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

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

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

Startup and Performance of the World s first Large Scale Primary Dissolved Air Floatation Clarifier ABSTRACT KEYWORDS INTRODUCTION

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

General Approaches and Recent Developments in Handling Wet Weather Flows in WWTPs. Julian Sandino PhD, PE, BCEE, IWA Fellow

Full Scale Testing to Demonstrate Anaerobic Selector Effect for Low Strength Wastewater

MEETING COLUMBUS S TREATMENT LIMITS

Matthew Cotton Process Group Manager. PNCWA October 27, 2010

East Coast P Removal Technology Performance Summary

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

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

Meeting SB1 Requirements and TP Removal Fundamentals

The State of Enhanced High- Rate Treatment in Ohio

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

NEWEA 2015 Annual Conference Session 16

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

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

Facilities Plan. Technical Memorandum No. TM-CSO-10 Wet Weather Treatment Facilities

CITY OF OXFORD WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR OF 2014

PLANNING FOR NUTRIENT REMOVAL: WHAT STEPS CAN WE BE TAKING NOW?

HIGH RATE TREATMENT AS PART OF THE SOLUTION FOR WET WEATHER FLOWS JUNE

Phosphorus Removal Treatment Alternatives

ACTIFLO Process. For Wet Weather and Wastewater Treatment WATER TECHNOLOGIES

CITY OF OXFORD WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR OF 2012

WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT MASTER PLAN 6. BUSINESS CASE EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES

Evaluation of Conventional Activated Sludge Compared to Membrane Bioreactors

BIOLOGICAL PHOSPHORUS REMOVAL PLUS CHEMICAL POLISHING FOR LOW LEVEL COMPLIANCE

ACTIFLO Process. For Wet Weather and Wastewater Treatment WATER TECHNOLOGIES

Appendix D JWPCP Background and NDN

Lowering The Total Cost Of Operation

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

Dave Diehl Applied Technologies, Inc.

Dave Diehl Applied Technologies, Inc.

Wet Weather Planning for Wastewater Treatment Plants

231 Mobile Session LIFT Innovative Advanced Primary Treatment for the Utility of the Future

Efficient Design Configurations for Biological Nutrient Removal

Environmental Improvements Associated with Springfield WWTP EHRT. Using the Compressed Media Filter Technology

CSR Process Simulations Can Help Municipalities Meet Stringent Nutrient Removal Requirements

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

Baltimore City Department of Public Works

Watertown Wastewater Facility Plan. August 11, 2015

WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT. Bentonville Wastewater Treatment Plant Facts:

WWETCO FlexFilter and Bio-FlexFilter

CITY OF OXFORD WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR OF 2018

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

UV DISINFECTION OF LOW TRANSMITTANCE PHARMACEUTICAL WASTEWATER

SECTION 8.0 NEWPCC SECOND PRIORITY CONTROL ALTERNATIVES

Use of Biowin for Process Troubleshooting / Design for a Unique Wastewater

Georgia Power Plant McDonough-Atkinson NPDES Permit No. GA Ash Pond Dewatering Plan. Revised May 2018

THE COMAG SYSTEM FOR ENHANCED PRIMARY AND TERTIARY TREATMENT

The following biological nutrient removal processes were evaluated in detail in the 2016 Liquid Processing Facilities Plan:

OPTIMIZATION STUDY OF THE ST. MARY'S WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT

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

2015 Spring Conference

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

Operation and Control of Multiple BNR Processes in One WWTP

SYSTEMATIC APPROACH TO WATER TREATMENT PLANT PROCESS OPTIMIZATION

The NEORSD Demonstration of a Cost-Effective Solution

Inland Empire Utilities Agency Carollo Engineers, Inc. CH2M HILL

By Jack Wendler/Ripon WWTF

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

NEW BIOLOGICAL PHOSPHORUS REMOVAL CONCEPT SUCCESSFULLY APPLIED IN A T-DITCH PROCESS WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT

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

Troubleshooting Activated Sludge Processes. PNCWA - Southeast Idaho Operators Section Pocatello, ID February 11, 2016 Jim Goodley, P.E.

Nutrient Removal Optimization at the Fairview WWTP

Preparing for Nutrient Removal at Your Treatment Plant

American Water College 2010

Treatability Study and Reverse Osmosis Pilot Study of Industrial Wastewater at a Wood Products Mill

20 Years of Nutrient Removal City of Beloit

TWO YEARS OF BIOLOGICAL PHOSPHORUS REMOVAL WITH AN ADVANCED MSBR SYSTEM AT THE SHENZHEN YANTIAN WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT

Altoona Westerly Wastewater Treatment Facility BNR Conversion with Wet Weather Accommodation

TREATMENT OF HIGH SULFITE REFINERY WASTEWATER BY CONVENTIONAL ACTIVATED SLUDGE

Masses at Massillon: IFAS for Industrial Loads and Nutrient Removal

WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT MASTER PLAN 3. EXISTING FACILITIES AND PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

Contents General Information Abbreviations and Acronyms Chapter 1 Wastewater Treatment and the Development of Activated Sludge

USING NUMERICAL SIMULATION SOFTWARE FOR IMPROVING WASTEWATER TREATMENT EFFICIENCY

A Review of the Current State of Knowledge on Phosphorus Removal

Wastewater Treatment. Where does wastewater go when it leaves your house?

DISCUSSION PAPER. 1 Objective. 2 Design Flows and Loads. Capital Regional District Core Area Wastewater Management Program

PRIMARY DRINKING WATER FROM WASTEWATER EFFLUENT: PILOT TEST EXPERIENCE AT THE MIAMI DADE SOUTH DISTRICT WWTP

IMPLEMENTING COMPRESSIBLE MEDIA FILTRATION FOR SPRINGFIELD S WET WEATHER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Georgia Power Plant McManus NPDES Permit No. GA Ash Pond Dewatering Plan. Revised April 2018

Fond du Lac Low Level Phosphorus Efforts & SNRP Overview

City of Portsmouth Wastewater Division. Wastewater Facilities and Programs. City Council Briefing and Public Input Session

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

Assuming 100 gallons per capita per day, and 3 people per REU, design flows for the development are proposed to be:

WASTEWATER 101 Fo r MOWA

Choices to Address Filamentous Growth

THE ROLE OF ACTIVATED SLUDGE SOLIDS IN AN ACTIFLO SYSTEM. Chen-An Lien and Andrew P. Kruzic

Utilization of Dynamic Modeling to Evaluate and Design Secondary Clarifiers for the Muddy Creek WWTP

Anderson Water Pollution Control Plant

Wastewater treatment objecives

Pilot Testing and Evaluation of Three Filtration Technologies for the Eugene / Springfield Wastewater Treatment Plant

Kristin Waller, PE and Ned Talbot, PE WaterJAM September 13, 2017

Presentation Outline

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

Optimizing Nutrient Removal. PNCWA - Southeast Idaho Operators Section Pocatello, ID February 11, 2016 Jim Goodley, P.E.

Chemical and Biological Phosphorus Removal at One of the World s Largest Water Resource Recovery Facilities

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

Transcription:

CSWEA 2013 Comparison of Three Wet Weather Flow Treatment Alternatives to Increase Plant Capacity Don Esping, Denny Parker, Jose Jimenez, Fenghua Yang, Tim Bate, Steve Arant May 16 2013

Milwaukee MSD South Shore Water Reclamation Facility 24 Final Settling Tanks 28 Aeration Basins 16 Primary Settling Tanks Aerated Grit 1 screens

Outline Background/Goals Bench Scale Testing Demonstration Facilities Testing Round 1 Simulated Wet Weather Round 2 Wet Weather Conclusions/Further Testing

Project Background/Goals 2020 Facilities Plan Increase wet weather treatment capacity from 300 mgd to 450 mgd SSO Level of Protection 5 year Ballasted flocculation pilot tested Bio-ballasted flocculation Bench tested Project Goals Demonstrate other non- proprietary processes: Chemically Enhanced Sedimentation (CEPT) Biological Contact Treatment Compressible Media Filtration

Treatment Flow Routing Plant Influent (450 mgd) Primary Settling Tanks (150/300/300 mgd) Compressible Media Filtration (150 mgd) Existing Activated Sludge Process (300/300/300 mgd) Biological Contact Treatment (150 mgd) Disinfection (450 mgd) Flow routing and flow rates Compressible Media Filtration/Biological Contact / Chemically Enhanced Sedimentation

Demonstration Study Effluent Goals Item Units NPDES Permit Operations Contract Demonstration Study Daily Goals Total BOD 5 mg/l 30 a /45 b 15 a 35 Total Suspended Solids mg/l 30 a /45 b 15 a 35 Total Phosphorus mg P/L 1.0 a 1.0 a 1 Ammonia-Nitrogen mg N/L Seasonal 5 a 5 Fecal Coliform c (no./100 ml) 200 100 -- a. Monthly average b. Weekly average c. Geometric mean

Bench-Scale Testing CEPT Cocktail for wet weather and chemical system sizing Biological Contact Treatment Bio-flocculation potential and kinetics ( MLSS and contact time) Simulation of coagulation and/or flocculation processes

180 170 CEPT Bench- Scale Testing Supernatant TSS, mg/l 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 Coagulant Only 40 100 Coagulant and Flocculant 27.5 25 30 24 Demonstration Target 40 mg/l ferric chloride 0.5 mg/l anionic polymer 400 0 Control 40 mg/l FeCl3 12.6 mg/l PAX 40 mg/l FeCl3 & 0.46 mg/l A210P 12.6 mg/l PAX & 0.46 mg/l A210P 40 mg/l FeCl3 & 0.4 mg/l CE9307 12.6 mg/l PAX &0.4 mg/l CE9307 350 342 Supernatant COD, mg/l 300 250 200 150 100 50 215 182 168 166 176 174 160 87 70 78 87 76 84 84 84 62 59 37 34 40 48 42 45 0 Diluted raw influent Control 40 mg/l FeCl3 12.6 mg/l PAX 40 mg/l FeCl3 & 0.46 mg/l A210P 12.6 mg/l PAX & 0.46 mg/l A210P 40 mg/l FeCl3 & 0.4 mg/l CE9307 12.6 mg/l PAX &0.4 mg/l CE9307 COD SCOD FFCOD

Biological Contact Treatment High rate biological process which relies on biological flocculation for colloidal & particulate removal No chemical addition required Effluent meets secondary treatment requirements Contact Tank Combined or Dedicated Clarifiers PE or Raw RAS Short HRT Contact RAS Tank MLSS or RAS WAS WAS

Biological Contact Bench Scale Testing Supernatant TSS, mg/l 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 % Approach to Residual Particulate COD 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 410 820 1025 1230 1540 20% 1740 10% 0% Particulate COD = TCOD - SCOD(0.45 um filter) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Contact Time (min) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 500 mg/l 1,000 mg/l 1,250 mg/l 1,500 mg/l 2,000 mg/l Flocculation Time, minutes Demonstration Target MLSS 1500-2000 mg/l HRT 15-20 minutes

CEPT Demonstration Full Scale ¼ existing primary settling tanks Wet weather SOR: 1500 gal/sf-d 40 mg/l ferric chloride and 0.5 mg/l anionic polymer Primary effluent sampler Influent sampler and ferric chloride feed location CES Primary Clarifiers 9-12 Polymer Feed/ Mixer Location

Biological Contact Treatment Demonstration 4000 gallon aerated plug flow reactor Bench Scale Settling Tests MLSS: 1500-2000 mg/l HRT: 15-20 minutes Bench testing for clarification Plant Influent Head Tank Tank 4 Tank 1 Tank 2 Return Sludge

Compressible Media Filter Demonstration WWETCO Rental Filtration rate 5-7.5 gpm/sf 2011 - Primary effluent and secondary effluent 2012 - Primary influent

Simulated Wet Weather Biological Contact Item Units 10/12/2011 10/17/2011 10/17/2011 Influent stream Blend of primary influent and secondary effluent MLSS mg/l 1653 1882 2069 Influent COD mg/l 190 160 130 TSS mg/l 95 79 66 BOD 5 mg/l 68 64 51 TP mg/l 1.8 1.8 1.3 Reactor 3 Contract time minutes 15 22 15 Effluent TSS mg/l 34 15 7 Reactor 4 Contact time minutes 20 29 20 Effluent COD mg/l 110 51 59 Effluent TSS mg/l 25 19 6 Effluent TP mg/l 1.0 0.53 0.36 Demonstration Target MLSS 1500-2000 mg/l HRT 15-20 minutes

Simulated Wet Weather Compressible Media 120 Total Suspended Solids, mg/l 100 80 60 40 20 60 13 19 8 34 11 58 22 5 7 100 10 26 26 26 23 12 10 15 15 15 12 31 5 27 8 0 5.5 5.5 7.5 7.5 80 RAS 5.5 135 RAS 7.5 11 Fe @ 5.5 21 Fe @ 5.5 31 Fe @ 5.5 8 Fe @ 7.5 8 Fe @ 7.5 8 Fe @ 7.5 10 Fe @ 5 7 Fe @ 7.5 Diluted Primary Effluent Filtered Effluent

Simulated Wet Weather Compressible Media 200 180 160 140 120 190 130 160 150 RAS addition did not improve soluble COD removal Ferric addition not required Test filtration rates of 5-10 gpm/sf Soluble COD, mg/l 100 80 60 40 5150 79 59 71 68 86 82 71 7170 71 65 65 65 57 59 53 55 52 77 71 95 30 20 0 5.5 5.5 7.5 7.5 80 RAS 5.5 135 RAS 7.5 11 Fe @ 5.5 21 Fe @ 5.5 31 Fe @ 5.5 8 Fe @ 7.5 8 Fe @ 7.5 8 Fe @ 7.5 10 Fe @ 5 7 Fe @ 7.5 Diluted Primary Effluent scod Filtered scod

Wet Weather Testing - May 7, 2012 325 300 275 250 225 CES and BC Flow, mgd 200 175 150 125 100 75 50 25 0 5/6/12 0:00 5/6/12 3:00 5/6/12 6:00 5/6/12 9:00 5/6/12 12:00 5/6/12 15:00 5/6/12 18:00 5/6/12 21:00 5/7/12 0:00 5/7/12 3:00 5/7/12 6:00 5/7/12 9:00 5/7/12 12:00 5/7/12 15:00 5/7/12 18:00 5/7/12 21:00 5/8/12 0:00 CMF Operation

Wet Weather Testing - TSS 380 360 340 320 300 280 260 240 220 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 6:00 7:30 9:00 10:30 12:00 13:30 15:00 16:30 18:00 19:30 21:00 22:30 0:00 Total Suspended Solids, mg/l Time BC/CES Influent BC (HRT=16 min ) BC (HRT=22 min) CMF Influent CMF Effluent CES Effluent

Wet Weather Testing BOD 70 Biochemical Oxygen Demand, mg/l 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 6:00 7:30 9:00 10:30 12:00 13:30 15:00 16:30 18:00 19:30 21:00 22:30 0:00 Time BC (HRT=16 min ) BC (HRT=22 min) CMF Influent CMF Effluent CES Effluent

Wet Weather Testing COD 200 Chemical Oxygen Demand, mg/l 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 6:00 7:30 9:00 10:30 12:00 13:30 15:00 16:30 18:00 19:30 21:00 22:30 0:00 Time BC/CES Influent BC (HRT=16 min ) BC (HRT=22 min) CMF Influent CMF Effluent CES Effluent

Wet Weather Testing Soluble COD Soluble Chemical Oxygen Demand, mg/l 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 6:00 7:30 9:00 10:30 12:00 13:30 15:00 16:30 18:00 19:30 21:00 22:30 0:00 Time BC/CES Influent BC (HRT=16 min ) BC (HRT=22 min) CMF Influent CMF Effluent CES Effluent

Wet Weather Testing - Ammonia 9 8 Ammonia Nitrogen, mg N/L 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 6:00 7:30 9:00 10:30 12:00 13:30 15:00 16:30 18:00 19:30 21:00 22:30 0:00 Time BC/CES Influent BC (HRT=16 min ) BC (HRT=22 min) CMF Influent CMF Effluent CES Effluent

Wet Weather Testing Total Phosphorus 3.0 2.5 Total Phosphorus, mg P/L 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 6:00 7:30 9:00 10:30 12:00 13:30 15:00 Time BC/CES Influent BC (HRT=16 min ) BC (HRT=22 min) CMF Influent CMF Effluent CES Effluent 16:30 18:00 19:30 21:00 22:30 0:00

Wet Weather Testing Soluble Phosphorus 0.8 0.7 Soluble Phosphorus, mg P/L 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 6:00 7:30 9:00 10:30 12:00 13:30 15:00 Time BC/CES Influent BC (HRT=16 min ) BC (HRT=22 min) CMF Influent CMF Effluent CES Effluent 16:30 18:00 19:30 21:00 22:30 0:00

Conclusion to date Biological Contact Treatment Achieved lowest effluent concentrations Met all demonstration study effluent goals MLSS: 1600 to 2000 mg/l at 15 minute HRT. Compressible Media Filtration Effluent TSS, BOD 5, TP < effluent goals at 7.5 gpm/sf. CEPT Inconclusive due to equipment malfunctions Ongoing Testing 4-5 Additional wet weather events Biological contact settling characteristics testing Disinfection testing

Thank you