Storage Tank Comprehensive Inspections

We hope 2022 is off to a good start for you! Do you have storage tanks in the distribution system (after the Entry Point sampling location) and when was the last time the tanks had a comprehensive inspection? The Storage Tank Rule (Regulation 11.28) requires Comprehensive Inspections of each finished water storage tank at least every five calendar years or on an department acceptable alternative schedule. A comprehensive inspection is a in-depth tank inspection that includes both an internal and external inspection that covers all aspects of the condition of the storage tank including but not limited to sanitary, structural, and coating systems conditions, as well as security and safety concerns. Periodic tank inspections are mainly a visual external storage tank inspection that is typically performed by the supplier to identify evident sanitary defects (e.g., lack of screens on vents). Most water suppliers hire contractors to perform comprehensive tank inspections.

Policy DW-012 - Storage Tank Rule Alternate Inspection Schedule Justification, Section 4.6 specifies that with the Storage Tank Rule becoming effective April 1, 2016, suppliers of water are required to perform a comprehensive inspection of their finished water tanks within five years of this date and subsequently at least every five years thereafter. Please note, the five-year interval between comprehensive inspections is calculated on the calendar year rather than a specific month or date. For example, if a comprehensive inspection was completed anytime within calendar year 2016, then the following comprehensive inspection must have been completed by the last day of 2021 in order to be in compliance with the Storage Tank Rule. For another example, if a comprehensive inspection was completed anytime within calendar year 2018, then the next comprehensive inspection must be completed by the last day of 2023.

Please note! The water supplier must have conducted a comprehensive inspection on all distribution system tanks before the end of 2021 and every five years thereafter (Policy DW-012). Effective 2022, unless your distribution system tank was built after 2016 or was on a department acceptable alternate inspection schedule, a comprehensive inspection must have been completed. If a comprehensive inspection was not completed, then it is a treatment technique violation that requires Tier 2 public notice. The Field Services Section will be evaluating your documentation of your comprehensive tank inspections during your next Sanitary Survey. Please be prepared with the following information:

• When the tank(s) in the distribution system went into service
• Were comprehensive inspections completed every 5 years or are they on a department acceptable alternate schedule
• Copy of the comprehensive inspection report(s)
• Water supplier review of the comprehensive inspection report and any sanitary defects (Policy DW-010) identified (e.g., sediment exceeding 1-inch, holes, vent screens missing, etc.).
• Documentation demonstrating that any sanitary defects were corrected or are on a corrective action schedule to resolve.

Additional resources for comprehensive tank inspections, include the following: Comprehensive inspection checklist, Comprehensive inspection checklist instructions and Storage tank guidance handbook. The division’s intranet also has more information at https://cdphe.colorado.gov/dwtank.

Comprehensive inspections are important to protect storage tanks from sanitary defects and provide safe drinking water to customers. If you have any questions or concerns, please reach out to the Field Services Section at CDPHE_WQCD_FSS_Questions@state.co.us and thank you for all your efforts!

➽ Heather Young, PE, CWP

Coaches Classroom: Security - Regulatory Requirements for Tampering Events

As professionals in the drinking water field, our first concern is the protection of our communities' health by providing safe drinking water. This protection is evident in the daily work of operators, lab technicians, administrators, regulators, and many more. One aspect of a public water system's daily work is to protect drinking water infrastructure from tampering events. 

What is tampering?

Tampering as defined in Regulation 11.2(1) is 

• The introduction of a contaminant into a public water system or drinking water.
• To interfere with drinking water or the operation of a public water system. 

One of the main aspects of tampering is that there is an intention of harming people or public water systems. Regulation 11 is also clear about what is not tampering. It states that tampering does not include the standard accepted treatment procedures performed by the supplier in preparing water for human consumption. 

Tampering can occur along any one of the protected barriers of safe drinking water: 

• Source water
• Treatment
• Storage
• Distribution

What are the requirements to report tampering events?

Initial report to the department: 

Drinking water systems must notify the department as soon as possible but no later than 10 a.m. of the next calendar day after any tampering, suspected tampering, or receipt of a tampering threat.

Written report to the department: 

Following the initial report, drinking water systems must submit a detailed report of tampering events to the department no later than five calendar days after: 

• Tampering 
• Suspected tampering 
• Receipt of tampering threat

The report the department must be written and must cover the following information: 

• Explain the circumstances of the occurrence
• Identify the action(s) taken to ensure the ability of the supplier to provide safe and reliable drinking water 
• Identify the action(s) taken to prevent any recurrences  

Resources and Reporting Forms: 

• WQCD Security Toolbox website
• WQCD Tampering, Threat, and Incident Report Google Form (Preferred)
• WQCD Tampering, Threat, and Incident Report PDF Please send to  cdphe.wqacutes@state.co.us.

Why are there requirements to report tampering events? 

The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment is tasked with ensuring that drinking water is safe for human consumption throughout Colorado. Tampering presents an unacceptable risk to human health through potential contamination or other impairment of a drinking water system that could jeopardize its ability to provide safe water to the public. Once you inform the division of your tampering event, we will work with your system to determine next steps and connect you with state and federal partners to assist you in your recovery efforts. 

Thank you for all you and your partners do to keep all Coloradans safe and healthy! 

➽  Kyra Gregory Drinking Water Training Specialist

Program Manager Message: A Culture of Health and notifying mobile home park residents to boil their water

In October 2021 a situation arose at Elephant Rock Mobile Home Park in El Paso County leading the department to determine that the drinking water could represent an immediate public health risk and that public notice was needed to let the residents know to boil their water. Over the course of the prior couple of months, the department became aware that the water system did not have a certified operator and that no one was ensuring an adequate supply of chlorine into the tap water. No compliance sampling was taking place. Based on our knowledge of the chlorination system, we estimated that the chlorine had run out. With no one running the system, no sampling and no chlorine, the department issued a bottled water advisory to the system requiring that public notice be delivered to the residents within 24 hours. 

However, no administrative contact or owner for the property could be located or contacted. The public notice was not going to be issued by the water system in a timely fashion. The department coordinated with El Paso County health and the city of Palmer Lake. Both of these entities were very concerned for the residents and their situations. The department decided that under a Culture of Health we needed to conduct the public notice ourselves and make sure the residents were informed. We prepared the public notice ourselves and had it translated into Spanish. We coordinated the logistics with local governments for awareness and coordinated with local law enforcement to ensure that everyone would be safe. Then, one of our staff members went to the mobile home park with a local police agent and provided the public notice to the residents. In general, they greatly appreciated the efforts we undertook to help protect them. Our actions also did catch the attention of the property owners, who later took steps to get the system operating properly again. We are still tracking this situation closely.

It is fully a public water system’s responsibility to comply with the Colorado Primary Drinking Water Regulation (Regulation 11), and this includes providing public notice when violations occur or other situations arise that involve letting people know that the water might not be safe to drink. This responsibility also includes providing public notice in the language that residents understand, in this case Spanish. We have had only a couple of instances in the last fifteen years, when a water system was unable to meet this responsibility to the extent that the department had to undertake the public notice activity on their behalf. This is a disappointing and disturbing failure on the part of the public water system. However, as an agency with a Culture of Health as our North Star, we will take action in these cases as needed. We will do this in coordination with appropriate local governments, and in a manner that keeps our staff and the public safe in a difficult situation. 

I wanted to share this story with you about our collective commitment with local governments to protect public health and ensure safe tap water for all. Thank you.

➽ Ron Falco, P.E. Safe Drinking Water Program Manager

Operators in Responsible Charge: the importance of avoiding "paper" only ORC's

In early December 2021, I attended an Operator Certification Coordinators meeting hosted by the Association of State Drinking Water Administrators (ASDWA). One topic that generated significant interest was that of so-called “paper” operators. These are operators who are designated as operators in responsible charge (ORCs), but fail to adequately supervise the operation of their facilities. They are ORCs on paper only. Apparently, this is a concern in several states and one outcome of the meeting was an agreement that a subsequent meeting would be scheduled to discuss paper operators in greater detail. 

It was a timely conversation because here in Colorado, the Water and Wastewater Facility Operators Certification Board (board) revoked an operator’s certificates just two weeks prior to the ASDWA meeting for essentially being a “paper” operator. Three of his systems experienced disinfection or treatment violations due to his negligence. At two of these systems, Water Quality Control Division inspectors conducting a sanitary survey identified conditions that resulted in the immediate issue of boil water advisories. Furthermore, the operator never even visited one of these sites. At the third system, it was found that essential treatment equipment was not properly working. At all three sites, the operator failed to adequately train the individuals who performed routine operational duties and he failed to verify that the on-site operators were performing their tasks correctly - or at all. The operator failed to develop written delegation plans, so on-site operators had no operational limits and lacked instructions about when, or if, they should contact the ORC. As a result, uncertified operators made process control and system integrity decisions in violation of Regulation 100. One of the system administrators fittingly called this ORC “an operator in name only.”

The disciplinary action hearing concerning this operator underscored the risks to public health when a certified operator in responsible charge inadequately and/or inappropriately delegates essential ORC duties and/or fails to provide adequate supervision of the facility. In Colorado, this behavior is negligent; it is operator misconduct that can result in loss of certification. 

Some other states have confronted this potential risk to public health or are planning to amend their regulations. 

• In Wyoming, contract operators are now required to keep records of the amount of time they spend and the duties they perform at each contracted facility. They are also required to make a physical inspection of each contracted facility at least once a week unless an alternate schedule is approved by the state.
• Connecticut has proposed regulatory revisions that would include a section, like Colorado’s Regulation 100.12, which specifies the Chief Operator (what Colorado calls an ORC) duties. Each system would also have to provide the state with a list of non-delegable duties. Per Connecticut’s proposed revisions, the PWS Chief Operator designation would require state approval.

It is evident from the outcome of the recent disciplinary action hearing that Colorado’s current regulations provide means to address “paper” operator behavior. We intend to continue implementing and enforcing our existing requirements. New operator certification requirements are not being considered at this time.

➽ Nancy Horan, Facility and Operator Outreach and Certification Board Liaison

Backflow Prevention Program Requirements for 2022

Happy New Year, 2022 is here and there are Backflow Prevention and Cross Connection Control Program (BPCCC) requirements (in Regulation 11 Section 11.39) that will be coming up quickly. The BPCCC rule was originally adopted with stakeholder consensus in 2015 and became effective in 2016. 

What is coming due in 2022?

Two major milestones take effect in 2022. The first, is the final milestone for the staged implementation of the BPCCC surveys that started in 2016. This requires suppliers to survey all non-single-family-residential connections to the public water system to determine if the connection is a cross-connection, unless the supplier controls that connection with the most protective backflow prevention assembly or backflow prevention method. Suppliers must achieve the survey compliance ratios as specified in Table 11.39-I:

• By December 31, 2021 and each year after, the survey compliance ratio required is 1.0 
• A NOTE on rounding: Policy 7 - Compliance Ratio Rounding: 0.951 rounds up to 1.0, but 0.947 rounds down to 0.9
• Suppliers may apply to the Department for an alternative survey compliance ratio. Applications are online here. 

The second major milestone taking effect in 2022 is the final milestone for the backflow prevention assembly annual testing compliance ratios. Suppliers must ensure that backflow prevention assemblies used to control cross connections are tested annually by a Certified Cross-Connection Control Technician and maintained. Suppliers must achieve the backflow prevention assembly annual testing compliance ratios as specified in Table 11.39-II:

• By December 31, 2021 and each year after, the backflow prevention assembly annual testing compliance ratio must be > 0.90 
• A NOTE on rounding: Policy 7 - Compliance Ratio Rounding: 0.896 rounds up to 0.90, but 0.893 rounds down to 0.89
• No Alternative Compliance Ratios are allowed 
• Beginning January 1, 2022, for each backflow prevention assembly not tested during the previous calendar year, the supplier must ensure the backflow prevention assembly is tested no later than 90 days after the active date of the backflow prevention assembly in the following calendar year.
• If the supplier is unable to meet the 90-day deadline, the supplier must consult with the Department and the Department may approve an alternative schedule. The extension application form is available online here.

What BPCCC information will inspectors be looking for in 2022?

BPCCC records for 2021/2022 that will reviewed during a sanitary survey include:

• A list of the number and location of assemblies not tested in 2021
• Their active date and when they were tested in 2022 (must be tested within 90 days of active date in 2022 or by a Department approved alternate schedule). 
• This information must also be included in the 2021 BPCCC Annual Report that must be completed by May 1, 2022.
• If you were granted an extension request, please have your application and approval on hand for your inspector.

What is this Active Date and what do I do about Irrigation / Sprinkler Systems?

The active date is determined by when the assembly is first used during the calendar year, or the first date water runs through the assembly during the calendar year. Beginning January 1, 2022, each assembly that was used but not tested in 2021 must be tested no later than 90 days after the active date of the assembly in 2022.

For example: 

• If an irrigation assembly is not tested in 2021 and is first used January 1, 2022, the assembly would be required to be tested no later than April 1, 2022. 
• If an irrigation assembly is not tested in 2021 and is first used April 15, 2022, the assembly would be required to be tested no later than July 14, 2022. 
• If an assembly is not tested within the required time frame and the supplier has not removed or suspended service to the connection the supplier would be in violation. Note: violations are expected to be reported to the department within 48 hours.

Where can I get more information?

Field Services has developed an BPCCC FAQ that is available online here. 
For any questions or concerns about backflow prevention please email our backflow team at 
cdphe_wqcd_fss_questions@state.co.us. Please stay tuned!

➽ Clayton Moores, PE, Field Unit I Manager

➽ Cameron Wilkins, PE, Field Unit II Manager

➽ Heather Young, PE, CWP, Field Services Section Manager