Texas Municipal League Water Conference

Transcription

1 Texas Municipal League Water Conference January 8, 2015 Darron Leiker City Manager Wichita Falls, Texas

2 Water Supply Summary Population served w/ water ~ 150,000 Includes 15 wholesale customers Area cities and rural water districts Rely solely on surface reservoirs Lake Arrowhead, Lake Kickapoo (Fresh water) Lake Kemp (brackish water) Water Rights ~ 95,000 acft Current Storage Capacity ~ 22% Limited options no groundwater

3 Causes of Problem Record Temperatures Wichita Falls typically averages 28 days over 100 degrees Normal In 2011 we had 100 days The Weather Channel ranked Wichita Falls the #1 Worst Summer anywhere in the U.S. for In 2012 we had 50 days In 2013 we had 32 days In 2014 we had 21 days 28 Days

4 Causes of Problem Loss of Rainfall Average annual rainfall for the Wichita Falls area is 28.5 inches. Normal we were 15.5 inches below normal we were 8.75 inches below normal we were 7.25 inches below normal YTD we are 5.5 inches below normal

5 Precipitation Data (116 years) Average Rainfall in 1950 s drought

6 State of the Drought 2011 Wichita Falls October 2011

7 State of the Drought Dec Wichita Falls December 2014

8 Water Conservation and Restrictions 1,239 days of continuous water restrictions Currently in Stage 5 Water Restrictions: No outdoor irrigation allowed, no filling of swimming pools, car washes must close twice a week and follow strict conservation practices Aggressive enforcement: more than 2,000 tickets issued since 2012 Surcharges for high usage Reduced consumption from 27 MGD to 11 MGD (avg.) Pre-drought summer peaks = 50 MGD (avg.) 2014 summer peak = 14 MGD

9 DPR and IPR Defined Direct Potable Reuse (DPR) use of reclaimed water that is piped directly from wastewater treatment plant to a drinking water treatment facility. Sometimes called pipe to pipe. The natural environmental buffer is replaced with engineered advanced treatment. Indirect Potable Reuse (IPR) use of reclaimed water to augment drinking water supplies by discharging to a water body that is subsequently treated for potable consumption. Use of a natural environmental buffer.

10 Emergency Reuse Plan In 2012, started working on an emergency plan to supply the most amount of water, in quickest way possible (Direct Potable Reuse) Worked with Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) for two years on this project. Standards are stricter than California s and the EPA reuse guidelines TCEQ required a 75-day full-scale verification test Final report was over 5,000 pages long DPR system started In July and is working great Has saved over 700 million gallons of water

11 Direct Potable Reuse Project Temporary Pump Station and 13-mile pipeline to convey 7.5 MGD of highly treated effluent from WWTP to a Microfiltration/Reverse Osmosis Plant Treat water through both membrane plants Blend water with lake water 50/50 ratio Treat blended water through conventional treatment plant Water is currently treated 4 times (multiple barriers of protection) and is continuously monitored and tested In late January, ultraviolet disinfection will also be added (TCEQ mandate)

12 Direct Potable Reuse Project TCEQ concept approval received in early August 2013 Construction began August 23, Days of Full Scale Verification testing began on January 27, 2014 TCEQ approval for discharge on June 27, 2014 Water in distribution system on July 9, 2014 Project adds 5 MGD of supply (almost 1/2 of daily demand)

13 Direct Potable Reuse Project 30 Diameter High Density Polyethylene Pipe

14 Direct Potable Reuse Project

15 Direct Potable Reuse Project

16 Direct Potable Reuse Project

17 Keys To Success Biggest obstacle you will encounter when trying DPR or IPR is public relations/perception (citizen pushback) We started very early and mounted a massive communication/education campaign Town Hall meetings, brochures, TV, Radio and print media, website, social media Worked hard to explain why it is necessary and how it will be 100% safe Enlisted help from local physicians, scientists, university professors and engineers to validate the process and safety

18 Contact Information Darron Leiker City Manager (940)

19 CRMWD Raw Water Production Facility Big Spring Plant ( )

20 Toilet To Tap The Yuk Factor I m Moving!! I m Not Going To Drink It! Good, I Get To Drink My Beer Twice!

21 CRMWD.. Continues to Seek New Water Sources No New Surface Water Reservoirs Most Fresh Groundwater has been Developed What are Other Water Sources that have Not Been Used Pilot Project Using the Latest Technology

22 1. Concept / Study 2. Secure the Source 3. Preliminary Design A. Property Acquisition B. Permitting C. Cost Estimates D. Financing 4. Detail Design 5. Construction 6. Start-up 7. Operation

23 June 2002 CRMWD Board Approves Reuse / Desalination Studies October Membrane Technology Report April Water Reuse Feasibility Study (wastewater effluent and brackish groundwater) March Regional Water Reclamation Feasibility Study (wastewater effluent), Public Meetings April Member City Contract Amendment

24 October Big Spring Project Preliminary Design Report, Public Meetings February CRMWD Board Approves Proceeding with Detailed Design and Partial Funding for the Big Spring Project April CRMWD Purchase Property for the Big Spring Plant Fall Pilot Testing of Treatment Processes August TCEQ Issues Discharge Permit to CRMWD (WQ ) February TWDB Approves Funding for the Big Spring Raw Water Production Facility

25 May TCEQ Issues Preliminary Approval for the Big Spring Raw Water Production Facility (PWS ) August CRMWD Issues Purchase Order to Pall Corporation for Treatment Equipment May Construction Contract Awarded to CSA for Construction of the Big Spring Raw Water Production Facility April 2013 TCEQ Issues Final Approval for the Big Spring Raw Water Production Facility (PWS ) May 2013 Testing and Start-up of the Big Spring Raw Water Production Facility

26 Permitted by TCEQ just like any Water Treatment Plant and THEN SOME! Permitted for Raw Water for Municipal and Industrial Use Produced Water is Blended Back into the CRMWD Raw Water Transmission System 1 st Source of Water is Treated Wastewater Effluent from the City of Big Spring

27 Capacity 2.5 MGD In / 2.0 MGD Out Expandable to Produce 5.0 MGD (out) Goal to Use 100% of the Water 100% of the Time Chlorides 800 ppm In / 50 ppm Out (Pilot Testing) Estimated Project Cost $13.97 M / $3.25 per 1000 gallons Full Start-up and Operation May 2013

28 Precipitation 21 inches per year Evaporation 61 inches per year Surface and Subsurface Storage and Travel

29 City Water Treatment Wastewater Treatment Pump Station Creeks & Rivers Reservoir

30 Water Treatment City Raw Water Production Facility Pump Station Wastewater Treatment Creeks & Rivers Reservoir

31 To Odessa, Midland & Stanton Big Spring Big Spring Wastewater Treatment Plant 0.40 mile Big Spring Water Treatment Plant CRMWD Raw Water Production Facility RO Concentrate To Snyder Blended into Raw Water Transmission System 1.0 mile Lake J.B. Thomas E.V. Spence Reservoir Beals Creek 0.25 mile Red Draw Reservoir

32 Contaminant Membrane Filtration Reverse Osmosis Ultraviolet Oxidation Bacteria Partial Excellent Excellent Viruses Partial Excellent Excellent Protozoans Excellent Excellent Excellent Pharmaceut., Endocr. Disr. No effect Good Good Pesticides No effect Good Good Salts No effect Good No effect Contaminants vs. Barriers

33 Range Average Source Water TDS 3,000 5,400 4,200 Chlorides 800 1,200 1,000 Product Water TDS Chlorides RO Reject TDS 2,420 10,100 6,237 Chlorides 967 3,748 2,261

34

35

36

37 High Turbidity or Low Chlorine Water is Sent Back to the Big Spring Wastewater Treatment Plant

38 1.0 Million Gallons

39

40 500,000 Gallons

41

42

43

44 RO Concentrate is Discharged to Beals Creek

45

46

47

48 RO Skid MF Skid Plant Control

49 Central Control Facility 24 Hour Monitoring Emergency Shut Down

50 Questions?

51 FIRST TCEQ CHAPTER 321 SATELLITE PLANT: CHALLENGES AND LESSONS LEARNED TML Oil and Water Conference 2014

52 Satellite Reclaimed Water Production Facility A domestic wastewater treatment facility that treats municipal wastewater for reuse on an as-needed basis and is located at a different location from the permitted domestic wastewater treatment facility

53 Satellite Reclaimed Water Production Facility Irrigation User Raw Sewage Reclaimed Water Production Facility Industrial User Biosolids Publicly Owned Treatment Works City Center

54 Satellite Reclaimed Water Production Facility (SRWPF) Applicant must have existing WWTP and authorized discharge permit at downstream end of collection system 210 Authorization to use reclaimed water 321 P authorization does not change WWTP discharge permit No increase in WWTP permitted flow No discharge to waters of the state No sludge treatment onsite it all goes back in the sewer Buffer Zone Requirements Enhanced buffer with process units in building, no exhaust or odor control- 150 buffer

55 Satellite Reclaimed Water Production Facility Comply with Chapter 217 design criteria Convey all wastewater to downstream permitted WWTP when SRWPF is not in operation Convey all sludge produced back to sewer outfall and to downstream permitted Minimize odors and other nuisance conditions Protect surface and groundwater

56 Satellite Reclaimed Water Production Facility - Location Lift station on 33-in outfall in Windlands Park Six inch force main to SRWPF Discharge sludge back into sewer Reclaimed water storage tank and irrigation system at Midland College by others Tank LS SRWPF

57 Satellite Reclaimed Water Production Facility

58 Satellite Reclaimed Water Production Facility

59 Satellite Reclaimed Water Production Facility

60

61 Overall Plant Schematic

62 Building Layout

63 Coarse Screening

64 Coarse Screening

65 Odor Control and Noise Control

66 Odor Control and Noise Control

67 Construction Challenges Labor Shortages Start-up Issues Operator Training Public Perception Odor Control

68 Construction Challenges Start-up Issues Seeding No activated sludge process for treatment Minimum of 8,000 mg/l of MLSS Seed from City of Odessa WWTP

69 Questions?