Real Time Technologies for Early Contamination Warning in Water Security Systems

Real Time Technologies for Early Contamination Warning in Water Security Systems Andreas Weingartner, s::can Messtechnik GmbH Vienna, Austria www.s can.at

Agenda 1. purpose and limitations of drinkingwater event detection systems 2. key factors for successful systems 3. state of the art of sensors and software 4. logistic challenges 5. testing and standards 6. examples from the USA 7. Annex: examples of testing initiaives

Considering safe drinking water supply, whatare the types of risks and contamination Real time monitoring strategies are the answer to detect low probability / high impact events at an early stage. Chronic or long term risks still must be monitored by occasional sampling and laboratory analysis.

Considering safe drinking water supply, whatare the realistic detection limits 12.500 LD50 1.000 100 10 1 ppb LD1, estimated Saxitoxine Toxicity Limit, estimated Online Sensors Detection Limit long term effects acute toxicity 0,1 0,01 No known Drinking Water Limits Laboratory Detection Limit safe

Combining spectrometry with online toxicity test, what are Substance NaCN Na Fluoroacetate LSD Aldicarb Azinphos Methyl Fenamiphos Aflatoxin Difenacoum VX Ricin Saxitoxin Botulin Toxin realistic detection limits CTOX* (mg/l) 86 1.54 0.16 8.9 102 56 17 18.7 1.80 23.3 4.2 0.000028 combination ++ +/ +/ ++ ++ + + +/ +/ ++ UVspectral + +/ +/ + + + + +/ + + Bacteria TOXicity + +/ + + +/ + CTOX = [toxin] required for a person of 70 kg bdw drinking 3L/day consumption to aquire a dose equal to LD50

the ideal event detection system will... Chemical < > Biological react to most types of threat agents at concentrations far below LD50 lethal dose [but still much higher than drinking water limits] provide distinct signal to each threat agent not respond to harmless substances or operational fluctuations, avoid false alarms respond FAST / in real time local immediate interpretation and operative response prepared emergency response process (take samples, detailed lab analysis, further reactions)

overview of key factors for a successful event detection system 1. water quality sensors are the eyes into the water system. the more eyes, themorereliableinformation. 2. a dense grid of low cost sensors gives more protection than just a few complex stations, and at lower cost. 3. no new fancy sensor technologies are needed but better adapt and implement proven technologies. sensors need to be more simple, reliable, intelligent, transparent, and communicative. 4. the logistic implementation including maintenance plan, event response plan, and regular trainings is critical. 5. good and simple event detection software, and daily use of it, is critical. 6. to keep protection sustainable, ressources must be appointed to deal with the extra efforts.

types of monitors 1. chemical physical monitors 2. microorganism monitors 3. toxicity monitors Fluorescent bacteria (simple use, low sensitivity) Daphnia (more difficult use, better sensitivity) Clams, Fish (difficult use, good sensitivity)

So if you want to measure in pipe, this is the...... list of in pipe physical/chemical parameters General parameters solid-state on-chip or electrolyte pressure temperature ph ORP conductivity dissolved oxygen (on-chip) chlorine (free, total) chloramines: calculated from total - free chlorine General optical parameters turbidity (optical) colour UV254 - simple surrogate organics indicator (spectral) TOC/DOC - broad organics detector UV spectral alarms Special parameters for special purpose NH4 (chloraminating systems): ISE NO2 (chloraminating systems): spectral hi-resolution UV-Vis NO3 (ground water under agricultural influence): spectral UV-Vis Hydrocarbon alarm: UV-Vis or Fluorescence Other important parameters no sensors exist for Arsen Endocrine disruptors Pesticides/Herbicides on-chip on-chip PPT on-chip or electrolyte on-chip or electrolyte on-chip on-chip on-chip amperometric; use of ORP on-chip amperometric; use of ORP optical optical optical optical optical ISE optical optical optical none none none 10

The most difficult part...... to distinguish contamination from naturally fluctuating matrix Physical-chemical in-pipe sensors for contamination detection 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 detects water quality problem = selectivity reliability maintenance (x per yr) UV-Spectrum DOC_spectral TOC_spectral UV254 chlorine turbidity colour ORP conductivity dissolved oxygen ph temperature* pressure* 60

Installation types... SIMPLICITY isthe key Reagent based cabinet analyzers and monitoring stations: Loosing market and will loose quickly for the next 5 years. Non reagent, non consumable based, sensor type monitoring stations: Growing quickly and will dominate the market for the next 10 years. Pipe insertion probes: Demand quickly increasing, still in starting position. Will take over in 10 years.

Example 1: The i::scan, a new in pipe LED based spectrometer Color (div. standards) UV254 Organics (TOC, DOC, COD, BOD) Turbidity (NTU EPA, FTU ISO) UV Vis Spectral Alarm and combinations of them all (Made in Austria) 60

Example 2: The Intellisonde compact in pipe multiparameter probe: ph, ORP, Conductivity, Turbidity, Dissolved Oxygen, Pressure, Temperature, Chlorine, Monochloramine, Color, Flow. Chlorine still to be verified. Many sensors in very compact format. (UK made) Example 3: The KAPTA 3000 AC4 compact in pipe probe, manufactured by Endetec, a Veolia daughter. Former Silsense technology (CH). Chlorine, Pressure, Temperature, Conductivity. Very compact format, interesting new technology. Parameter combination so far mainly interesting for chlorinating utilities. Chlorine still to be verified. (France (?) made ) 60

Example 4: The CENSAR SIX CENSE in pipe probe: ph, ORP, Conductivity, Dissolved Oxygen, Temperature, Chlorine, Monochloramine (USA owned today, future not sure)

60 s::can Messtechnik, Vienna Physical-chemical in-pipe sensors for contamination detection 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 detects water quality problem = selectivity reliability maintenance (x per yr) Physical-chemical in-pipe sensors for contamination detection 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 detects water quality problem = selectivity reliability maintenance (x per yr) Intellisonde ~6.000 (?) UV-Spectrum DOC_spectral TOC_spectral UV254 chlorine turbidity colour ORP conductivity dissolved oxygen ph temperature* pressure* 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Physical-chemical in-pipe sensors for contamination detection detects water quality problem = selectivity reliability maintenance (x per yr) i::scan ~4.000 Kapta 3000 ~2.500 (?) UV-Spectrum DOC_spectral TOC_spectral UV254 chlorine turbidity colour ORP conductivity dissolved oxygen ph temperature* pressure* Spectrum C_spectral C_spectral UV254 chlorine turbidity colour ORP onductivity ed oxygen ph mperature* pressure*

We have installed the sensors, will we detect events now? No. Without EDS Software impossible. The most difficult part is to distinguish contamination from naturally fluctuating matrix = to establish a baseline The detection of events by simply using upper and lower thresholds of parameter concentration is impossible. More complex pattern recognition algorithms are indispensable. The use of advanced, userfriendly event detection software is critical. Importantly, adding EDS software allows the use of all and any already installed sensors to use for event detection and water protection, and thus is the most economical solution.

Good EDS Software is critical...... clear display and easy user guidance

Good EDS Software is critical...... auto diagnosis of parameters, sensors and station

Good EDS Software is critical...... numerical and graphical visualization of measured data and events

logistic challenges and conditions... Even the best water monitoring station will not give back the full effect if not implemented into a well organized logistic environment. This is still widely underestimated today. Too many false alarms will kill any event detection system implementation. No trained experts available in small towns where most of the accidents happen: there, the logistic environment should be provided by central and mobile experts. All critical evaluations and reactions should be triggered by a machine driven, well prepared response process, and escalated to a central team. The final decision event <> no event should be signed by a central expert.

logistic challenges and conditions... Events do not happen every day. Thus, regular daily use of data beyond event detection - is crucial for keeping a monitoring system in good shape Other purposes of real-time water quality monitoring are: detect any type of acute system irregularity continuous water system improvements: leakages, pump failures, low-pressure situations, low-chlorine situation, cross-connections, general maintenance programs, etc. compliance reporting water quality documentation event detection and response

testing of EDS system is crucial 1. in stable laboratory environment > loop tests (US.EPA) 2. under real world conditions in the field > spike tests 3. computer model > simulation of real world conditions

testing of EDS system is crucial ROC curves describe the most crucial performance parameter under real world conditions: true to false alarm ratio

testing of EDS system is crucial Standards for testing of event detection equipment and software are still missing!

testing of EDS systems Simulated contamination of a real water with Saxitoxine at 19 µg/l

Some examples from the USA US EPA runs the Water Security Initiative (WSI), a nationwide, multiphase project to support the investigation and deployment of large water security systems. US EPA has tested and explicitly recommends in their report the use of spectral and other sensors instead of reagent based analyzers. The 4 US EPA recommended parameters are TOC, ph, conductivity, and Chlorine. US EPA has tested the several types of event detection software, and recommends the use of it.

Some examples from the USA Glendale, AZ The first implementation of a working Water Security system in the USA. All stations fully integrated into a central data base Achieved together with CH2M Hill, the leading US consultant for Water Security projects and systems. Since then, CH2M Hill and s::can lead most US WSI projects.

Some examples from the USA supplied instrumentation to NYC DEP since 2006 existing sampling stations converted into water monitoring stations First micro stations installed in 2009 > 2012 about 30 stations moni::tool is accepted as event detection software Network growing every year NYC, NY

A complete contamination prevention system* Dallas, TX Multiple tools CCS OWQM Alerts PHS LIMS *by CH2M Hill, using sensors and stations from s::can

A complete contamination prevention system* Dallas, TX Multiple tools CCS OWQM Alerts PHS LIMS Real-time Station status at a glance *by CH2M Hill, using sensors and stations from s::can

A complete contamination prevention system* Dallas, TX Multiple tools CCS OWQM Alerts PHS LIMS Gauge View *by CH2M Hill, using sensors and stations from s::can

A complete contamination prevention system* Dallas, TX Multiple tools CCS OWQM Alerts PHS LIMS Gauge View Trend View *by CH2M Hill, using sensors and stations from s::can

A complete contamination prevention system* Dallas, TX Multiple tools CCS OWQM Alerts PHS LIMS Gauge View Trend View Leaks (month) from SAP *by CH2M Hill, using sensors and stations from s::can

ANNEX: Testing and Standards for event detection TTEP: Technology Testing and Evaluation Program US EPA formed the National Homeland Security Research Center (NHSRC). It manages research and technical assistance efforts to provide appropriate, affordable, effective, and validated technologies and methods for addressing risks posed by chemical, biological, and radiological terrorist attacks. Research focuses on enhancing ability to detect, contain, and decontaminate in the event of such attacks. The NHSRC has created the Technology Testing and Evaluation Program (TTEP) in an effort to provide reliable information regarding the performance of homeland security related technologies. TTEP provides independent, quality assured performance information that is useful to decision makers in purchasing or applying the tested technologies. 60

ANNEX: Testing and Standards for event detection TTEP: Technology Testing and Evaluation Program Battelle University did a lot of the testing, and developed testing standards and procedures. The procedures are rather simple spike into closed loop procedures, and quite far from real life situation. http://www.epa.gov/nhsrc/ttep_tis.html United States Army Center for Environmental Health Research: > Testing of Technologies for Building Protection 60

ANNEX: Testing and Standards for event detection The Water Security Initiative (WSI) The Water Security Initiative (WSI) target: "develop robust, comprehensive, and fully coordinated surveillance and monitoring systems, including international information, for water quality that provides early detection and awareness of disease, pest, or poisonous agents. Homeland Security Directive 9 US EPA is implementing the WS initiative in three phases: Phase I: develop the conceptual design of a system for timely detection and appropriate response to drinking water contamination incidents to mitigate public health and economic impacts; Phase II: test and demonstrate contamination warning systems through pilots at drinking water utilities and municipalities and make refinements to the design as needed based upon pilot results; Phase III: develop practical guidance and outreach to promote voluntary national adoption of effective and sustainable drinking water contamination warning systems. 60

ANNEX: Testing and Standards for event detection US EPA T&E Testing (Cincinnati, OH) US EPA facilities in Cincinnati OH: T&E Testing Extensive testing 2004 until today of all kind of equipment and software according to quite theoretical spike reaction in a closedloop Financed by Homeland Security budget Partly fed into: US EPA Guideline Distribution System Water Quality Monitoring: Sensor Technology Evaluation Methodology and Results, A Guide for Sensor Manufacturers and Water Utilities, Oct 2009 60

ANNEX: Testing and Standards for event detection The US EPA EDS Software Challenge Testing 5 different software packages for the capability to detect events under real-life conditions US-EPA 2013: Water Quality Event Detection System Challenge: Methodology and Findings -> Understanding the importance of event detection software, Sandia National Laboratories have developed the CANARY software, financed by substancial EPA funds. Ask Wayne Einfeld, Sandia National Laboratories 60

ANNEX: Testing and Standards for event detection Some other testing initiatives Netherlands Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieul National Institute for Public Health and the Environment: several test and publications on water security sensors Netherlands KIWA 2004 and following Swiss Army, 2006 US Carollo Engineers, City of Tampa US, Spike Testing, published Report 2012 60