East Coast P Removal Technology Performance Summary

Similar documents
Efficient Design Configurations for Biological Nutrient Removal

Comparison of Three Wet Weather Flow Treatment Alternatives to Increase Plant Capacity

Copies: Mark Hildebrand (NCA) ARCADIS Project No.: April 10, Task A 3100

Operation and Control of Multiple BNR Processes in One WWTP

A Critical New Look at Nutrient Removal Processes

Altoona Westerly Wastewater Treatment Facility BNR Conversion with Wet Weather Accommodation

Comparison of Three Wet Weather Flow Treatment Alternatives to Increase Plant Capacity

BEING GOOD STEWARDS: IMPROVING EFFLUENT QUALITY ON A BARRIER ISLAND. 1.0 Executive Summary

ASA Analytics ChemScan Process Analyzers Reprint ASA Publication #194

Membrane Bio-Reactors (MBRs) The Future of Wastewater Technology, Science and Economy Aspects

Review of WEFTEC 2016 Challenge & Overview of 2017 Event. Malcolm Fabiyi, PhD, MBA Spencer Snowling, PhD. P.Eng

Filtrate Treatment Facility Update

James Winslade Instructor, Environmental Resources Training Center Southern Illinois University-Edwardsville

Peter Schauer Chris debarbadillo PNCWA 2009

Meeting SB1 Requirements and TP Removal Fundamentals

North Side WRP Master Plan Research and Development Department 2006 Seminar Series October 27, 2006 Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of

Rare Earth Technology for Low Phosphorus Removal. Pam Cornish Business Development Manager OWEA Technical Conference & Expo June 2017

Membrane Bioreactor and High Flow Biological Treatment System for the Cox Creek WRF

Upgrading Lagoons to Remove Ammonia, Nitrogen, and Phosphorus *nutrient removal in cold-climate lagoon systems

OWEA Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition Upgrading WRFs for Biological Nutrient Removal. June 25, 2015

A Submerged Attached Growth Bioreactor (SAGB) And Membrane Filtration For Water Reuse

Emerging Issues in the Water/Wastewater Industry. Austin s Full-Scale Step-BNR Demonstration

W O C H H O L Z R E G I O N A L W A T E R R E C L A M A T I O N F A C I L I T Y O V E R V I E W

NEWEA 2015 Annual Conference Session 16

MAINSTREAM DEAMMONIFICATION

NUTRIENT REDUCTION THROUGH THE USE OF ADVANCED BIOLOGICAL NUTRIENT RECOVERY. Rick Johnson Vice President, Market Development

Appendix D JWPCP Background and NDN

Masses at Massillon: IFAS for Industrial Loads and Nutrient Removal

Baltimore City Department of Public Works

Fond du Lac Low Level Phosphorus Efforts & SNRP Overview

PHOSPHORUS REMOVAL: TREATMENT

JB Neethling HDR Engineering

Wet Weather and Advanced Treatment: Procurement Strategies to Secure the Right Technology

Performance Evaluation of the Moores Creek Advanced Water Resource Recovery Facility

NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT PROVEN METHODS FOR UPGRADING YOUR FACILITIES

Dipankar Sen, PhD, PE Santa Clara Valley Water District Professor, Virginia Tech Civil & Env Engr

Preparing for Nutrient Removal at Your Treatment Plant

COG Region s Potomac Water Quality & Wastewater Treatment Fact Sheet (current draft, as of 7/28/09)

Phosphorous Removal using Tertiary UF How Low Can You Go? and Other Design Considerations

20 Years of Nutrient Removal City of Beloit

EVALUATING ALTERNATIVES FOR DISPOSING OF WATER PLANT SOLIDS INTO A WASTEWATER PLANT

Refinement of Nitrogen Removal from Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants

ENHANCED BIOLOGICAL PHOSPHORUS REMOVAL WITHIN MEMBRANE BIOREACTORS. 255 Consumers Road Toronto, ON, Canada, M2J 5B6

A Battle to Be the Best: A Comparison of Two Powerful Sidestream Treatment Technologies: Post Aerobic Digestion and Anammox

Using Municipal Reclaimed Water for Cooling Water Applications: Review of Two Case Studies

Presentation Outline

Post-Aerobic Digester with Bioaugmentation Pilot Study City of Meridian, ID WWTP PNCWA 2010

Process Monitoring for Biological and Chemical Nutrient Removal

SeRVice: Wastewater Treatment

Design, Construction and Startup of the First Enhanced Nutrient Removal Plant in Maryland Funded by the Chesapeake Bay Restoration Fund

The Significance of Reporting Methodologies in Stringent Phosphorus NPDES Permits

Case Study. BiOWiSH Aqua has Positive Long-Term Effects. Biological Help for the Human Race

WEFTEC.06. **Cobb County Water System, Marietta, Georgia

Feel free to contact me should you require any additional information regarding the report. I can be reached at

Nutrient Removal Optimization at the Fairview WWTP

Maureen O Shaughnessy. Prince William County Service Authority

Case Study. Biological Help for the Human Race. Bathurst Municipal Wastewater Treatment Works, New South Wales, Australia.

DESIGNING LAGOON-BASED WWTP FOR <1 MG/ L AMMONIA (AND TN) IN <34 F WATER. Nick Janous Regional Manager

New Phosphorus Removal Requirement Tips the Scales: Lessons Learned on Biosolids Management and Odor Control at the Southington CT Treatment Plant.

Wastewater Treatment Processes

MEETING COLUMBUS S TREATMENT LIMITS

Is membrane filtration worth it?

Biological Phosphorus Removal Technology. Presented by: Eugene Laschinger, P.E.

Biological Phosphorous Removal Is Coming! Michigan Water Environment Association Annual Conference, June 23, 2008; Boyne Falls MI

Commissioning and Operation of a 50 mgd Ultrafiltration Advanced Reclamation Facility for Gwinnett County, Georgia

Fremont Water Pollution Control Center Plant Expansion for Nutrient Removal and Wet Weather Flow Treatment

Tales from the Field: Troubleshooting Denitrification

WATER AND WASTEWATER FACILITY CLASSIFICATION APPLICATION FORM

WASTEWATER 101 Fo r MOWA

Ballasted Activated Sludge Demonstration Study SEPTEMBER 30, 2016

2017 Annual Performance Report

Evaluation of Conventional Activated Sludge Compared to Membrane Bioreactors

City of Redlands Wastewater Treatment Plant. Redlands, CA LOCATION: Carollo Engineers; CH2M HILL MBR MANUFACTURER: COMMENTS:

Water Reuse: identifying the optimal solution for the desired water quality. Didier PERRIN Technical & Marketing Director Degremont Asia

Disinfection By-Products Reduction and SCADA Evaluation and WTP Sludge Removal System and Dewatering Facility

Water Resources Director: Chris Graybeal

UV DISINFECTION OF LOW TRANSMITTANCE PHARMACEUTICAL WASTEWATER

Westside Regional WWTP Service Review. Regional District of Central Okanagan

Presenters: Rodrigo Pena-Lang, PE (D&B Engineers), Magdalena Gasior, PE (D&B Engineers) and Paul D. Smith, PE (NYCDEP)

Case Study. BiOWiSH Aqua. Biological Help for the Human Race. Municipal Wastewater Bathurst Waste Water Treatment Works Australia.

Waste water treatment

Pilot Testing Reveals Alternative Methods to Meet Wisconsin s Low Level Phosphorus Limits

Project Report Global Potable Reuse Case Study 2: Upper Occoquan Service Authority

PERMIT TO OPERATE SILVER CLOUD CT., MONTEREY, CA TELEPHONE (831) FAX (831)

Watertown Wastewater Facility Plan. August 11, 2015

Town of North Castle, NY Sewer District No. 2 WWTP

Achieving Effluent Limits While Treating an Intermittently Deficient Wastewater MWEA September 27, 2018

Dundalk Wastewater Treatment Plant

Duffin Creek Water Pollution Control Plant Technical Information

Wastewater treatment objecives

Conceptual Design for a Future Wastewater Treatment Plant

Upgrade of the Marathon Louisiana Refining Division s Wastewater Treatment Plant to a State-of-the-Art Nitrification-Denitrification Facility

AquaPASS. Aqua MixAir System. Phase Separator. System Features and Advantages. Anaerobic. Staged Aeration. Pre-Anoxic.

Overview of Supplemental Carbon Sources for Denitrification and Enhanced Biological Phosphorus Removal

Energy Neutral Opportunities

Lowering The Total Cost Of Operation

BOD5 REMOVALS VIA BIOLOGICAL CONTACT AND BALLASTED CLARIFICATION FOR WET WEATHER M. COTTON; D. HOLLIMAN; B. FINCHER, R. DIMASSIMO (KRUGER, INC.

STRUVITE HARVESTING: A UTILITY S PERSPECTIVE

Recovery of Ammonia and Production of High-Grade Phosphates from Side-Stream Digester Effluents Using Gas-Permeable Membranes

Lysis and Autooxidation. Organic Nitrogen (net growth) Figure by MIT OCW.

Transcription:

East Coast P Removal Technology Performance Summary Charles B. Bott Hampton Roads Sanitation District NonReactive Phosphorus Workshop Spokane, Washington August 11 12, 2009

Acknowledgements Numerous slides provided by Sudhir Murthy Input from treatment plant managers Some data from WERF Study Evaluating the Performance of Nutrient Removal Treatment Processes

Municipal WWTP Point Source 483 Municipal WWTP s in watershed Treat an average of 1,600 MGD (dry weather) More than 3,500 MGD in wet weather From CBP-2009

Chesapeake Bay 2000 Agreement Goals Priority Area Reducing Pollution Agriculture Nitrogen 50 Agriculture Phosphorus 49 47%, 63%, 64% of Goals Achieved N P S -85-74 Agriculture Sediment Wastewater Nitrogen Wastewater Phosphorus Urban/Suburban Nitrogen Urban/Suburban Phosphorus 48 67 Note: Some jurisdictions may be underreporting existing stormwater management practices. 91-61 Urban/Suburban Sediment Air Nitrogen 9 Data and Methods: www.chesapeakebay.net/status_reducingpollution.aspx From CBP-2009

Wastewater Treatment Goals Relative Responsibility of Wastewater Loads Nitrogen 67% of Nitrogen Goal Achieved Wastewater Pollution Controls Percent of Goal Achieved 100 80 60 40 20 0-20 Controlling Nitrogen GOAL 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Controlling Phosphorus Phosphorus 91% of Phosphorus Goal Achieved 100 80 60 40 20 GOAL 0 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Accounting begins Data and Methods: www.chesapeakebay.net/status_wastewater.aspx From CBP-2009

How was this done: Phosphorus Detergent Ban Design Goals - effluent TP 1.0 mg/l) Specific plants with lower effluent TP limits Potomac River Standard = 0.18 mg/l TP Current effort - bay wide limits: - 0.3 mg/l TP (some much lower) - 3-8 mg/l TN (most 3-5 mg/l)

Arlington Co. AWTP 40 mgd Alexandria AWTP 54 mgd Noman Cole, Jr AWTP 67 mgd Blue Plains AWTP 370 mgd Piscataway AWTP 30 mgd H.L. Mooney AWTP 24 mgd

TN or TP Limits (mg/l) Permit Limits for Tidal Potomac Plants 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 3.0 4.2 3.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 Arlington Co. Blue Plains Alexandria Piscataway Noman Cole Mooney TN (future) TP (current)

TN or TP Limits (mg/l) 2006 Performance for Tidal Potomac Plants 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.09 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.07 0.05 Arlington Co. Blue Plains Alexandria Piscataway Noman Cole Mooney TP (2006 annual average) TP (permit)

Arlington Plant Some Fe addition ahead of primary clarification (CEPT) Tertiary Clarification using Fe Granular Media Filters Additional Denitrification Filters

Blue Plains Plant Multipoint Fe CEPT using Fe Simultaneous Precipitation using Fe GMF

WSSC Piscataway Plant Simultaneous Precipitation using Al GMF From Grit Chamber Primary Clarifier Primary Sludge Train 1 Screw Pump Station Step-Feed Basins RAS Train 2 Step-Feed Basins Alum WAS Alum Flocculation Final Chambers Clarifier RAS WAS Final Clarifiers To Gravity Filters

Noman Cole Plant Some Bio P (step feed BNR) Tertiary Clarification with Fe Tertiary Sludge Recycling GMF Preliminary & Primary Treatment Secondary Treatment Equalization Ponds Tertiary Clarifiers Solids Processing & Incineration FeCl3 Filters

H. L. Mooney Plant Multipoint Fe CEPT using Fe Simultaneous Precipitation using Fe Denite Filters Preliminary & Primary Treatment FeCl 3 Secondary Treatment FeCl 3 Denitrification Filters Solids Processing & Incineration

Alexandria Plant Some Fe Addition - CEPT Simultaneous Precipitation using Fe Tertiary Clarifiers with Al (including good rapid mix and flocculation) GMF Raw Wastewater Ferric Chloride Polymer Sodium VFAor Hydroxide Methanol Ferric Polymer Chloride Coarse Screens Recyclefrom PlantDrain Raw Wastewater Pumps Fine Screens VortexGrit Chambers ToLandfill Flow Measurement Primary Settling Tank Primary Effluent Pumps Sludgeto Gravity Thickeners Sodium Hypochlorite RAS AnoxicZone AerobicZone Biological Secondary Reactor Settling Internal Recycle MLR Basins Tanks Pumps WASto Thickening Centrifuges RAS Pumps Sodium Hydroxide Alum BackwashWastewater Intermediate Pumps RapidMixand FlocculationTanks Sludgeto Thickening Centrifuges Tertiary Settling Tanks GravityFilters Sodium Hydroxide PlantEffluent tooutfall UVDisinfection Post-Aeration

TN or TP Limits (mg/l) 2006 Performance for Tidal Potomac Plants 0.2 0.18 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.09 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.07 0.05 Arlington Co. Blue Plains Alexandria Piscataway Noman Cole Mooney TP (2006 annual average) TP (permit)

Overall Molar Ratios Plant Dose (mg/l) Me/TP inf (molar) Notes: Blue Plains Fe 8 0.94 Fe; CEPT ASA Fe 6; Al 2 0.77 Fe & Al Piscataway Al 2 0.60 Al; Ca; BPR? Noman Cole Fe 7 0.57 Fe; BPR

Molar Ratios at Final Step Plant Me/OP Notes: Blue Plains 3.3 Simultaneous Precipitation Noman Cole 4.8 Tertiary Clarification

TP or OP (mg P/L) Alexandria - 30-Day Rolling Avg 1 Weekly Avg TP Limit = 0.27 mg/l Monthly Avg TP Limit = 0.18 mg/l 0.1 Median TP (50%) = 0.051 mg/l Median OP (50%) = 0.025 mg/l TP OP 0.01 Nov-04 May-05 Dec-05 Jul-06 Jan-07 Aug-07 Feb-08 19

Alexandria Plant 1 TP OP Ln-Normal Values TP or OP (mg P/L) 0.1 0.01 0.01 0.1 1 10 30 50 70 90 99 99.9 99.99 % of Values Less Than or Equal to Indicated Value 20

TP or OP (mg/l) 3.84 Percentile 50 th Percentile 90 th Percentile 95 th Percentile 99 th Percentile Alexandria Probability Summary 0.18 Daily Data 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.00 TP OP 21

Effluent Policy Requirement Occoquan Reservoir and Dulles Corridor Discharge Limits: COD (mg/l) - 10.0 Suspended solids (mg/l) - 1.0 Nitrogen (mg/l) - 1.0 (as TKN) Phosphorus (mg/l) - 0.10 MBAS (mg/l) - 0.1 Turbidity (NTU) - 0.5 Coliform per 100 ml Sample - less than 2.0

Two Virginia Plants Included Upper Occoquan Sanitation Authority (UOSA) Loudoun County Broad Run WWTP

UOSA Treatment Process (54 MGD)

Broad Run WWTP MBR + GAC Al addition ahead of primary clarifiers (just starting this) - CEPT Simultaneous Precipitation using Al (relatively high dose) Bio-P process in MBR Membrane filtration Zenon hollow fiber GAC (Canham et al, 2009)

Broad Run WWTP MBR + GAC Design 11 MGD Operating now at 3.3 MGD without all units in service (Canham et al, 2009) April 2009 Avg: TP = 0.048 mg/l OP = 0.040 mg/l

HRSD VIP Plant 40 MGD Bio-P using VIP process Operating ~32 MGD Rare Fe Addition 2 mg/l annual TP limit Year-round nitrification No filtration Avg TP = 0.47 mg/l ( 04-08)

VIP Process

Summary All plants have filters Most plants use simultaneous precipitation Half of the plants use tertiary clarifiers Chemical removal in primary is not always possible Plants use iron or aluminum Bio P can reduce chemical dose

Questions?