GFIA Stormwater/Deicing Runoff Management Program. Deicing and Stormwater Management Conference May 19, 2015

Transcription

1 GFIA Stormwater/Deicing Runoff Management Program Deicing and Stormwater Management Conference May 19, 2015

2 Dean Mericas, Ph.D. Mead & Hunt, Inc. Roy Hawkins Gerald R. Ford International Airport Design Team Contributors: Chris Cieciek, LimnoTech John Stroo, Prein & Newhof Jim Bays, CH2M HILL Scott Wallace, Naturally Wallace Jeff Longsworth, Barnes & Thornburg

3 Project Context and Background Public Involvement Program Alternative Selection Process Stormwater Treatment System

4 Project Goal Identify and design a comprehensive stormwater and deicing management system to address environmental concerns and ensure long-term compliance with NPDES requirements.

5 NPDES Permit Requirements (2000 present) Implement Best Management Practices Monitor water quality & material usage Evaluate and report performance annually Refine BMPs as appropriate Glycol (1000 gals) % 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Collection Efficiency Glycol Used (gals) Collection Efficiency (%)

6 Biofilms remain an issue Thornapple River Outfall 1 Unnamed Tributary

7 What are Biofilms? Natural, complex communities of microorganisms Includes algae, fungi, bacteria, protozoa Nuisance conditions often characterized by dominance of Sphaerotilus natans

8 What are the environmental concerns? Aesthetics Habitat Dissolved oxygen The challenge: No quantitative relationships between water quality and avoidance of nuisance biofilm conditions. 8

9 Project Context & Background 2011 NPDES Permit Requirements to Address Biofilms Additional Monitoring Deicing Runoff Management Improvements Long-Term Deicing Runoff Management Program Development Study Eliminate GFIA s contribution to biofilm in the Unnamed Tributary October 1, 2015 completion

10 GFIA/KCDA Open Book Education and Continuous Improvement Information on Web Site (flygrandrapids.org) Presentations and Tours (Staff) Newsletters, Annual Reports Social Media

11 Reviewed System Performance Requirements: Literature Review System Review Regulatory Review Conducted Planning Charrette: (December 1-2, 2010) GFIA Stakeholders 10 Alternative Concepts Evaluated Alternatives and Selected Preferred Alternative (September 2011) Stakeholders Advisory Committee Process: (Not Required) Governing Agencies, Environmental Groups, Neighbors, Tenants, Airline Environmental Staff

12 Narrowed from 10 to 4 Relocate outfall to river & base-flow treatment Relocate outfall to river & continue collection CDFs and relocate outfall to river Seasonal high BOD flows diverted to river Selected Alternative Incorporated components from each of the four alternatives and other voluntary measures Design commitments made during process Relocate outfall to river (guarantee compliance) Natural Treatment System (NTS) Base Flow Diversion (non-deicing season) Sedimentation Control/Maintenance Trash Collection

13 Key Advantages: Eliminates GFIA contribution to nuisance biofilm in Unnamed Tributary Meets environmental standards and expectations Low complexity/high reliability Integrates with current operations Adaptable to change

14 CBOD 5 Max concentration: Max load: Oct. 1 Nov. 30 Dec. 1 Feb. 28 Mar Apr Ammonia N Max load: Dissolved Oxygen Min concentration: 2,000 mg/l 3,600 lbs/day 13,000 lbs/day 18,000 lbs/day 21,000 lbs/day 120 lbs/day 6 mg/l

15 NORTH

16 Address risk of nuisance biofilms at other outfalls Route drainage from all designated deicing areas to new treatment system and outfall Utilized existing infrastructure to the extent possible.

17 Outfall from Airport Detention Basin Floating Booms Stage 1 Treatment Cells Stage 2 Treatment Cells Stage 3 Treatment Channel Primary Catch Basin With Sump Trash Rack Splitter Box Dosing Chamber Multiple Features: Detention Basin Sedimentation Removal Trash Removal Natural Treatment System Water Level Control Structure Water Level Control Structure Siphon Chamber Multiple Aeration Structures (7) Thornapple River 6 Riser Diffuser

18 900 acre tributary area Restricted discharge (0.12 cfs per acre) 100 year flood combined capacity 185 acre-ft storage volume Sediment and trash removal occurs in the primary basin All deicing flows from primary basin treated FAA required holding time (< 48 hours) Natural Treatment System Primary Basin Secondary Basin

19 CATCH BASIN BERMS TRASH RACK LOG BOOM Check Dams Remove first flush sediment Trap behind berms First berm has concrete pad easy maintenance Catch Basin with sump

20 Trash Rack Keeps solids out Removes submerged debris Large and small screens over inlet Floating Log Boom Series of floating logs Block flow of floating debris

21

22 1A 2A

23 Aeration in Stage 3 Treatment Channel 7 Aeration Structures

24

25 Alternatives Evaluation $570,000 NPDES Permit Negotiations $77,000 Environmental Assessment $350,000 Engineering Design $ 1,177,000 Construction/ Construction Engineering $17,854,000 Total Project Cost - $20,028,000

26 Permit negotiations framed the solution Forced property acquisition not always bad Elevation presented energy source Designed for adaptability to future needs Relocating existing detention basin supports future needs CSX Railroad experience can be good

27 NORTH

28 Outfall from Airport Detention Basin Floating Booms Stage 1 Treatment Cells Stage 2 Treatment Cells Stage 3 Treatment Channel Primary Catch Basin With Sump Trash Rack Splitter Box Dosing Chamber Multiple Features: Detention Basin Sedimentation Removal Trash Removal Natural Treatment System Water Level Control Structure Water Level Control Structure Siphon Chamber Multiple Aeration Structures (7) Thornapple River 6 Riser Diffuser

29 1A 2A

30