treatment plant. Funding includes

$3.5 million from the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF). EWPSD has

established a more appropriate rate structure and pricing.

✓ The first phase of the consolidation, interconnecting seven systems and constructing a new

regional treatment plant, is under way and scheduled for completion in fall 2006.

+
Office of Water (4606M)

EPA 816-R-06-005

www.epa.gov/safewater

October 2006

Printed on Recycled Paper