<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.2" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Proposed BMP 3 - Problem #3</title>
	<link>http://www.centralbasin.org/blog/2008/06/16/proposed-bmp-3-problem-3/</link>
	<description>Central Basin Municipal Water District</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 23:22:08 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Rick Hydrick</title>
		<link>http://www.centralbasin.org/blog/2008/06/16/proposed-bmp-3-problem-3/#comment-564</link>
		<dc:creator>Rick Hydrick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2008 22:50:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.centralbasin.org/blog/2008/06/16/proposed-bmp-3-problem-3/#comment-564</guid>
		<description>I think problem number four would be the absolute paucity of meaningful, technical information about how to value the duration of unknown leaks.  When you find one, by accident of course, are you suppose to multiply the leak rate by one day, four days, three hundred and sixty-five days, seven hundred and thirty days?  The duration of undiscovered leaks, as Matt points out, is so elementally integral to a good science approach to BMP 3 that we can't move on without it.  Until conventions are developed,as suggested by Toby above, for such core factors as valuing unknown leaks, BMP 3 is pointless.

Rick Hydrick</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think problem number four would be the absolute paucity of meaningful, technical information about how to value the duration of unknown leaks.  When you find one, by accident of course, are you suppose to multiply the leak rate by one day, four days, three hundred and sixty-five days, seven hundred and thirty days?  The duration of undiscovered leaks, as Matt points out, is so elementally integral to a good science approach to BMP 3 that we can&#8217;t move on without it.  Until conventions are developed,as suggested by Toby above, for such core factors as valuing unknown leaks, BMP 3 is pointless.</p>
<p>Rick Hydrick</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Toby Roy</title>
		<link>http://www.centralbasin.org/blog/2008/06/16/proposed-bmp-3-problem-3/#comment-562</link>
		<dc:creator>Toby Roy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2008 00:38:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.centralbasin.org/blog/2008/06/16/proposed-bmp-3-problem-3/#comment-562</guid>
		<description>I attended the AWWA National Conference in Atlanta.  Leak detection and prevention was a significant topic of discussion at the conference.  It is my understanding that the M36 manual could take as long as another year to be finalized due to the number of comments that were received.  I attended the leak detection session on Thursday morning.  This was a packed session on the last day of the conference.  While water agencies recognize a need for standardizing leak detection and audit procedures, there is still significant discussion on the national level on how to use the manual to set standards for how much leakage should be acceptable.  

In light of the status at the national level of AWWA, what may be more appropriate at this time is to get agencies to start standardizing their audit procedures.  Appropriate leak standards could be set at a later date when more information is available and the industry has had a chance to adapt to some of the new approaches. 

Toby Roy</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I attended the AWWA National Conference in Atlanta.  Leak detection and prevention was a significant topic of discussion at the conference.  It is my understanding that the M36 manual could take as long as another year to be finalized due to the number of comments that were received.  I attended the leak detection session on Thursday morning.  This was a packed session on the last day of the conference.  While water agencies recognize a need for standardizing leak detection and audit procedures, there is still significant discussion on the national level on how to use the manual to set standards for how much leakage should be acceptable.  </p>
<p>In light of the status at the national level of AWWA, what may be more appropriate at this time is to get agencies to start standardizing their audit procedures.  Appropriate leak standards could be set at a later date when more information is available and the industry has had a chance to adapt to some of the new approaches. </p>
<p>Toby Roy</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
