Best Practice Protocols For Response
And Recovery Operations In
Contaminated Water Systems
Center for Water Resource Studies
Western Kentucky University
Kentucky Water Resources Research Institute
University of Kentucky
Center for Infrastructure Research
University of Louisville
Water Resources Research Center
University of Missouri
KYPipe LLC
2. Problem Statement
2. Problem Statement
Decision-Support Tool to Guide Response & Recovery Operations
DHS - 2008-002-Water: “Decontamination Research”

Pre-event – Post-event planning robustness

Decontamination options


Flush - No-Flush?
Response command structure

regulatory stakeholders, local government, law enforcement,
environmental concerns, etc.

Factors affecting approach selection

NIMS & ICS compatibility
2. Project Focus
Multi-Scale


Local and Regional

Resiliency data

Decision support
Multi-Faceted



National


Extrapolated impact and
exposure
Fact Sheets
Expert System



Rules-based
Graphical DSS

Policy support
Scale relevance
Distribution system
Training Materials

Web-delivered
2. Project Organization
Principle Investigator
Andrew Ernest
WKU/CWRS
Project Coordinator
Jana Fattic
WKU/CWRS
Hydraulic Systems
Lindell Ormsbee
UK/KWRRI
Stakeholder Engagement
Thomas Rockaway
UofL/CIR
Utility Operations
Robert Reed
UofM/WRRC
Background Research
Thomas Clevenger
UofM/WRRC
3. Technical Review / Project
Content
3. Technical - Project Components
Decision
Support
Tool
Background
Research
Stakeholder
Engagement
Decontamination
Network
Model
Training
Education
Guidance
Rules-Based
Decision
Support
Tool
3. Technical - Stakeholder Engagement

Technology Review


Tabletop Exercises


Gap assessment
Decontamination
scenarios
Technology Deployment

DHS

Utilities

Bio/Chemical specialists

USEPA

CDC

DHHS

State Health Departments

Training

End users

Technology validation

NIMS

ICS
3. Technical - Prioritized List of Decontamination
Issue Categories*
1. Large volumes
9. Treatment procedures
2. Practical solutions
10.Agent fate and transport
3. Treatment works
11.Roles and responsibilities
4. Decision-making frameworks
12.Waivers or suspensions
5. Distribution and collection
systems
13.Resources and assets
6. Outreach and training
7. Utility communications
14.Laboratory analysis
15.Operator health and safety
16.Overarching
8. Cleanup levels
*2007 Critical Infrastructure Partnership Advisory Council (CIPAC), Water Sector Decontamination Working
Group, Water Sector Coordinating Council (SCC), and Government Coordinating Council (GCC)
3. Technical - Decontamination Network Model



Decontamination
Network
Model (DNM)
GIS Datasets


If the system should be flushed,
using what hydrant(s)?
What will be the final disposition
of the flushed water? Where will
the water flow?
If the system should be flushed,
can the “upstream” part of the
system be used or does the
system need to be isolated and
flushing water pumped through a
hydrant? If so, which hydrant?
If the system needs to be
isolated, using what valve(s)?
What is the associated volume of
water that will be isolated?
3. Technical – Export to KYPIPE R (existing
technology) for addressing additional questions



Decontamination
Network
Model (DNM)
KYPIPE

What additional system
components (e.g. pumps, tanks)
need to be changed in support of
system flushing or isolation?
How can water be provided to
those denied service due to the
isolation?
What is the operational impact
associated with the rest of the
system?
What operational steps need to be
taken to maintain normal conditions
until decontamination is complete?
3. Technical - Rules-Based Decision Support
Tool

Fact Base
(Working Memory)

Explanation System
U
S
E
R

Inference Engine
(Rule Engine)
Rule Base
(Knowledge Base)
Knowledge Base
Editor
I
N
T
E
R
F
A
C
E



Expert System Shell
Who should be notified? How?
When?
What are the potential health
impacts? Immediate? Shortterm?
What are the environmental
concerns?
When should decontamination
be implemented?
What decontamination strategy
should be taken?
What post event information
needs to be provided to decision
makers, utility customers, and
the general public?
3. Technical - Decision Support Tool
notify?
what else?
where?
health impacts?
environmental?
volume?
flush?
disposal?
isolate?
when?
3. Technical - Training, Education, and Guidance
Guidance Documents
Online Training
and Professional Networking
Technology Deployment
Workshops
4. Landscape Assessment
4. Landscape - Related Work

Prioritized list of decontamination issue categories


Possible contaminants



Centers for Disease Control (CDC). 2003. Emergency Preparedness & Response. Atlanta, Georgia: Center for
Disease Control.
States, S., et al. 2003. Utility-based Analytical Methods to Ensure Public Water Supply Security. Journal
American Water Works Association 95(4): 103-115.
Use of traditional treatment techniques for treating non-traditional contaminants


CIPAC 2008 Critical Infrastructure Partnership Advisory Council, Water Sector Decontamination Working
Group Final Report (August 2008)
Fox 2004 Water Treatment and Equipment Decontamination Techniques Journal of Contemporary Water
Research and Education Issue 129, Pages 18-21 2004
Planning, evaluating and implementing responses


U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2003 Overview of the Response Protocol Toolbox. EPA-817D-03-007. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2008 Decontamination and Recovery Planning, Water and
Wastewater Utility Case Study EPA-817-F-08-004 Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection, Agency,
Office of Water.
5. Collaborative Opportunities
5. Collaborative Opportunities

U.S. EPA National Homeland Security Research Center

American Water Works Association Research Foundation

U.S. Army Edgewood Chemical Biological Center

Battelle Memorial Institute



State regulatory agencies (e.g. Kentucky Division of
Water, Kentucky Division of Waste Management)
State emergency response agencies (e.g. Kentucky
Division of Emergency Response)
Others (water utility representatives)
6. Commercialization Progress
6. Commercialization Plan


Decontamination Network Model

Traditional licensing

Product-based deliverables - commercialization

KYPIPE LLC (www.kypipe.com) – project
commercialization partner
Rules-Based Decision Support Tool

Spin-off company to market deliverables

Subscription-based business model

Open environment, PLLC (www.openenvironment.com)
7. Summary and Conclusions
7. Summary and Conclusions
Project Start Date: March 31, 2010
• Project plan is complete with timelines and milestones
• Team is in place
• Roles and responsibilities are defined
• Work has started
8. Contact Information
8. Contact - Western Kentucky University
Andrew N.S. Ernest, Ph.D., P.E., BCEE, D.WRE
Associate Dean, Ogden College of Science and Engineering
Director, Center for Water Resource Studies
Western Kentucky University
Andrew.Ernest@WKU.edu
+1 (270) 745-2761
Jana R. Fattic, RS
Associate Director, Center for Water Resource Studies
Western Kentucky University
Jana.Fattic@WKU.edu
+1 (270) 745-8706
8. Contact - University of Kentucky
Lindell E. Ormsbee, Ph.D., P.E., P.H., D.WRE, F.ASCE
Director, Kentucky Water Resource Research Institute
University of Kentucky
LOrmsbee@engr.UKy.edu
+1 (859) 257-6329
8. Contact - University of Louisville
Thomas D. Rockaway, Ph.D., P.E.
Director, Center for Infrastructure Research
University of Louisville
Tom.Rockaway@louisville.edu
+1 (502) 582-3272
8. Contact - University of Missouri
Thomas E. Clevenger, Ph.D.
Director, Missouri Water Resources Research Center
University of Missouri
ClevengerT@missouri.edu
+1 (573) 882-7564
Robert E. Reed, Ph.D., P.E.
Research Associate Professor
University of Missouri
ReedRE@missouri.edu
+1 (573) 882-6162
9. Project Timelines
10. Budget Information
10. Budget - Financial Status

Contract date: March 31, 2010

Contract length: 24 months

Budget amount total: $1,546,264

Amount spent to date: $0
11. IP Status
11. Prior IP

Project commercialization partner

KYPIPE, Pipe2008

Water distribution analysis software

Graphical user interface

GUI simplification
11. IP - Project
Not Ready for Disclosure