RFAs: Comprehensive Corrosion Control Strategies for Various Water Infrastructure Materials

Objectives

• Develop guidance for corrosion control strategies for various materials commonly found in water distribution systems (mains and service lines) and premise plumbing systems, including non-lead materials.
• Evaluate and compare different corrosion control processes, highlighting their advantages and disadvantages towards the variety of materials found in distribution and plumbing systems.
• Explore the feasibility of reducing, eliminating, or replacing orthophosphate-based corrosion control treatments in post lead service line (LSL) scenarios, assess subsequent impacts on remaining lead-containing and non-lead materials, and evaluate alternatives to orthophosphate for reducing lead and copper in drinking water.

Research Approach

• The proposal must include the following tasks in the research approach with a detailed description of the research methodologies and a clear plan for addressing each task.
  • Conduct a comprehensive review of existing literature and industry standards to identify corrosion control strategies tailored to specific materials commonly found in water distribution mains, service lines, and premise plumbing systems.
  • Assess the effectiveness of various corrosion control treatments through literature review, surveys, and/or case studies from utilities that have implemented different corrosion control strategies and examine their impacts on different infrastructure materials. Highlight challenges and unintended consequences that may have been observed, if any.
  • Investigate the feasibility of reducing or eliminating orthophosphate-based corrosion control treatments in post-LSL scenarios through experience from water systems.
  • Explore alternatives to orthophosphate for reducing lead and copper in drinking water. These alternatives could be used instead of orthophosphate or during the transition away from orthophosphate in a post-LSL scenario. Also, consider addressing various challenges (e.g., small systems, disadvantaged communities that may lack the means to implement orthophosphate, systems with multiple water sources where corrosion control cannot be applied at each entry point) associated with orthophosphate use.
  • Develop a guidance document outlining best practices for corrosion control for the most common materials found in distribution and plumbing systems.

Funding Information

• The maximum funding available from WRF for this project is $350,000. The applicant must contribute additional resources equivalent to at least 33% of the project award. For example, if an applicant requests $100,000 from WRF, an additional $33,000 or more must be contributed by the applicant. Acceptable forms of applicant contribution include cost share, applicant in-kind, or third-party in-kind that comply with 2 CFR Part 200.306 cost sharing or matching. The applicant may elect to contribute more than 33% to the project, but the maximum WRF funding available remains fixed at $350,000.
• The anticipated period of performance for this project is 36 months from the contract start date.

Expected Deliverables

• A final report summarizing the findings of the comparative analysis of different corrosion control processes, the feasibility of reducing or eliminating orthophosphate-based corrosion control treatments in post-LSL scenarios, and the assessment of the effectiveness of various CCTs
• Webinars to share project outcomes with water utility professionals and stakeholders on corrosion control strategies and best practices
• A decision support system or tool that utilities can use to select and implement the most appropriate corrosion control strategy based on their specific circumstances and goals. This tool could incorporate various factors, including material types, water chemistry, regulatory requirements, and cost considerations
• If technology deliverables (e.g., web tool) will be produced, they must follow the Technology Deliverables Guidance.

Eligibility Criteria

• Proposals will be accepted from both U.S.-based and non-U.S.-based entities, including educational institutions, research organizations, governmental agencies, and consultants or other for-profit entities.
• WRF’s Board of Directors has established a Timeliness Policy that addresses researcher adherence to the project schedule. Researchers who are late on any ongoing WRF-sponsored studies without approved no-cost extensions are not eligible to be named participants in any proposals.

For more information, visit WRF.