A look back, and look forward
Dec. 17 speech to restructuring roundtable
Thank you for having me here this morning, for what I anticipate will be my last major speaking engagement as Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs. I intend to describe the energy waterfront as I see it – I have reviewed the thrust of my remarks with my successor and with the Governor, so I want to be clear that my remarks also reflect the policies and priorities of the Governor as he moves into his second term.
Let me begin with thanks. First, to all of you. You have all been participants, proponents, advocates (and yes, I am sure, a few holdouts) in a remarkable transformation of our energy framework. I appreciate your activism and commitment – to the degree we have had success, it truly has a thousand fathers. Many of you in this room should be proud owners of the legacy we have created together in Massachusetts over the last four years. For the record – let’s see a show of hands: how many of you believe there will be a solar industry in the United States going forward? How many believe that there will be an offshore wind industry? Ok, good – I will get back to that.
My greatest thanks go to Governor Deval Patrick, my friend and the best boss in the Commonwealth. I have had great fun over the last four years and feel proud of my run as Secretary of the first state-level Cabinet agency in the nation encompassing both energy and environment. Combining energy and environment under a single Cabinet secretary was Governor Patrick’s idea, and for this idea the time was right.
It is particularly appropriate that I am winding up my time in office addressing the Restructuring Roundtable. I have spoken here four times, first previewing, and then reporting on, our progress toward creating a clean energy future for the Commonwealth.
As I prepare to leave my state post, I am grateful to have this opportunity to reflect on what we have accomplished in the past four years, and, I hope, leave you with an important message for the future.
Here is that message: there is a second restructuring well under way, as a result of the Green Communities Act and the Global Warming Solutions Act. Neither of these acts of the Legislature in 2008 have “restructuring” in their names, like the Electricity Restructuring Act of 1997, but their impacts on energy markets and institutions will ultimately be more profound as they play out over the next several decades. And understanding the implications of this second energy restructuring will be every bit as important as understanding the first one.
The Restructuring Roundtable came into existence to help everyone involved in the electricity industry understand the Electricity Restructuring Act of 1997, with its breakup of vertically integrated utilities and introduction of competition in the wholesale electricity market. Now, New England has the most open and competitive electricity market in the country, and the results are impressive: 9600 MW of new gas fired generation was built, representing $10 billion of private investment. Greenhouse gas emissions from power plants are down 12 percent.
The 1997 restructuring also laid the foundation for the second restructuring now under way. The 1997 act established one of the first Renewable Portfolio Standards in the country, and provided resources, through a Systems Benefit Charge, to support the development and deployment of renewable energy technologies that provide cleaner, more sustainable alternatives to fossil fuels, as well as, unlike many states that implemented restructuring, maintained a significant SBC to continue energy efficiency programs in the post-restructuring era.
But while the 1997 restructuring shook things up in a way that stimulated investment and competition – both things that contributed to the public good – it was a restructuring that lacked an explicit public purpose beyond efficiency and competition. Public purpose is exactly what the second restructuring is all about – energy independence, price stability, lower greenhouse gas emissions, and above all, cleaner energy resources all of which will directly lead to stronger economic future for the Commonwealth. It is a matter of setting a new direction within the competitive structure of our energy market. Indeed, with great clarity, the Governor and the Great and General Court have declared that it is an overriding public purpose in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to move forward aggressively with renewable power, energy efficiency and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.
While not requiring any entity to divest assets or otherwise alter the basic energy market framework, the Green Communities Act created a new set of mandates, purposes and expectations about the way we use and generate electricity going forward. Energy efficiency was put in competition with supply in meeting our energy needs. Instead of being an add-on service that utilities could provide their customers on a limited basis, energy efficiency became the Commonwealth’s “first fuel,” utilized whenever it is cheaper than additional generation. In tandem, the Dept. of Public Utilities issued a decoupling order, breaking down a century’s worth of barriers that kept the utilities from embracing the full potential of efficiency (and distributed renewable power) as ways to meet their customers’ energy needs. Aligning incentives properly has given us the most ambitious energy efficiency program in the nation – the greatest investment per capita of any state in the country. The first three year plan alone is expected to deliver $6 billion of savings for customers from $2 billion of efficiency upgrades.
We changed our building code so that it conforms to the highest available standard – and then we raised the standard on an elective basis for towns/cities. The “stretch code” we created to allow municipalities to require greater efficiency on a localoption basis – more than 60 communities have signed on – has now been adopted as the 2012 IECC standard that Massachusetts, and many other states, utilize for setting their requirements. The stretch code itself was considered controversial for a time – but now virtually all the major cities of Massachusetts have adopted it and it is well on its way to becoming the new national standard. We are leading the way – and others are following.
In renewables, we doubled the rate of increase of RPS – from ½ percent per year to a full percent – so that we will be getting 15 percent of our electricity from new, renewable sources in 2020, and even more thereafter. With long-term contracts to facilitate development of renewable energy generation, we will bring substantial new renewable power resources to market. Same thing for solar, as the solar credit program will support installations that not only meet but exceed Governor Patrick’s goal of 250 MW by 2017. The Massachusetts solar credit program is quickly now setting a national standard as a cost-effective and (in light of rapidly declining solar installation costs) flexible alternative to the first generation of solar programs based on the feed-in tariff model. We get regular calls from other states looking closely at our model. Again, Massachusetts is leading the way.
The other piece of the second restructuring comes from the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2008. We have the strongest greenhouse gas emissions law in the country, and I am required, by the end of the year, to set a legally enforceable 2020 emissions reduction mandate for Massachusetts between 10 and 25 percent below 1990 levels. Thanks to the GCA and other measures, we estimate getting to 18 percent below 1990 without any further actions. That is far beyond what any other state has done to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, so as we reach beyond that, in the 2020 limit I will set in the next two weeks, we will be setting a new standard for the nation. Others will surely follow.
These measures and others are putting Massachusetts on a path toward a clean energy economy – and we are getting noticed for doing so. Governor Patrick was recognized by the Alliance to Save Energy for his national leadership on energy efficiency. Clean Edge, Inc., has, in two separate reports, named Massachusetts as the East Coast leader on clean energy technology, policy, and financing. The annual Freeing the Grid report gave Massachusetts top ranking in the two key policies that support customer adoption of renewables: net metering and interconnection. The Commonwealth’s grade in that report jumped from “C” to “A” in four years.
That is a record to be proud of, but not everyone is happy about it. There are some who say the measures we are taking in this second restructuring go too far: they are too expensive, and they will hurt the economy. I respectfully, but strongly, disagree. Keep in mind the basic facts of energy life in the Commonwealth: with no coal, oil, or natural gas of our own, Massachusetts pays high prices for the energy sources we import from elsewhere, and there is nothing we can do about that. What we can do is reduce our energy use through efficiency, and diversify our fuel sources to capture more homegrown wind and solar energy that keeps dollars here and reduces greenhouse gas emissions. And as we do that for ourselves, we create the technologies, the products, the services the world needs now and in the future.
Let me go straight at one point of contention: Hydro Quebec versus solar PV and offshore wind. This is a dichotomy that is completely false. It’s not one or the other. We need all of them and we need them all in volume and for different reasons.
What we don’t need is to overturn 13 years of consensus that large-scale hydropower ought not to qualify for RPS and receive subsidies in the form of Renewable Energy Certificates. Large hydro is a mature technology that is already competitive in the marketplace – to give it subsidies would amount to a windfall of billions of dollars to a Canadian state owned enterprise at the expense of Massachusetts ratepayers. This was a ridiculous idea when it was trotted out for political purposes during the election campaign, and it is ridiculous now. Indeed, the idea is so fringe that it was not even brought up, let alone debated, in the context of the Green Communities Act in 2008. Now, Hydro Quebec has publicly announced that it will pay to build a new transmission line to bring its power to the New England market, and that is proof that this low-emissions renewable energy will get here, without a giveaway of excess profit.
But why solar? Some might say, it’s expensive; why should Massachusetts go big into solar, requiring electricity providers to buy a minimum amount of electricity from solar as a carve-out of the RPS requirement? I’ll tell you why. If solar is going to become a large market in this country – and you and I all believe it is – we want to be a leader. Right now, we are capturing the entire value chain of solar here in Massachusetts. We have solar panel manufacturing at Evergreen Solar; installers based here like Nexamp, Alteris, and Broadway Electric and others that have come here like Borrego and SunRun; component manufacturers like Panel Claw – a remarkable MA company that is now the 3rd largest US supplier of commercial mounting brackets; and consumers large and small getting electricity from their roofs instead of the grid. We had none of that before Governor Patrick – just 3.5 MW installed when he took office and hardly anyone was making a living installing solar PV. Now, we have nearly 80 MW of solar installed or under contract; employment in solar manufacturing, installation, and services has nearly tripled; and our robust, competitive market is translating falling panel costs into sharply lower total installed costs, moving solar closer to grid parity and closer to the day it will no longer need subsidies at all. That’s not happening in states that don’t have strong programs to support solar. So, I repeat: if you think there will be a US solar market, we have every reason to grow this sector in Massachusetts.
A word about solar costs. I have read in the unhappy mutterings of some opponents of solar in MA that our solar credit program will costs billions upon billions of dollars. The only way that you can arrive at that sky-is-falling conclusion is if you believe two things. One, contrary to the manifest experience of the last three years, where solar component and installation costs have both fallen by roughly 50%, you believe that costs will abruptly stop coming down and remain static for the foreseeable future. I don’t believe that and neither does Nobel Prize winning US Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, who projects solar hitting grid parity in markets like ours in five years. Two, you have to believe that all solar produced will be priced at the current ACP level – despite the manifest evidence that we lowered our solar rebate program levels no less than four times since we started it in three years ago (going from $2 per watt installed to 75 cents per watt installed for the residential market). We are encouraged that market forces are delivering new solar projects at prices far below the ACP price today and we have every reason to expect this trend will continue if not accelerate as the market continues to grow. So, those who say our solar program will cost billions are willfully ignoring the facts, relevant experience and market conditions in order to make a disingenuous argument.
And in terms of offshore wind, the naysayers dwell on the wrong question – what is the cost of the first offshore wind farm to be built in the U.S. – instead of the right question – what does Massachusetts stand to gain from having the first offshore wind farm in the U.S. built here?
Once again, my expectation is that offshore wind will develop into a major new industry in the U.S. I base this on the scramble now taking place among Atlantic Coast governors – Republican and Democrat – for second place in the offshore wind race. From Maine to Virginia, states are pushing – much more aggressively than anything we have done in Massachusetts, by the way – for their own offshore wind projects, often through special-purpose legislation and rich state supports. New Jersey, for instance, under a conservative Republican Governor who signed it into law, has created an Offshore Wind REC, requiring its utilities to purchase the output of 1,100 MW of offshore wind capacity developed and interconnected into New Jersey. Such policies go far beyond any we have put in place for offshore wind in Massachusetts. I also base it on Secretary Salazar’s active promotion of offshore wind, and on the U.S. Department of Energy’s pursuit of an offshore wind strategic plan to address obstacles to the development of offshore wind and drive down its cost. We share that objective and as we move forward with additional offshore wind development in federal waters off of Massachusetts, the Commonwealth and its Clean Energy Center will make a multimillion dollar commitment to the applied R&D necessary to drive down the cost of offshore wind in the next 10 years.
The bottom line is offshore wind is coming and we have much to gain from it. But only one state can reap the particular economic benefits of being the first mover – and with Cape Wind going forward, it will be Massachusetts. In fact, we are seeing those benefits already. Siemens has opened its North American offshore wind headquarters in Boston, because of its contract to supply turbines for Cape Wind. In New Bedford, we will have the first port facility in the U.S. designed with the capabilities to support offshore wind installation, and it will host up to 1,000 jobs as Cape Wind is constructed. Mass Tank, a Middleboro-based steel pipe manufacturer, has joined forces with a leading European firm to supply Cape Wind with foundations and other structural steel components made in Massachusetts.
But let me come back to Hydro Quebec. Just because large hydro is not a new technology that needs support in the marketplace doesn’t mean we are indifferent to its benefits. Governor Patrick and I have worked hard to facilitate the delivery of additional HydroQuebec resources to MA – including several direct discussions with the Quebec Premier and other officials. As we implement the Global Warming Solutions Act, we need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by means other than RPS-eligible renewable energy. In the plan to meet the 2020 emissions-reduction mandate I soon set, I will propose for consideration a Clean Energy Standard, which would require electricity suppliers to increasingly favor low-emissions and no-emissions sources like hydro and nuclear power and even natural gas over coal and oil, in the mix of electricity delivered to their customers. That is the right way to continue to tip the scales toward all the cleaner options we have. We can send a signal that our market wants and needs additional low or zero emission power from non-RPS technologies. CA has been working on a preferred loading order meant to encourage dispatch of lower emissions resources – and there are ways to get at this. My point is we need to move forward to address this challenge; however, we don’t need to upend our renewables market in order to do it.
Going forward, we are also looking to lead the nation on management of public energy. Under Governor Patrick’s Leading By Example Executive Order, state agencies are already diligently working to reduce unnecessary energy use and greenhouse gas emissions. But we are looking to go much further through an initiative called Commonwealth Energy Solutions. This initiative consists of three parts:
- Procurement: We will be tapping the benefits of competitive energy supply for all state, quasi-public, and ultimately municipal buyers of power.
- Comprehensive retrofits of public buildings. We already have a $2 billion investment program on our own balance sheet, but we need to make every public building a model of energy efficiency and distributed generation.
- Comprehensive energy management. With federal stimulus dollars, we have begun a nation-leading enterprise management system, utilizing local company EnerNOC.
This all adds up to Massachusetts becoming a state of the art public energy manager. Now, when this idea was floated before, there were some entities that expressed some misgivings. I say to them: You have nothing to fear. We are not seeking to turn the state into a utility, or to becoming a market participant. This is all about cost savings and emissions reduction in the public sector. You will be seeing this initiative coming forward, and I ask for your support.
We are starting to see the fruits of the historic 2008 legislative session that gave us the Green Communities Act and the Global Warming Solutions Act. But these landmark pieces of legislation did more than change rules to favor efficiency and renewables and reduce emissions, it established a set of new expectations for participants in our competitive energy market. Specifically, the Global Warming Solutions Act requires all state agencies, departments, boards, commissions and authorities to consider climate change impacts, such as greenhouse gas emissions, in issuing permits, licenses and other administrative approvals. We are already seeing this from MassDOT with its historic GreenDOT mandate that bakes greenhouse gas emissions reductions into its capital decisions in an unprecedented way. Show me any other state where its DEP has conformity review as to annual greenhouse gas emission from transportation investment. It is a remarkable achievement and shows but one example of the appropriately pervasive influence of the state’s greenhouse gas law.
With electricity generation accounting for 28 percent of greenhouse gas emissions today, and with electrification of vehicles being seen as a way to free ourselves from foreign oil, approvals relative to how we make, deliver, and use electricity have significant climate change impacts. Indeed, reducing greenhouse gases will inevitably fall heavily on the electricity generating sector – and we need to be acting in a way that recognizes that.
This also suggests that, in the second restructuring, we should be expecting something more of the regulated utilities. The 1997 restructuring narrowed their responsibilities, by making them deliverers of electricity, not generators. Now is the time to broaden the mission of these electricity distributors, with their exclusive franchises, and to hold them accountable for that broader mission.
You know, historically, the first corporations created in this country, and in this Commonwealth, were all public service entities, and they were all monopolies – they had rights to do business that could not be taken away from them. Indeed, it was their monopoly status that carried with it an obligation to serve a public purpose. Now, our energy utilities are the last remaining monopolies – they have exclusive service territories where they alone can do business, and those rights cannot be infringed upon or taken away from them. And public service obligation they have in the post-1997 marketplace is clear – to provide safe, reasonably priced, reliable electric service.
But in the second restructuring, safety, price, and reliability are not enough. As the last remaining private monopolies, utilities need to be held accountable for their performance in relation to all public purposes. As I mentioned above, the Commonwealth has in 2008 given clarity and direction to a new and vitally important set of public purposes for the energy sector. As such, we need to take performance against their obligation to society, including our clean energy goals, into account in rate cases,mergers, and other state approvals. As we move forward, we need to develop a robust set of incentives and penalties for performance against our clean energy and climate goals – it should grow to become a fundamental part of utility regulation in all aspects.
To be specific, in the case of mergers and other major transactions, we need new standard of review. Consolidation offers clear benefits to shareholders, but what benefits to the public? Even benefits to ratepayers are speculative at best, counting on operating efficiencies that may or may not translate into customer savings. It is not enough to protect against harm resulting from mergers, there must be guaranteed benefits to the public as a condition of allowing one monopoly to merge with another and create a vastly bigger monopoly. “No net harm” was a standard appropriate to the first restructuring; in the second, the standard must be “substantial net benefits.”
To apply this standard, we should be asking questions like these:
- Will a merger be good for our businesses?
- Will a merger provide rate relief for residential customers?
- Will a merger provide better storm response?
And to apply this standard relative to our clean energy and greenhouse gas mandates, we should be asking:
- Will a merger help advance the development of the Commonwealth’s solar and offshore wind resources?
- Will a merger improve and accelerate delivery of energy efficiency services?
- Will a merger make it easier for customers to deploy distributed generation?
- Will a merger make it easier for large-scale shifts toward new technologies when they arrive, like smart grid technologies and electric vehicles?
Put another way, if a merger simply creates a new entity that is bigger, richer, and in control of a larger service territory but uses that size, those resources, and a bigger footprint just to build big transmission projects it can then try to bake into its ratebase – does this serve the public purposes established in the Commonwealth’s laws? If not, why should the public allow it? Conversely, if merging utilities could demonstrate that they had outstanding track records in serving customers and advancing clean energy goals, and that their merger would put more resources into customer service, make energy efficiency services more effective, and ramp up renewable energy on our roofs, on our hilltops, and in our waters – that should be cause for public celebration, as well as regulatory approval.
Let me note here that in all such matters Attorney General Martha Coakley, as statutory advocate for ratepayers, plays a vital and centrally important role. She has been a zealous and effective advocate in both rate cases and mergers. I fully expect she will take up this agenda of seeking the broadest possible public benefits from regulatory proceedings, and go further. I thank her for her good work to date, and I look forward to seeing what additional steps she will take in the future.
In conclusion, the challenge for the next four years is not to continue to implement the Green Communities Act’s many provisions. That would be superlative from a national standpoint, but it is not sufficient. The next four years need to be about consolidation of the second restructuring – resisting and ignoring those who still wish to roll back the first restructuring or fight against the progress already made on the second restructuring. We need to move forward so that clean energy takes its rightful place as one of the calling cards of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. It is a worthy challenge.
Governor Patrick has said many times, if we get clean energy right, the world will be our customer. It is happening, right before our eyes. Earlier this week, I convened a meeting of the CEOs of a couple dozen Massachusetts clean energy companies – and every one of those companies is growing. Companies like EnerNOC, a leader in demand response that is building out an exciting suite of energy management services and taking them across the country. Companies like Second Wind, which is manufacturing innovative wind measurement systems, and partnering with WindPole Ventures, another Massachusetts company, to establish a pilot wind measurement network in southeastern Massachusetts. TPI Composites, a leading manufacturer of wind turbine blades, is opening an R&D center in Fall River, in part to be in proximity to the Wind Turbine Testing Center now under construction in Charlestown, with support from U.S. Department of Energy. With help from the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center, Beacon Power, A123 Systems, and Premium Power are expanding their Massachusetts operations as they lead the way in innovations for electric vehicles, grid storage, and other energy storage needs. And Flo-Design, a company that has won awards and DOE funding for its innovative shrouded turbine design, has set up its corporate headquarters here, and will manufacture its first turbines here in Massachusetts.That will be the fruit of the second restructuring of the electricity market in Massachusetts. The laws we have in place have given us the framework, but we are still learning how to use that framework to greatest effect – and to get us where we want to go. I can promise you that I will continue to work toward that goal in my new life in the private sector. And I hope I can count on all of you to work with my worthy successor, Rick Sullivan, to realize Governor Patrick’s clean energy vision.
(Ian Bowles is the former Massachusetts secretary for energy and environmental affairs and former president of MassINC.)


text:
Rarely ever seen on print or heard from, designer Gavin Miguel, recently spoke to BollywoodHungama. In his interview Gavin talks about Tabu’s brown gown from the Filmfare Awards, Priyanka Chopra’s mustard yellow silk one from the Atlantis Launch, Bipasha’s lame cut-out gown from the Star Screen Awards and more…
Check out the interview below.
Left: Tabu at Filmfare Awards
Center: Priyanka Chopra at Atlantis Launch
Right: Bipasha Basu at Star Screen Awards

domain: celebrity


|Publication number||US6324898 B1|
|Application number||US 09/468,779|
|Publication date||Dec 4, 2001|
|Filing date||Dec 21, 1999|
|Priority date||Dec 21, 1999|
|Also published as||DE60011618D1, DE60011618T2, EP1194217A1, EP1194217B1, WO2001045829A1|
|Publication number||09468779, 468779, US 6324898 B1, US 6324898B1, US-B1-6324898, US6324898 B1, US6324898B1|
|Inventors||Pierre Cote, Arnold Janson, Nicholas Adams|
|Original Assignee||Zenon Environmental Inc.|
|Export Citation||BiBTeX, EndNote, RefMan|
|Patent Citations (21), Non-Patent Citations (1), Referenced by (75), Classifications (9), Legal Events (6)|
|External Links: USPTO, USPTO Assignment, Espacenet|
The present invention relates to a method and apparatus for testing the integrity of filtering membranes.
Filtering membranes are used to permeate a relatively particle free liquid from a liquid rich in particles. Reverse osmosis and nanofiltration membranes, for example, are used to produce very high quality water for drinking or industrial applications. Ultrafiltration and microfiltration membranes are used at lower pressure to filter water for drinking or industrial applications and to treat waste water.
One reason for using membranes to filter water is that membranes are able to remove very small particles including pathogenic microorganisms and colloids. Thus, strong chemicals may not be required as a primary disinfectant in drinking water applications and a nearly complete lack of colloids in water produced for industrial purposes improves the performance of many industrial processes. To ensure that undesired particles are removed, however, the integrity of a membrane unit must be monitored and tested regularly. In particular, although membranes are usually tested after they are manufactured, leaks can develop when the membranes are installed in a filtering system and during the subsequent operation of the system. For example, leaks may result from fatigue, from over-pressurization, or from cleaning and maintenance activities.
Membrane integrity can be monitored using continuous or discontinuous methods. Continuous integrity testing techniques, which include particle counting and acoustic analysis, do not evaluate the membrane itself but instead monitor and assess a surrogate parameter to diagnose the membrane condition. For instance, a batch or on-line particle counter generally includes a light scattering sensor, typically laser-based, interfaced with a computer running particle enumeration software that assesses the number of particles in one or more particle size ranges: see generally Panglish et al., “Monitoring the Integrity of Capillary Membranes by Particle Counters”, Desalination, vol. 119, p. 65-72 (1998). Similarly, a particle monitor that measures the fluctuation in intensity in a narrow light beam transmitted through a permeate sample is also known. Through subsequent computer analysis, the observed fluctuations can be converted into an index of water quality. Particle counting and particle monitoring techniques require elaborate and expensive measurement equipment that is subject to measurement drift, noise, and periodic maintenance such as calibration. In addition, these methods generally do not differentiate between undesirable particles and other signals that have no relation to membrane integrity, particularly air bubbles produced on the permeate side of the membrane and associated with backwashing operations. Moreover, the number of membrane units or modules that can be simultaneously monitored using these integrity testing methods is limited by dilution effects.
In acoustic membrane analysis methods, as described in Glucina et al., “Acoustic Sensor; a Novel Technique for Low Pressure Membrane Integrity Monitoring”, AWWA Membrane Conference, Long Beach, Calif. (Feb. 28 to Mar. 3, 1999), one or more sound wave sensors or transducers are placed on a membrane unit to detect anomalies in the acoustic response of the membrane, namely noise originating from broken fibres. These acoustic techniques, however, detect only broken fibres and do not detect more subtle defects in, or the general deterioration of, a membrane. Furthermore, these methods are susceptible to interference from surrounding noise and are very expensive, since they require at least one acoustic sensor per membrane unit and each of these sensors must be electrically connected to a central computer for appropriate signal analysis.
In another class of integrity testing techniques, membrane integrity is assessed directly while permeation is temporarily stopped. Typically, air (or another suitable gas) is applied to a first side of a wet membrane at a pressure higher than the pressure of water or air on a second side of the membrane to create a trans-membrane pressure but at a pressure lower than the bubble point of a membrane without defects. A rapid flow of air from the first side of the membrane to the second side indicates a leak in the membrane. Such integrity testing methods are often referred to as air leak tests and examples are discussed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,353,630 to Soda et al. and in International Patent Application No. PCT/FR97/00930 (corresponding to International Publication No. WO 97/45193) assigned to OTV Omnium de Traitements et de Valorisation of France. In U.S. Pat. No. 5,353,630, the water on the feed side of a shelled membrane module is replaced with pressurized air. In International Patent Application No. PCT/FR97/00930, the feed side of an immersed, unshelled membrane module is exposed to air at atmospheric pressure by emptying a tank in which the module is immersed and then a partial vacuum is applied to the filtered water on the permeate side of the module.
In air leak tests, the trans-membrane pressure used is selected to exceed the bubble point corresponding to defects or holes whose size is of interest, i.e. whose undesirable passage requires monitoring. The bubble point is the air pressure which exceeds the surface tension of a liquid in a hole of the relevant size. The bubble point is described theoretically by the Young Laplace equation which provides the pressure difference required across a curved interface in terms of the surface or interfacial tension and the principal radii of curvature. For example, pressures of 0.3 to 1.0 bar are used to detect holes in the range of 0.5 to 2.3 μm.
In different air leak test methods, the trans-membrane pressure is controlled over time according to alternate strategies to provide an indication of the size or number of leaks. For example, in a pressure hold test (“PHT”), the flow rate of air required to maintain a certain trans-membrane test pressure is measured. In a pressure decay test (“PDT”), the rate of trans-membrane pressure change (decay) from an initial value is measured. With both tests, measured values are compared to membranes known to be free from defects. Both tests require precise air flow or air pressure sensors or both and are accordingly expensive to install.
Another problem with the PHT and PDT is that the accuracy of both tests is limited by the fact that air crosses the membrane by diffusion through water filled pores in addition to flowing through defects in the membrane. Such diffusive air flow is related to the surface area of the membrane unit being tested. In a large membrane unit (ie. with a flow capacity in the range of a thousand or more cubic metres per day), the diffusive air flow may be similar in magnitude to the air flow expected from a defect of the size being tested for. This problem makes detecting a single broken fiber difficult in a membrane unit of this size and generally limits the size of membrane units that can be properly tested with such tests. Thus, in a large municipal or industrial installation with several large membrane units connected together in a filter train, several distinct sets of membrane integrity testing apparatus are required. Thus, there is a need for an improved method and system for accurately measuring the integrity of filtering membranes.
An object of the present invention is to provide a method and apparatus for providing an integrity test for filtering membranes.
The present invention is a method and system for testing the integrity of membranes using a gas such as air subjected to a trans-membrane pressure. The air that crosses a membrane locally (i.e. on a specific unit of membranes) is collected. The volume of air collected for each membrane unit tested provides a quantified indication of the integrity of the membrane unit, since that volume is directly related to the amount and quality of leaks in the membrane unit.
In one aspect, the invention is directed at an improvement to an outside/in hollow fiber filtration system. For some systems, particularly those with immersed shell-less membrane units, the improvement includes a source of suction on the lumens of the membranes operable without producing permeate, such as a permeate pump operating in a recycle loop. For other systems, particularly those with shelled modules, the improvement includes a source of pressure on the outside of the membranes operable in the absence of water on the outside of the membranes, such as pressurized air. In both cases, an air collector is also provided to collect any air that passes from the outside of the membranes to their lumens during an integrity test. The amount of air so collected is measured and then released prior to subsequent tests.
In another aspect, the invention is directed at a method for testing the integrity of filtering membranes used, for example, to filter water. After stopping filtration, a first side of the membranes is exposed to air while a second side of the membranes remains exposed to water. A selected transmembrane pressure is created across the membranes from the first side of the membranes to the second side for a selected period of time, the selected transmembrane pressure being sufficient to force air through a potential defect of concern in the membranes. The first side of the membranes are then re-exposed to water and permeation is resumed. Air that passed through a set of membranes is collected and its amount measured. The set of membranes is chosen to produce a membrane unit of such a size that a defect of interest is distinguishable from diffusion of air through the pores of the membranes in the membrane unit. The amount of air collected from the membrane unit is related to an acceptable amount of air to indicate whether there is a defect in the membranes of the membrane unit. Preferably, air is collected individually but simultaneously from a plurality of membrane units in a filtration train. The amount of air collected from a membrane unit is compared with the amount of air collected from another membrane unit to indicate if one of the membrane units is defective.
Embodiments of the invention will be described below with reference to the following drawings:
FIG. 1 illustrates integrity testing apparatus for immersed shelless outside-in flow membranes with certain components shown in elevation view.
FIG. 2 illustrates integrity testing apparatus according to the embodiment of FIG. 1 with certain components shown in plan view.
FIG. 3 illustrates integrity testing apparatus for an outside-in flow membrane module in a pressurized shell.
FIGS. 4, 5 and 6 illustrate cross sections of membranes showing water in or around the pores during an integrity test.
Referring to FIGS. 1 through 3, the embodiments described below involve hollow-fiber filtering membranes 10 which may be made of polypropylene, polysulfone derivatives, or the like. In FIG. 1 through 3, the membranes 10 are used in an outside-in (“O/I”) mode. In the O/I mode, feed water 12 is applied to the outside of the membranes 10 and permeate 14 is collected from the lumens of the membranes 10. Although the description below refers to filtering water, the present invention is applicable to integrity tests of membranes used for filtering other liquids.
Referring to FIGS. 1 and 2, a plurality of membranes 10 (typically thousands) are assembled into a submerged membrane unit 16. A plurality of membrane units 16, collectively referred to as a filtration train 17, are immersed into a tank 18 and connected by permeate collection pipes 20 and an isolation valve 22 to a header 24, a permeate pump 26, an outlet valve 28 and an outlet 30. Feed water 12 enters the tank 18 through a feed valve 32. Permeation is performed by operating the permeate pump 26 to create a negative pressure in the lumens of the membranes 10. Permeate 14 is drawn out of the tank 18 through the membranes 10 and replaced by feed water 12 such that the membranes 10 remain immersed. From time to time, a permeate storage valve 52 is opened to admit permeate 14 to a storage tank 54. A backwash loop 50 has backwash valves 60 to allow the permeate pump 26 to draw permeate 14 from the storage tank 54 and flow it through the membranes 10 is a reverse direction.
To facilitate an integrity test, an air collector 33 is provided at a high point in the permeate collection pipes 20 such that air entrained in permeate 14 will collect in the air collector 33. The air collector 33 has a collection vessel 34, an air release valve 36 (also referred to as a priming valve) and a check valve 38. The bottom of the collection vessel 34 is in fluid communication with the flow of permeate 14 in the permeate collection pipes 20. The top of the collection vessel is in fluid communication with the atmosphere through the air release valve 36 and check valve 38. The collection vessel 34 is preferably a clear cylinder with graduations allowing a visual determination of volume. Optionally, the collection vessel may have a pressure gauge or sensor (not shown) and a level sensor (not shown) to allow the volume and pressure of air in the collection vessel 34 to be determined remotely or automatically by a programmable logic controller. Air release valve 36 allows air to leave the collection vessel 34 when it is under pressure while check valve 38 prevents air from entering the air collection vessel 34 from the atmosphere generally when the air collection vessel 34 is under vacuum. In place of the air release valve 36 and check valve 38, a solenoid valve and vacuum pump can be used to remove air from the collection vessel 34 when required. If so, a single vacuum pump is preferably connected by a header to a plurality of air collection vessels 34 each having its own associated solenoid valve.
Also provided is a recycle loop 40 having a loop inlet 46, a loop outlet 48, loop closure valves 42 and a loop tank 44. The loop inlet 46 is located at the discharge side of the permeate pump 26 and the loop outlet is located at the inlet side of the permeate pump 26. Thus the permeate pump 26 can be operated to produce a vacuum in the lumens of the membranes 10 without producing permeate 14. In many cases, the ordinary permeate pump 26 may not produce sufficient vacuum without cavitation or the cost of operating the permeate pump 26 to test the membranes exceeds the cost of purchasing a separate vacuum pump for testing the membranes. In these cases, it would be preferably to include a valve operable to disconnect the permeate pump 26 from the header 24 and connect instead a separate vacuum pump (with necessary apparatus) or other apparatus suitable for producing a vacuum without flow of permeate 14.
To perform an integrity test, the following steps are performed:
1. Permeation is stopped by stopping the permeate pump 26.
2. Any air (from degassing as a result of the drop in pressure across the membrane etc.) in the collection vessel 34 is discharged. This may be done by backwashing the filtration train 17 at a pressure that exceeds the minimum pressure at which the air release valve 36 will vent the collection vessel 34, by opening a solenoid valve during backwash (if one is used in place of the air release valve 36) or by opening a solenoid valve and operating a vacuum pump to overcome the suction of the permeate pump 26 during permeation. The latter method is preferred in systems where backwashing is likely to leave air bubbles in the lumens of the membranes 10 in sufficient amount to interfere with the integrity test.
3. The outside of the membranes 10 are exposed to air by opening a drain valve 62 connected to a drain 64 to at least partially empty the tank 18. The membranes 10 are not allowed, however, to dry out and their pores remain wet. Where the tank 18 is periodically deconcentrated by draining it and re-filling it with fresh feed water 12, the integrity test is preferably performed during such a deconcentration to avoid the need for an additional draining of the tank 18.
4. A transmembrane pressure is created across the membranes 10. This is done by closing the outlet valve 28, opening the loop closure valves 42 and operating the permeate pump 26. This creates a suction in the lumens of the membranes 10. The speed of the permeate pump 26 is selected such that the suction is sufficient to draw an appreciable amount of air through a defect of a relevant size according to calculations which are known to those skilled in the art. The suction is not sufficient, however, to overcome surface tension across the pores of the membranes 10 which retains the permeate 14 in the lumens of the membranes 10 or exceed the bubble point of a membrane 10 without defects. Typical transmembrane pressures may range from 20 to 90 kPa. The preferred duration of this step is selected with regard to the size of the collection vessel 34. At the end of this step, the loop closure valves 42 are closed and the permeate pump 32 is stopped.
5. Air is purged from the outside of the membranes 10 by closing the drain valve 62 and opening the feed valve 32 to refill the tank 18.
6. Permeation is resumed at a low flux by opening the outlet valve 28 and operating the permeate pump 26 at an appropriate speed. Air that passed through the membranes 10 is entrained with the flow of permeate 14 until it reaches the collection vessels 34. The air separates from the permeate 14 in the collection vessels 34 and collects in them.
7. Permeation is stopped and pressures in the permeate collection pipes 20 associated with the various membrane units 16 of the filtration train 17 are allowed to equilibrate. With equal pressure in the permeate collection pipes 22, the volume or air in one collection vessel 34 compared to another is related to the integrity of the associated membrane units 16.
8. The volume, and optionally the pressure, of the air in each collection vessel 34 is read and recorded manually or automatically.
9. Membrane units 16 associated with collection vessels 34 with unacceptable amounts of air are isolated from the filtration train 17 by closing their associated isolation valve 22.
10. Air in the collection vessel 34 is discharged by any of the techniques described in step 2 above.
11. Regular permeation is resumed.
Steps 6 and 7 above increase the accuracy of the procedure but may not be necessary in all systems. Particularly where a membrane unit 16 and its associated permeate collection pipes 20 are small, enough air may be collected in a portion step 4 alone to indicate a defect. If so, step 8 may be replaced by measuring the volume of air collected during a selected interval of time during step 4 while the membranes 10 are still subject to a transmembrane pressure during step 4. The volume collected for a membrane unit 16 may be converted to a volume at standard conditions (assuming that the transmembrane pressure applied is reasonably accurately known) or compared to air volumes collected from other membrane units 16.
With collection vessels 34 associated with each membrane unit 16, many membrane units 16 can be tested separately but simultaneously and with a single recycle loop 40 and permeate pump 26. Preferably, a large municipal or industrial filtration train 17 is divided into at least ten distinct membrane units 16. In this way, if one of the membrane units 16 is found to be defective there is at most a 10% drop in production of permeate 14 when it is isolated from the filtration train. Further, it is preferable to make each membrane unit 16 small enough that a defect of the relevant size is distinguishable from diffusion. This preferred size limit varies for different membranes 10 but typically corresponds with a capacity to produce a few thousand m3day of permeate 14 or about 6000 m2 of membrane surface area. Such membrane units 16 typically comprise a plurality of sub-units, often referred to as modules. Various pipes typically connect permeate 14 collected from each sub-unit to the permeate collection pipes 20 serving the entire membrane unit 16. These various pipes are preferably clear. In this way, if a defective membrane unit 16 is identified, visual inspection of the clear pipes during an integrity test is often sufficient to locate a defective sub-unit within a membrane unit 16. Once identified, a defective membrane unit 16 or sub-unit is isolated and either repaired or replaced.
The volume of air collected for each membrane unit 16 may be interpreted directly to indicate the presence or size of a defect using calculations known to those skilled in the art. Alternatively or additionally, the volume of air collected relating to one membrane unit 16 can be compared to the volume of air collected from another membrane unit 16 or, preferably, from several other membrane units 16. Provided that the pressure in the various the collection vessels 34 is constant, there is no need to know the pressure as is required to perform calculations relating the volume collected to the presence or size of defects.
Now referring to FIGS. 3, an embodiment of the invention is shown in which a plurality of membranes 10 (typically thousands) are assembled into a shelled second membrane unit 116. To avoid repetition, process steps or components will not be described specifically with reference to FIG. 3 where they are similar to process steps or components discussed with reference to FIGS. 1 and 2 or generally known. Further, names and numbers identifying components in the embodiment of FIGS. 1 and 2 may be used for similar components in the following description of the embodiment of FIG. 3. For example, only a single second membrane unit 116 is shown in FIG. 3 whereas each such second membrane unit 116 typically comprises several sub-units and a plurality of second membrane units 116 are typically connected together into a filtration train in a manner analogous to that shown in FIG. 2.
During permeation, a feed pump 70 pumps feed water 12 through a second feed valve 132 into the second membrane unit 116. Permeation is performed in O/I mode by operating the feed pump 70 to create a positive pressure on the outside of the membranes 10. Permeate 14 is produced in the lumens of the membranes under some residual pressure and flows to permeate collection pipes 20. Feed water 12 which does not pass through the membranes 10 exits the second membrane module 116 through a recycle line 72 and may be returned to a feed supply 74, or to a recycle drain 76 through a recycle drain valve 78 or partially to both.
A second air collector 133 is provided at the top of the second membrane unit 116 or at a high point in the permeate collection pipes 20 such that air entrained in permeate 14 will collect in the second air collector 133. The second air collector 133 has a collection vessel 34 and a solenoid valve 136. The bottom of the collection vessel 34 is in fluid communication with the flow of permeate 14. The solenoid valve 136 is operable to open the top of the collection vessel 34 to atmosphere and many other types of valves could also be suitable. Also provided is an air source 80, an air inlet valve 82, a secondary drain 84, a secondary drain valve 86 and a vent valve 88. The air source 80 is operable to provide pressurized air (typically, instrument air) and, although not shown, preferably services several second membrane units 116.
To perform an integrity test, the steps described below are performed. As above, steps 6 and 7 may be optional for some systems.
1. Any air in the collection vessel 34 is discharged by opening the solenoid valve 136 briefly during permeation.
2. Permeafion is stopped by stopping the feed pump 70 and closing the second feed valve 132.
3. The outside of the membranes 10 are exposed to air by opening secondary drain valve 86 and operating air source 80 to flow water in the second membrane unit 116 out the secondary drain 84. While the term air is used in this description, other gases, for example nitrogen, can also be used. This step may also be performed without a secondary drain 84 by operating air source 80 to force feed water 12 in the second membrane unit 116 through the membranes 10.
4. A transmembrane pressure is created across the membranes 10. This is done by closing secondary drain valve 86 and operating air source 80 to provide air at a selected pressure in the second membrane unit 116.
5. Air is purged from the outside of the membranes 10 by opening vent valve 88 and second feed valve 132 and operating feed pump 70 to re-fill the second membrane unit.
6. Permeation is resumed at a low flux by closing the vent valve 88 and operating the feed pump 70 at a reduced speed.
7. Permeation is stopped and pressures across the various second membrane units 116 of a filtration train are allowed to equilibrate.
8. The volume, and optionally the pressure, of the air in each collection vessel 34 is read and recorded manually or automatically.
9. Second membrane units 116 associated with collection vessels 34 with unacceptable amounts of air are isolated from a filtration train by closing their associated isolation valve 22.
10. Regular permeation is resumed.
11. Air in the collection vessel 34 is discharged by opening the solenoid valve 136.
It will be apparent to those skilled in the art that the equipment and methods described above can be adapted to other sorts of membranes and other configurations of membrane units. In doing so, the inventors caution that some adaptations are preferably used only when the membranes 10 have symmetrical pores. With reference to FIGS. 4, 5 and 6, the rate of diffusion of air 90 through water 93 in the pores 92 of the membranes 10 increases as the length of the path of diffusion 94 decreases. FIG. 4 illustrates a symmetrical pore 92. The path of diffusion 94 extends from a meniscus 96 of the water 93 to the other side of the membrane 10 regardless of which side of the membrane 10 is the air 90 side. In FIG. 5, the membrane 10 has an asymmetrical pore 92 with the smaller side of the pore 92 meeting the air 90. As the transmembrane pressure is applied from air 90 side to water 93 side, a meniscus 96 forms on the air 90 side of the membrane and the path of diffusion 94 again extends substantially across the membrane 10. In FIG. 6, however, the membrane 10 has an asymmetrical pore 92 with the smaller side of the pore 92 meeting the water 93. As the transmembrane pressure is applied from air 90 side to the water 93 side, a meniscus 96 forms at a point inside the pore 92 where the surface tension of the meniscus 96 balances the transmembrane pressure. Typically, the path of diffusion 94 extends only part of the way across the membrane 10. Returning to FIGS. 1 through 3, with asymmetric hollow fiber membranes 10, the pores typically widen along a path from the outsides of the membranes 10 to their lumens. When the transmembrane pressure in the integrity test is applied from the feed side of the membranes 10 to the permeate side of the membranes 10 by either of the methods described in relation to FIGS. 1 and 2 or 3, the situation is as shown in FIGS. 4 or 5. In developing alternate embodiments, the situation shown in FIG. 6 is preferably avoided or the maximum size of a membrane unit reduced from the values suggested above to compensate for the increased rate of diffusion.
A pilot plant was constructed generally as shown in FIGS. 1 and 2 but using four membrane units each made of horizontal asymmetric hollow fiber membranes having a total of 9 m2 of surface area. Three of the four membrane units were purposely made defective as described in the table below. The fourth had no defects. The cleaning regimen for the membrane unit included backwashing it once a day with a chemical cleaner into an empty tank. While the tank was empty for cleaning, an integrity test was performed generally as described above. Transmembrane pressure for the test was set at three different values (as shown in the table below) and maintained within 5% of the values given below by using a feedback signal from a pressure transducer to a control valve on the discharge side of the permeate pump. Air was collected for ten minutes and the height of the air column collected in the collection vessel was measured with a capacitance level probe while the system was still under suction. The air collection vessel has a 25 mm diameter tube but the inventors believe that a 50 mm diameter tube would have provided good resolution while providing more space for the level probe.
The pressure and temperature at the time of the height reading were recorded and, in combination with the cross sectional area of the collection vessel, allowed the height readings to be converted to an air volumes at standard conditions, which air volumes are given in the table below.
Unit #2 -
Unit #3 -
Unit #1 -
Two pin holes
One pin hole
Unit #4 -
One cut fibre
in one fibre
in one fibre
In the trial at 62 kPa, no air was collected from Unit #4 after over twenty minutes of suction. This result suggests that the testing method of the present invention should be sufficiently sensitive to detect a single broken fiber or pin hole in a large commercial membrane unit typically having about 6,300 m2 of surface area. In contrast, the same four membrane units were tested with a pressure decay test using pressurized air in the lumens of the fibres. At a transmembrane pressure of 55 kPa, for example, the pressure drop over two minutes was about 0.5 kPa for unit #4 with no defects. The pressure drop for unit #1 with a cut fiber was about 47 kPa. Using this value as a basis for calculations, the pressure drop for a single cut fiber in a 6,300 m2 membrane unit would be only 0.02 kPa which would be difficult to detect against the pressure drop caused by movement of air through the wet pores of the membranes.
While preferred embodiments of the present invention have been described, the embodiments disclosed are illustrative and not restrictive, and the invention is intended to be defined by the appended claims.
|Cited Patent||Filing date||Publication date||Applicant||Title|
|US4231768||Sep 29, 1978||Nov 4, 1980||Pall Corporation||Air purification system and process|
|US4614109 *||Jul 15, 1985||Sep 30, 1986||Brunswick Corporation||Method and device for testing the permeability of membrane filters|
|US4701861||May 31, 1985||Oct 20, 1987||Pall Corporation||Filter test device|
|US4778499 *||Jun 19, 1986||Oct 18, 1988||Ppg Industries, Inc.||Method of producing porous hollow silica-rich fibers|
|US4881176||Jan 22, 1988||Nov 14, 1989||Anthony Kononov||Filter analyzing system|
|US5064529||Aug 22, 1989||Nov 12, 1991||Fujisawa Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.||Apparatus for testing membrane filters|
|US5353630||Apr 30, 1993||Oct 11, 1994||Memtec Japan Limited||Apparatus for testing membrane filter integrity|
|US5417101 *||Jun 9, 1992||May 23, 1995||Pall Corporation||Method and apparatus for testing the integrity of filter elements|
|US5488811||Feb 21, 1995||Feb 6, 1996||Abbott Laboratories||On-line air filter integrity testing apparatus|
|US5507959 *||Nov 4, 1994||Apr 16, 1996||Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.||Apparatus for wetting, flushing and performing integrity checks on encapsulated PTFE filters|
|US5594161 *||Feb 27, 1995||Jan 14, 1997||Pall Corporation||Method and apparatus for rapidly testing the integrity of filter elements|
|US5783760 *||Oct 7, 1996||Jul 21, 1998||Marathon Oil Company||Method and apparatus for core flooding studies|
|US5786528 *||Sep 10, 1996||Jul 28, 1998||Millipore Corporation||Water intrusion test for filters|
|US5808181 *||Aug 29, 1996||Sep 15, 1998||Fresenius Ag||Method for testing a filter in a dialysis system|
|US5888401 *||Sep 16, 1996||Mar 30, 1999||Union Camp Corporation||Method and apparatus for reducing membrane fouling|
|US6022478 *||Feb 3, 1997||Feb 8, 2000||Akzo Nobel N.V.||Device and process for the substance-specific treatment of fluids|
|EP0139202A1||Sep 7, 1984||May 2, 1985||Fujisawa Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.||Apparatus for testing membrane filters, and apparatus for sterilizing liquids with use of membrane filter|
|EP0592066A1||Apr 26, 1993||Apr 13, 1994||Memtec Japan Limited||Apparatus for testing membrane filter integrity|
|GB2132366A||Title not available|
|JPH04348252A *||Title not available|
|WO1997045193A1||May 28, 1997||Dec 4, 1997||Otv Omnium De Traitements Et De Valorisation||Method and installation for in situ testing of filtering membrane integrity|
|1||"Journal AWWA", Low Pressure Membranes: Assessing Integrity: Mar. 1995, pp. 62-75.|
|Citing Patent||Filing date||Publication date||Applicant||Title|
|US6422063 *||Aug 11, 1999||Jul 23, 2002||Ramaswamy C. Anantheswaran||Rapid method to experimentally measure the gas permeability of micro-perforated films|
|US6543275 *||Jul 2, 2001||Apr 8, 2003||Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., Ltd||Apparatus and method for testing air permeability of a fabric|
|US6568282 *||Feb 25, 2000||May 27, 2003||United States Filter Corporation||Method and apparatus for evaluating a membrane|
|US6907770 *||Jul 19, 2002||Jun 21, 2005||Sartorius Ag||Test device for filter systems|
|US7037426 *||May 17, 2002||May 2, 2006||Zenon Environmental Inc.||Immersed membrane apparatus|
|US7300582 *||Jan 27, 2006||Nov 27, 2007||Zenon Technology Partnership||Immersed membrane apparatus|
|US7584061 *||Mar 12, 2007||Sep 1, 2009||Hydranautics||Device for measuring permeate flow and permeate conductivity of individual reverse osmosis membrane elements|
|US7698928||Jul 29, 2005||Apr 20, 2010||Dow Global Technologies, Inc.||Method for testing separation modules|
|US8110112||May 30, 2008||Feb 7, 2012||Innova Prep LLC||Liquid to liquid biological particle concentrator|
|US8146444||Mar 16, 2007||Apr 3, 2012||Shin Yun Ho||Ultra filtration system for on-line analyzer|
|US8182687 *||Jan 30, 2008||May 22, 2012||Siemens Industry, Inc.||Methods of minimising the effect of integrity loss in hollow fibre membrane modules|
|US8268176||Aug 27, 2004||Sep 18, 2012||Siemens Industry, Inc.||Backwash|
|US8272251||Feb 18, 2010||Sep 25, 2012||Dow Global Technologies Llc||Method for testing separation modules|
|US8287743||Sep 30, 2010||Oct 16, 2012||Siemens Industry, Inc.||Membrane cleaning with pulsed airlift pump|
|US8293098||Oct 23, 2007||Oct 23, 2012||Siemens Industry, Inc.||Infiltration/inflow control for membrane bioreactor|
|US8318028||Apr 1, 2008||Nov 27, 2012||Siemens Industry, Inc.||Infiltration/inflow control for membrane bioreactor|
|US8354029 *||Mar 15, 2007||Jan 15, 2013||Seccua Gmbh||Controls of a filtration system|
|US8372276||Nov 17, 2011||Feb 12, 2013||Siemens Industry, Inc.||Membrane cleaning with pulsed airlift pump|
|US8377305||Sep 15, 2005||Feb 19, 2013||Siemens Industry, Inc.||Continuously variable aeration|
|US8382981||Jul 29, 2009||Feb 26, 2013||Siemens Industry, Inc.||Frame system for membrane filtration modules|
|US8403457||Feb 4, 2011||Mar 26, 2013||Xerox Corporation||Waste ink reclamation apparatus for liquid ink recirculation system|
|US8496828||Dec 19, 2005||Jul 30, 2013||Siemens Industry, Inc.||Cleaning in membrane filtration systems|
|US8506061||Aug 23, 2010||Aug 13, 2013||Xerox Corporation||Method and apparatus for purging and supplying ink to an inkjet printing apparatus|
|US8506806||Sep 13, 2005||Aug 13, 2013||Siemens Industry, Inc.||Methods and apparatus for removing solids from a membrane module|
|US8512568||May 14, 2009||Aug 20, 2013||Siemens Industry, Inc.||Method of cleaning membrane modules|
|US8518256||Apr 15, 2011||Aug 27, 2013||Siemens Industry, Inc.||Membrane module|
|US8550612||Oct 20, 2010||Oct 8, 2013||Xerox Corporation||Method and system for ink delivery and purged ink recovery in an inkjet printer|
|US8571296 *||Oct 13, 2010||Oct 29, 2013||Dow Global Technologies Llc||Method of testing the integrity of spiral wound modules|
|US8596110||Mar 14, 2011||Dec 3, 2013||King Fahd University Of Petroleum And Minerals||Device and method for testing reverse osmosis membranes|
|US8617397||Sep 7, 2006||Dec 31, 2013||Hydranautics||Reverse osmosis filtration devices with RFID tag-powered flow and conductivity meters|
|US8622222||May 29, 2008||Jan 7, 2014||Siemens Water Technologies Llc||Membrane cleaning with pulsed airlift pump|
|US8623202||Oct 17, 2012||Jan 7, 2014||Siemens Water Technologies Llc||Infiltration/inflow control for membrane bioreactor|
|US8651619||Mar 19, 2013||Feb 18, 2014||Xerox Corporation||Waste ink reclamation apparatus for liquid ink recirculation system|
|US8652331||Aug 17, 2009||Feb 18, 2014||Siemens Water Technologies Llc||Membrane system backwash energy efficiency|
|US8662649||Jan 18, 2012||Mar 4, 2014||Xerox Corporation||Method and system for printing recycled ink with process black neutralization|
|US8689610||Sep 23, 2010||Apr 8, 2014||W. L. Gore & Associates, Inc.||Integrity test method for porous filters|
|US8758621||Mar 24, 2005||Jun 24, 2014||Evoqua Water Technologies Llc||Process and apparatus for purifying impure water using microfiltration or ultrafiltration in combination with reverse osmosis|
|US8758622||Dec 22, 2005||Jun 24, 2014||Evoqua Water Technologies Llc||Simple gas scouring method and apparatus|
|US8790515||Sep 7, 2005||Jul 29, 2014||Evoqua Water Technologies Llc||Reduction of backwash liquid waste|
|US8808540||Nov 12, 2004||Aug 19, 2014||Evoqua Water Technologies Llc||Module cleaning method|
|US8840230||Jun 4, 2012||Sep 23, 2014||Xerox Corporation||Ink waste tray configured with one way filter|
|US8840783||Feb 12, 2013||Sep 23, 2014||Evoqua Water Technologies Llc||Water treatment membrane cleaning with pulsed airlift pump|
|US8858796||Aug 22, 2006||Oct 14, 2014||Evoqua Water Technologies Llc||Assembly for water filtration using a tube manifold to minimise backwash|
|US8894858||Jul 15, 2014||Nov 25, 2014||Evoqua Water Technologies Llc||Method and assembly for water filtration using a tube manifold to minimize backwash|
|US8956464||Jun 11, 2010||Feb 17, 2015||Evoqua Water Technologies Llc||Method of cleaning membranes|
|US8968568 *||Nov 2, 2012||Mar 3, 2015||John A. Armour||Water filtration system|
|US9022224||Sep 22, 2011||May 5, 2015||Evoqua Water Technologies Llc||Fluid control manifold for membrane filtration system|
|US9023206||Jan 9, 2013||May 5, 2015||Evoqua Water Technologies Llc||Frame system for membrane filtration modules|
|US9108138||Jan 24, 2012||Aug 18, 2015||Emd Millipore Corporation||Accelerated mixed gas integrity testing of porous materials|
|US9114626||Feb 3, 2014||Aug 25, 2015||Xerox Corporation||Method for operating a printer to print recycled ink with process black neutralization|
|US9206057||Feb 11, 2014||Dec 8, 2015||Evoqua Water Technologies Llc||Membrane cleaning with pulsed airlift pump|
|US9573824||Nov 26, 2013||Feb 21, 2017||Evoqua Water Technologies Llc||Membrane cleaning with pulsed airlift pump|
|US20020179517 *||May 17, 2002||Dec 5, 2002||Steven Pedersen||Immersed membrane apparatus|
|US20030033856 *||Jul 19, 2002||Feb 20, 2003||Sartorius Ag||Test device for filter systems|
|US20060118477 *||Jan 27, 2006||Jun 8, 2006||Steven Pedersen||Immersed membrane apparatus|
|US20070056905 *||Feb 18, 2005||Mar 15, 2007||Beck Thomas W||Continuous pressure decay test|
|US20070144949 *||Dec 1, 2006||Jun 28, 2007||Hidayat Husain||Method and apparatus for testing membrane integrity|
|US20070209977 *||Mar 12, 2007||Sep 13, 2007||Mark Wilf||Device for measuring permeate flow and permeate conductivity of individual reverse osmosis membrane elements|
|US20080105038 *||Jul 29, 2005||May 8, 2008||Steven Douglas Jons||Method for Testing Separation Modules|
|US20080179249 *||Jan 30, 2008||Jul 31, 2008||Siemens Water Technologies Corp.||Methods of minimising the effect of integrity loss in hollow fibre membrane modules|
|US20080296208 *||Sep 7, 2006||Dec 4, 2008||Norio Ikeyama||Reverse Osmosis Filtration Devices with Rfid Tag-Powered Flow and Conductivity Meters|
|US20090001018 *||Jan 12, 2007||Jan 1, 2009||Fufang Zha||Operating Strategies in Filtration Processes|
|US20090101575 *||May 30, 2008||Apr 23, 2009||Alburty David S||Liquid To Liquid Biological Particle Concentrator|
|US20090165576 *||Mar 16, 2007||Jul 2, 2009||Shin Yun Ho||Ultra filtration system for on-line analyzer|
|US20090218285 *||Mar 15, 2007||Sep 3, 2009||Seccua Gmbh||Controls of a filtration system|
|US20090320563 *||Mar 12, 2007||Dec 31, 2009||Hydranautics||Device for measuring permeate flow and permeate conductivity of individual reverse osmosis membrane elements|
|US20100148752 *||Feb 18, 2010||Jun 17, 2010||Steven Douglas Jons||Method for testing separation modules|
|US20110056522 *||Jun 11, 2010||Mar 10, 2011||Peter Zauner||Method of cleaning membranes|
|US20110067485 *||Sep 23, 2010||Mar 24, 2011||Grant Donald C||Integrity Test Method for Porous Filters|
|US20110091094 *||Oct 13, 2010||Apr 21, 2011||Jons Steven D||Method of testing the integrity of spiral wound modules|
|CN101762561B||Nov 10, 2009||Jun 6, 2012||浙江天元生物药业有限公司||Method for on-line detecting integrity of ultrafiltration membrane by using ultraviolet monitoring method|
|CN102639218A *||Sep 23, 2010||Aug 15, 2012||戈尔企业控股股份有限公司||Integrity test method for porous filters|
|WO2007080260A1 *||Dec 13, 2006||Jul 19, 2007||Degremont||Method and device for testing the integrity of filtration membranes|
|WO2007119928A1 *||Mar 16, 2007||Oct 25, 2007||Yun Ho Shin||The ultra filtration system for on-line analyzer|
|WO2008151093A1 *||May 30, 2008||Dec 11, 2008||Alburtylab, Inc.||Liquid to liquid biological particle concentrator|
|U.S. Classification||73/38, 210/90|
|International Classification||G01N15/08, B01D65/10|
|Cooperative Classification||G01N15/0826, B01D65/102, G01N2015/086|
|European Classification||B01D65/10B, G01N15/08C1|
|May 25, 2000||AS||Assignment|
Owner name: ZENON ENVIRONMENTAL INC., CANADA
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:COTE, PIERRE;JANSON, ARNOLD;ADAMS, NICHOLAS;REEL/FRAME:010853/0365
Effective date: 20000127
|Jul 9, 2002||AS||Assignment|
Owner name: CANADIAN IMPERIAL BANK OF COMMERCE, ONTARIO
Free format text: SECURITY AGREEMENT;ASSIGNOR:ZENON ENVIRONMENTAL INC.;REEL/FRAME:013343/0179
Effective date: 19960626
|Jun 22, 2005||REMI||Maintenance fee reminder mailed|
|Aug 29, 2005||AS||Assignment|
Owner name: ZENON ENVIRONMENTAL INC., CANADA
Free format text: RELEASE OF SECURITY INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:CANADIAN IMPERIAL BANK OF COMMERCE;REEL/FRAME:016460/0742
Effective date: 20050829
|Dec 5, 2005||LAPS||Lapse for failure to pay maintenance fees|
|Jan 31, 2006||FP||Expired due to failure to pay maintenance fee|
Effective date: 20051204


text:
Sports injuries that occur with inflammation and pain:
Sports Pro-Resolve is a breakthrough innovation designed to support the athlete’s recovery in a natural way.
What are SPMs?
SPM are natural metabolites biosynthesized in the organism from EPA and DHA, essential to promoting resolution of the inflammatory response and the return to homeostasis (body’s equilibrium).+
How do SPMs work?
The immune system defends our body against infection and injury via the inflammatory response, which is a necessary process timely programmed to end or naturally terminate through SPM’s action.
However, when the immune system fails to terminate the inflammation process, it can lead to unbalanced health that may possibly become chronic inflammation. This chronic state can be associated with tissue destruction and pain.
Conventional inflammatory treatments are focused on inhibiting, suppressing or blocking the natural acute inflammatory response, delaying or impeding resolution and provoking other side effects. Unlike them, SPMs do not block inflammation, instead, they support the body’s ability to naturally terminate the inflammation process.*+
Sports ProResolve SPMs are targeted to help restore the balance in the immune system’s natural response*.
+Buckley, C.D., Gilroy, D.W., Serhan, C.N. Proresolving Lipid Mediators and Mechanisms in the Resolution of Acute Inflammation. Immunity. 2014 Mar; 40(3): 315-27.

domain: medical


text:
If you want to apply for a personal loan, you should know that there are certain things that you need to keep in mind. If you follow these simple steps, you will surely get approved for a personal loan. Personal loans are usually used for short term purposes such as paying off credit card bills, buying a new car, or even paying off other debts. Two types of personal loans are secured loans and unsecured loans. Secured loans require collateral support while unsecured loans does not require any collateral support. We also have fixed interest rate and variable interest rate loans. Fixed rate loans offer a set interest rate for a specific period of time. Variable rate loans offer an adjustable interest rate based on the current market rates. In addition, if your income is low, it may be difficult to qualify for a personal loan. You must have good credit history and sufficient monthly income to repay the loan.
Things to remember
Many people sign up for a loan without reading the fine print. This could result in you being charged fees that you did not agree to pay. If you feel that you cannot afford to pay back the loan, you should contact a company that offers loans for people with bad credits. These companies usually work with people who have had problems with their finances in the past. They may be willing to give you a loan even though you have bad credit. You also choose to go this route, you should only borrow what you can afford to repay. If you do not pay back the loan, your credit rating will suffer. This means that it will be harder for you to get another loan in the future. If you are interested in getting a loan, you should visit our website www.loanzzones.com. Here, you can find information about different types of loans. You can learn about the different types of loans that are available. You can also learn about the different companies that offer these types of loans. You should always compare interest rates and other important details before deciding to apply for a loan. Loanzzones ensures that you get the best deal possible.
Research about the loans and analyse the lender offers, You should always look into the interest rates that are associated with each loan, compare the rates that are offered by different companies, You should also look at the fees that are associated with each type of loan to avoid paying high fees. In addition, you should avoid paying a fee every time you roll over your loan to avoid paying a fee every month. Never pay a fee if you are late on a payment to avoid making payments that are too large. You can also study about the different companies that offer loans. You can compare the rates that each company charges. You can also learn how to get a loan approved quickly.
However, there is no need to worry because loanzzones provide all kinds of loans such as home improvement loans, business loans, personal loans, Mortgage loans etc. We help those individuals or businesses, who don’t have enough money to meet their financial needs but still want to settle their debts. loanzzones services are fast and reliable so you won’t spend more than necessary when dealing with us.
Effective for applying for Personal loan.
Effective ways to improve your chances of receiving an unsecured personal loan include:
1) Having a good credit score is the first think any lender would look at for processing the loan.
2) Being employed with standard salary in a reputed company, to the value and gives better terms for the loan.
3) Paying off any outstanding loans, emi is always recommended.
4) Maintaining a healthy balance sheet. So that expenditure is not high.
5) Not missing any scheduled payments with the present financial commitment
6) Avoiding default in the recent credit history is something we cannot afford
7) Applying early in business or before actual requirement would give you space to choose the best
8) Choosing a reputable loan service agency like loanzzones
9) Getting pre-approved loans is not so difficult selection should be done after homework.
10) Preparing yourself for financial professional to process information rightly
11) Taking advantage of promotional deals and offers available with lender
12) Using multiple lenders to know the best deals for loans
13) Finding a perfect lender whom meets our requirement
Loanzzones would help you for preparing thoroughly prior to submitting a personal loan application. It’s very easy to overlook something small while filling out paperwork, which can lead to rejection. The key here is preparation – know exactly what you’re going to submit and why!
Key take away from the project.
1. Have a solid plan in place before starting your search.
2. Be prepared to put forth extra effort during the application process.
3. Don’t rely solely on one source for funding; use several sources.
4. Look for competitively priced options from reputable providers.
5. Consider using alternative methods to fund your project.
6. Keep track of your progress throughout the entire financing cycle.

domain: finance


text:
Golden Reasons Why You Should Learn To Do CPR. Benefits Of Learning How To Do CPR. Here Is Why You Should Learn To Do CPR.
Learning Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) skills help you a lot and among the major reasons why you should have them is the fact that you could save another person’s life. Today, there are so many people that have been diagnosed with heart disease, and the heart attacks have caused millions of deaths according to the CDC. The cardiac arrest happens when the heart’s electrical activity goes out of order stopping the heart from beating or flutter and this brings about the deprivation of the oxygen on the tissues.
Others muscle tissues can degenerate after this, but a loss in the brain tissue cause the brain dysfunction. The CPR is like an artificial heart mimicking the real heart-pumping action. We have the conventional CPR that the professionals including the breathing techniques and the compression and the hands on CPR that only involves the chest compressions. Now that you have the basics, here are reasons why you should learn how to do the CPR.
First of all, this is a skill that is pretty easy to learn because this is s hands-only compressions on the heat. The chance of developing the brain dysfunctions later is significantly reduced when the compressions are done for more than thirty-eight minutes. Anyone can get a cardiac arrest whether young or old, and there is also the drowning that many children are in danger of that cause this two.
When initiating a CPR to a child, however, there is an algorithm to follow because of the strength difference. Very many people get cardiac to attest when they are at home and very few of those actually survives, and there is nothing worse than feeling helpless when a loved one needs the help and you have no idea what to do. You will be repaid should there be an emergency because normally you will have memorized the instructions and the procedures.
With the skill, you have the chance to save someone from having to live with a disability because the help did not get there in time. With the skill, you also double or triple their survival rate and check this page. If you are looking to be a fireman, electrician, coach, flight attendant, a school staff or even a volunteer, it is a necessity today to have the skills or else you will not be considered. The cardiac arrest usually has no warning signs, can happen to anyone and anywhere which makes it different from the heart attack, which is what bring about the cardiac arrest, and every minute counts. That being said, this is a skill that you should have.


CZ-USA in Kansas City, Kansas imports
some of the most handsome, useful, and well-made rifles
available. Most all of them feature good-looking and comfortable
walnut stocks, along with barrels and receivers made from
genuine polished blue steel. The CZ Model 527 is a particularly
handy little rifle, using a Mauser style action with
fixed ejector and claw extractor that is perfectly scaled to the
diminutive cartridges for which it is chambered.
It has been just over a year since I reviewed
the smaller Model 453 that was chambered
for the .17 Hornady Magnum Rimfire cartridge. It proved
to be an accurate and handy little rifle, so I was anxious to
get to shoot this slighter larger Model 527. The 527, like other
CZ bolt rifles, has an excellent set trigger. The trigger pull
is fully adjustable for weight of pull, engagement, and
overtravel. Pushing forward on the trigger places it in
“set” mode, and the release is both light and crisp,
contributing greatly to the practical accuracy of the weapon
both at the range and in the field.
The Model 527 wears a medium weight tapered
twenty-two inch barrel that is free-floated its entire length,
and has no sights mounted. The rifle has a five-shot detachable
box magazine. The magazine, like all of the metal parts on this
rifle, is made of steel. The checkered walnut stock is of the
classic straight-comb design, is equipped with sling swivel
studs fore and aft, and has a synthetic rubber butt pad that
fits the stock very well.
The CZ-527 reviewed here weighs in at just
barely under six pounds, and is chambered for the wonderfully
efficient .221 Remington Fireball cartridge. The Fireball was
introduced as a pistol cartridge almost fifty years ago, but I
think that in the compact CZ rifle, it has found a better home.
The 527 chambered for the Fireball has a one-in-twelve inch
twist. The trigger pull on the sample rifle measures three
pounds, two ounces in the normal mode, and one pound, four
ounces in the “set” mode. As noted earlier, it is
adjustable, but I left it alone, as it suited me perfectly. I
got in the habit of always firing it in the set mode, as it is a
wonderful trigger to use as such.
For accuracy testing, I mounted a favorite
Leupold VX-III 6.5 to 20 power target scope.
I fired the 527 for accuracy at 100 yards, and
with Remington 50 grain factory ammunition, the
performance was very good, grouping consistently into less than
one inch, with most groups under three-quarters of an inch. Four
groups were fired that measured only nine-sixteenths of an inch,
with one of those pictured here, along with a five-eighths inch
group. The Remington ammo averaged a velocity of 2931.2
feet-per-second (fps), with little variation. This was very
consistent ammunition, and I am sure that the larger groups were
my fault, as I am certainly no expert marksman, but even the
largest group fired with the Remington ammunition still went
into a cluster of less than one inch at 100 yards. The wonderful
trigger made shooting good groups pretty easy from the bench. I
rested the rifle in a Target
Shooting, Inc. Model 1000 rifle rest for all accuracy
testing. Handloads also performed admirably. I usually reach for
Barnes Varmint Grenades when testing any .22 caliber
centerfire cartridge, and was anxious to try them in the 527,
but they did not perform well in this particular rifle. Weighing
in at only thirty-six grains, I pushed them up to speeds as high
as 3567 fps out of the CZ’s barrel, but groups were in the one
and one-half inch range, no matter the bullet speed. Trying Hornady
52 grain hollowpoint match bullets resulted in superb accuracy,
at a velocity of 3032.1 fps clocked ten feet from the muzzle.
This load used a Remington Number 7 ˝ primer and 16.7 grains of
H4227 powder. Other powders that proved well-suited to the .221
Fireball were Hodgdon Lil’Gun
and Accurate Arms 1680.
After accuracy testing was complete, I mounted a
Leupold Compact 2 to 7 power scope, which is much better suited
to the trim lines of the little 527. The CZ 527 has scope bases
integral with the receiver, and comes from the factory with
scope rings. However, for some reason the rings were not in the
box with the test rifle, so I mounted the scopes using Warne rings
which are made to fit the 527 bases. The Compact Leupold was
used for field shooting with the 527, and also while shooting
the rifle at the Confederate Sixgunners Association
gathering near Clarksville, Arkansas. The CSA is a
loosely-formed informal group that meets each Spring for a
weekend of shooting and fellowship, and the little CZ 527
performed admirably. I had two boxes of Remington factory ammo
left, and my good friend Chuck Smith sent most of it down
range, firing at target at various ranges. Chuck is very handy
with a rifle, and is a great fan of CZ rifles in general, and
the trim little 452, 453, and 527 Models in particular. The
controlled-round feed, detachable box magazine, classic trim
lines, and set trigger endeared the rifle to all who handled it,
and Chuck fell in love with the little Fireball.
CZ continues to listen to rifle shooters, and to
manufacture rifles that are not just a copy of what others
offer. CZ rifles fill a niche which needed filling, especially
with this little Fireball. The .221 Fireball is a wonderfully
efficient little cartridge that offers a lot of performance in a
small package, and the CZ 527 is a rifle which is perfectly
scaled to the svelte dimensions of the dandy little cartridge.
It is built of blued steel and walnut by craftsmen who know what
a rifle should be, is easy to use, very accurate, and priced
Check out the entire line of CZ rifles,
shotguns, and handguns online at www.cz-usa.com.
For the location of a CZ dealer near you, click
on the DEALER FINDER icon at www.lipseys.com.
To order the 527 online, go to www.galleryofguns.com.
For a detailed look at the extensive line of
quality Leupold optics, go to www.leupold.com.
NOTE: All load data posted on this
web site are for educational purposes only. Neither the author nor
GunBlast.com assume any responsibility for the use or misuse of this data.
The data indicated were arrived at using specialized equipment under
conditions not necessarily comparable to those encountered by the
potential user of this data. Always use data from respected loading
manuals and begin working up loads at least 10% below the loads indicated
in the source manual.
|For a list of dealers where you can
buy this gun, go to:
|To buy this gun online, go to:
Our friend and brother Shootist, Captain
Chuck Smith, fires the CZ 527 at the Confederate
Sixgunners Association shoot.
Author used Leupold VX-III 6.5-20x
scope and Target Shooting, Inc. Model 1000 Rifle Rest
for accuracy testing.
Leupold's 2-7x Compact scope is a
perfect match for the handy 527.
Warne rings were used to mount both
Accuracy was excellent, as we have
come to expect from CZ.
Got something to say about this article? Want to agree (or
disagree) with it? Click the following link to go to the GUNBlast Feedback Page.


An auto expert and former Energy Department adviser says the policies of a handful of states have pushed the development of electric vehicles. How the U.S. could win the global competition for the car of the future.
Joe Califano declared smoking tobacco “public health enemy number one” when he served as Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare in the Carter administration. Today he’s calling for a new attitude in American attitudes toward all substance abuse and addiction, and a revolution in how we deal with these problems. He joins Diane to outline his vision.
- Joseph Califano founding chairman of the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University. He was special assistant to the Secretary of Defense in the Kennedy administration; special assistant to President Lyndon Johnson; and Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare in the Carter administration.
Most Recent Shows
A measles outbreak centered in California has sickened more than 80 people and is still spreading. Why some families are opting out of vaccines and what it means for public health across the country.
A rebel attack on Yemen's capital throws the country into crisis. U.S. lawmakers renew calls for sanctions against Iran. And American and Cuban officials meet in Havana for the first time in decades. A panel of journalists joins guest host Susan Page for analysis of the week's top international news stories.
President Barack Obama travels to conservative states to pitch his middle class economic plan. House Republicans drop a controversial abortion bill. And the FBI says there isn't enough evidence to charge Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson. A panel of journalists joins guest host Susan Page for analysis of the week's top national news stories.


Documentation and procurement. Prepare documentation sufficient for local authority submission: co-ordinate technical documentation with the consultants and complete primary co-ordination. Prepare specifications for the work. Review costing and program with the consultants. Obtain client’s authority and submit documents for approval.
Complete construction documentation and proceed to call for tenders. Prepare documents to precure offers for the execution of works. Obtain offers, evaluate and recommend. Prepare contract document and arrange signing thereof.


There are 14 Special Education Parent Centers across New York State. These centers will provide parents of children with disabilities with information, resources, and strategies to:
promote their meaningful involvement in their children’s education programs, including information regarding the special education process (referrals, individual evaluations and individualized education program development and transition planning);
assist in understanding their children’s disabilities;
promote early resolution of disputes between parents and school districts;
promote the use of resolution sessions and special education mediation;
assist in understanding procedural due process rights, including the right to impartial hearings and appeals and the State complaint process; and
enhance parents’ skills and levels of confidence to communicate effectively and work collaboratively with other schools and other stakeholders to advocate and actively participate in their children’s education program.
A Parent's Guide to Special Education in NYS for Children 3-21
This guide contains comprehensive information on the special education process in New York State, beginning with the initial referral for special education services. Special education means specially designed individualized or group instruction or special services or programs to meet the unique needs of students with disabilities. Special education services and programs are provided at no cost to the parent.


text:
After making this collage for the finale of A Lovely Year of Finishes, I was delighted to revisit some of these quilts I've made this year. And, putting them into a collage, it looks pretty sweet!
I only completed 6 months worth of goals this year, but I'm okay with that. It's probably five more than I would have completed without the Goal Setting motivation of ALYOF. I want to thank Melissa and Shanna for sponsoring this the past three years - THANK YOU! We look forward to seeing what else you fine ladies might have up your sleeves.
Here are the links to my finishes:
January: Goal and Finish
February: Goal and Finish
April: Goal and Finish
June: Goal and Finish
July: Goal and Finish
October: Goal and Finish
Well, shoot - guess I didn't link up my April finish. But I completed it anyway. Oh, well, time always seems to get in the way. I'm still glad that I got six goals completed so I could work on other projects. It's all good!
Happy New Year to everyone, and thanks again, Melissa and Shanna, for all your efforts.
Quilting with a smile,

domain: hobby


Prefabricated floor trusses have revolutionized the construction industry by offering a cost-effective and time-efficient alternative to traditional building methods. With continuous advancements in technology and manufacturing processes, these floor trusses have become even more versatile and beneficial for modern construction projects. Here are four key advances in prefabricated floor trusses that have significantly improved construction efficiency.
One of the major advancements in prefabricated floor trusses is the increased design flexibility they offer. Modern manufacturing techniques allow for intricate and customized designs to suit the specific needs of a project. Architects and engineers can take advantage of the versatility of prefabricated trusses to create unique floor layouts, incorporating varying spans, curves, and complex configurations.
Precision Engineering and Manufacturing
Advancements in precision engineering and manufacturing processes have greatly enhanced the quality and consistency of prefabricated floor trusses. Computer-aided design (CAD) and computer numerical control (CNC) technology allow for precise measurements, cuts, and assembly of the trusses. This level of accuracy ensures that each truss is manufactured to the exact specifications, eliminating the need for on-site adjustments or modifications. As a result, construction crews can install prefabricated floor trusses with ease and confidence, reducing labor requirements and minimizing errors during installation.
Integration of Mechanical and Electrical Systems
Prefabricated floor trusses can now incorporate pre-installed mechanical and electrical systems, adding another layer of efficiency to construction projects. These trusses can be designed with built-in channels and spaces to accommodate HVAC ducts, plumbing pipes, and electrical conduits. By integrating these systems into the trusses during the manufacturing process, the on-site installation becomes significantly faster and more streamlined. This advancement minimizes coordination issues between different trades and reduces the potential for errors during system installation.
Eco-Friendly and Sustainable Materials
Sustainability is a growing concern in the construction industry, and prefabricated floor trusses have responded to this trend by utilizing eco-friendly and sustainable materials. Engineered wood products, such as laminated veneer lumber (LVL) and glulam beams, are commonly used in the manufacturing of prefabricated trusses. These materials are sourced from sustainable forests and offer high strength-to-weight ratios. Using eco-friendly materials reduces the carbon footprint of construction projects and promotes environmental stewardship. Additionally, the efficient manufacturing processes involved in producing prefabricated trusses minimize waste and optimize material usage, further contributing to sustainability goals.
The advancements in prefabricated floor trusses have revolutionized the construction industry. Reach out to a manufacturer in your area for more information about prefabricated floor trusses.Share


text:
Granite Shoals House Rental Photos and Description
2 houses! 4 bedrooms, 3 full baths, sleeps 10
Cooling lake breeze rides over you as you lounge on the deck-top hammock; soaking in the sunset and sipping your favorite beverage. Enticing? Just wait until you see this place! Just about perfect any time of the year, this vacation lake property offers not one but two houses! Nestled in a cove, you have forever lake views, a boat dock, kayaks, deck with covered bbq/picnic area and a grassy area for the kids. The main house offers everything you need. A master suite, and secondary bedroom. Double vanity guest bath with tub/shower. Wood burning fireplace for those winter stays in the warm and inviting family room. Kitchen with dining bar. Washer and dryer room. We can go on! Okay we will! Covered backpatio overlooks the yard to the lake. Covered boat dock for seating on the water and fishing fun. Let the kids or your guests stay in a separate house. The second house offers sleeping for 6 with a full bath.
Cabana: The cabana is situated close to the waterfront and is perfect for those who prefer to stay up late or just prefer separate quarters ( kids) . The cabana offers a two bedroom, 1 bath with 2 sets of bunk beds in one room and 2 twins in the other! TV provided.
Main house: The main house features concrete stained floors with 2 large bedrooms, 2 baths, fireplace, dining area for 10, washer, dryer, full kitchen with with built in cook top, microwave, oven, refrigerator/freezer, and dishwasher. A separate refrigerator is available for your extra drinks and food.
Seating area accommodates 7-10 for either a cozy fire, watching your favorite movie or sporting events on big screen tv, while viewing the lake.
Surroundings: This property offers 4 outside seating areas, a covered porch off the house overlooking the lawn, a picnic and BBQ area underneath the elevated deck, the elevated deck which allows you to see for miles - watch the sunsets over Packsaddle Mountain, and last but not least, seating on the boat dock - six inches above the water.
RENTAL POLICY ON PRIVACY - In order to improve the rental experience for all Guests and to preserve the standard of quality established by the Agent/Owners, all Guests are reviewed using www.guestchecker.com. This contract may be canceled based on the results of this search. At any time during, before, or after your stay, your information may be shared with www.guestchecker.com.
- limited accessibility
- Minimum Age Limit for Renters
- suitable for elderly or infirm
- children welcome
- pets considered
- non smoking only
- Long-term Renters Welcome
Guestbook comments from the owner
The house was just PERFECT! Having rented condos (at the beach) in the
past and being required to bring so much stuff of our own, I was so
pleasantly surprised to see how much you all do to accommodate with
extras! Thank goodness for that hair dryer!
There was ample parking space, we utilized your games, plenty of
chairs on the deck, loved the radio and we even used the fire pit. The
house was so clean and nicely decorated, yet felt homey and
comfortable for our weekend away. We needed a relaxing place with
beautiful surroundings and that's just what we got!
I am already trying to find a date to take my family back over the summer!
Thanks again....everything was just perfect!

domain: travel