Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My Public Portal
About
RES-CC-2016-30-with Attachment
Resolution #30-2016 A Resolution Adopting the Moab Wastewater Treatment Plan — Facilities Master Plan WHEREAS, the City has determined that it is in the best interest of the community to provide Wastewater Treatment Services as a Regional Plant for Moab City and Spanish Valley; and WHEREAS, the attached Moab Wastewater Treatment Plan Facilities Master Plan was prepared by Bowen Collins & Associates in February 2015; and WHEREAS, the City Council and staff have reviewed said document as well as solicited public input at a Public Hearing before the City Council held on October 25, 2016; and WHEREAS, the City Council has deemed the document to be accurate and necessary to guide the Treatment of Wastewater in Moab City and Spanish Valley; NOW THEREFORE, WE, THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE CITY OF MOAB DO HEREBY ADOPT THE MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLAN — FACILITIES MASTER PLAN IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE FORM PRESENTED TO THIS MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon passage. Passed and adopted by action of the Governing Body of Moab City in open session this 8th day of November, 2016. CITY OF OAB By. Attest: Rachel E. Stenta City Recorder David L. akrison Mayor Resolution #i30-2016 Page 1 of 1 lt'1�1��i(:i i •. Moab WasteWater treatMent Plant Facilities Master Plan (with 2016 Amendment Memorandum) Prepared for:Prepared by: Job No. 130-14-03 February 2015 MOAB WWTP FACILITIES MASTER PLAN February 2015 Consultant Job No. 130-14-03 Prepared for: Prepared by: Bowen Collins & Associates, Inc. CONSULTING ENGINEERS Bowen, Collins & Associates, Inc. 154 East 14000 South Draper, Utah 84020 TABLE OF CONTENTS – MOAB WWTP FACILITIES MASTER PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................... ES-1 CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION .............................................................. 1-1 1.1 BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 OBJECTIVES .............................................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ......................................................................................................................... 1-2 1.4 PREVIOUS REPORT................................................................................................................................ 1-2 CHAPTER 2 – PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION ....................................... 2-1 2.1 PLANNING AREA .................................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 CLIMATE .................................................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.3 TOPOGRAPHY AND GEOLOGY .......................................................................................................... 2-2 2.4 GOVERNING BODY ................................................................................................................................. 2-3 2.5 LAND USE .................................................................................................................................................. 2-4 2.6 CURRENT POPULATION ...................................................................................................................... 2-4 2.7 FUTURE GROWTH ................................................................................................................................. 2-5 CHAPTER 3 – EXISTING FACILITY DESCRIPTION .................................. 3-1 3.1 LOCATION ................................................................................................................................................. 3-1 3.2 EXISTING TREATMENT FACILITIES ............................................................................................... 3-1 3.2.1 Influent Pump Station .............................................................................................................. 3-2 3.2.2 Headworks ................................................................................................................................... 3-2 3.2.3 Primary Treatment ................................................................................................................... 3-2 3.2.4 Trickling Filters .......................................................................................................................... 3-3 3.2.5 Final Clarifiers ............................................................................................................................. 3-3 3.2.6 Disinfection .................................................................................................................................. 3-3 3.2.7 Biosolids Management ............................................................................................................. 3-3 3.2.8 Septage Receiving ...................................................................................................................... 3-4 3.3 FLOOD MANAGEMENT ........................................................................................................................ 3-4 CHAPTER 4 – INFLUENT WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS ................ 4-1 4.1 INFLUENT FLOW .................................................................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 WASTEWATER STRENGTH ................................................................................................................ 4-2 4.3 SEPTAGE RECEIVING ............................................................................................................................ 4-2 2.4 PROJECTED WASTELOAD ................................................................................................................... 4-2 BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MAOB I TABLE OF CONTENTS – MOAB WWTP FACILITIES MASTER PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) Page No. CHAPTER 5 – EVALUATION OF EXISTING PROCESSES ........................ 5-1 5.1 CURRENT DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ...................................................................................... 5-1 5.2 CURRENT DISCHARGE WATER QUALITY .................................................................................... 5-1 5.3 TREATMENT PROCESS DESCRIPTION .......................................................................................... 5-2 5.4 PROCESS PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION ........................................................ 5-2 5.5 OPERATIONAL CHANGES FOR CURRENT REQUIREMENTS ................................................. 5-4 5.6 ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CURRENT REQUIREMENTS ......................... 5-5 CHAPTER 6 – PROJECT NEED .............................................................. 6-1 6.1 PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATION ....................................................................................................... 6-1 6.2 PROJECT NEED ........................................................................................................................................ 6-1 6.2.1 Adoption of Nutrient Regulations ....................................................................................... 6-1 6.2.1 Inability to Meet Existing Discharge Requirements ..................................................... 6-2 6.2.2 Protecting the Plant from 100 yr Flood ........................................................................... 6-2 6.2.3 Aging Facilities ............................................................................................................................ 6-2 6.2.4 Constructability Concerns ...................................................................................................... 6-2 6.3 SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................. 6-3 CHAPTER 7 – DEVELOPMENT AND SCREENING OF ALTERNATIVES .... 7-1 7.1 DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATIVES .............................................................................................. 7-1 7.1.1 General ........................................................................................................................................... 7-1 7.1.2 No Action ....................................................................................................................................... 7-2 7.1.3 Optimization of Plant Operations ....................................................................................... 7-2 7.1.4 Modification and/or Expansion of Existing Treatment Plant................................... 7-2 7.1.5 Construction of New Treatment Plant ............................................................................... 7-3 7.2 REGIONALIZATION ............................................................................................................................... 7-4 7.3 UN-SEWERED AREAS ........................................................................................................................... 7-4 7.4 CONVENTIONAL COLLECTION SYSTEMS ..................................................................................... 7-4 7.5 ALTERNATIVE CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS ....................................................................................... 7-4 7.6 EVALUATION OF SEWER ALIGNMENTS ....................................................................................... 7-4 7.7 WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES ........................................................................... 7-4 7.7.1 Conventional Technologies .................................................................................................... 7-4 7.7.2 Innovative Technologies ......................................................................................................... 7-5 7.7.3 Staged Construction ................................................................................................................. 7-5 7.7.4 Multiple Purpose Projects ...................................................................................................... 7-5 CHAPTER 8 – EVALUATION OF PRINCIPAL ALTERNATIVES ................... 8-1 8.1 ALTERNATIVE EVALUATION ............................................................................................................ 8-1 8.2 BASIC PROCESS INFORMATION ....................................................................................................... 8-1 BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB II TABLE OF CONTENTS – MOAB WWTP FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 8.2.1 Removal of Organic Constitutes and Ammonia ............................................................. 8-1 8.2.2 Removal of Nitrogen Compounds........................................................................................ 8-2 8.2.3 Removal of Phosphorus ......................................................................................................... 8-2 8.2.4 Process Distinctives .................................................................................................................. 8-2 8.3 COMMON FEATURES ............................................................................................................................ 8-3 8.4 EVALUATION OF MONETARY COSTS ............................................................................................. 8-4 8.4.1 Sunk Costs ..................................................................................................................................... 8-4 8.4.2 Allocation of Costs for Multiple Purpose Projects ......................................................... 8-4 8.5 RESERVE CAPACITY .............................................................................................................................. 8-4 8.6 DEMONSTRATION OF FINANCIAL CAPABILITY ........................................................................ 8-4 8.7 CAPITAL FINANCING PLAN................................................................................................................ 8-4 8.8 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION .................................................................................................... 8-5 8.9 EVALUATION OF RELIABILITY ......................................................................................................... 8-5 8.10 EVALUATION OF ENERGY REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................... 8-5 8.11 EVALUATION OF IMPLEMENTABILITY ........................................................................................ 8-5 8.12 EVALUATION OF RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES .............................................................. 8-5 8.13 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES .................................................................................................. 8-5 8.13.1 General ........................................................................................................................................... 8-5 8.13.2 Process Loading .......................................................................................................................... 8-7 8.13.3 Oxidation Ditch ........................................................................................................................... 8-8 8.13.4 Sequencing Batch Reactor ...................................................................................................... 8-9 8.13.5 Economic Comparison of Processes ................................................................................ 8-10 8.13.6 Non-Economic Comparison of Processes ...................................................................... 8-12 CHAPTER 9 – SELECTED AND RECOMMENDED PLAN ......................... 9-1 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A – Acronyms Appendix B – Moab WWTP 208 Plan Maps Appendix C – Moab WWTP UPDES Permit Appendix D – Additional Moab WWTP Operational Data Summary Appendix E – Oxidation Ditch Manufacturer Information Appendix F – Sequencing Batch Reactor manufacturer Information BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB III TABLE OF CONTENTS – MOAB WWTP FACILITIES MASTER PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) LIST OF TABLES No. Title Page No. ES-1 20-Year Wastewater Design Criteria .................................................................................. ES-1 ES-2 Treated Effluent Discharge Criteria .................................................................................... ES-2 ES-3 Estimated Probable Construction Cost .............................................................................. ES-3 ES-4 Non-Economic Comparison Factors ................................................................................... ES-3 2-1 Planning Area Climate ................................................................................................................. 2-2 2-2 Aquifer Characteristics of the Valley Fill .............................................................................. 2-3 2-3 Historic Populations ..................................................................................................................... 2-5 3-1 Historic Septage Volumes .......................................................................................................... 3-4 4-1 Influent Loading and Concentrations .................................................................................... 4-1 4-2 Flow Summary ................................................................................................................................ 4-1 4-3 20-Year Design Characteristics ................................................................................................ 4-3 5-1 Moab WWTP Discharge Requirements ................................................................................. 5-1 5-2 Typical BOD and TSS Removal Rates ..................................................................................... 5-3 5-3 Existing Design Wastewater Loading Information .......................................................... 5-3 6-1 Previous Report Recommendations and Costs .................................................................. 6-1 8-1 Wastewater Treatment Plant Features Common to Both Alternatives ................... 8-3 8-2 Process Elements Unique to the Oxidation Ditch Alternative...................................... 8-6 8-3 Process Elements Unique to the Sequencing Batch Reactor Alternative ................ 8-6 8-4 Process Capacity and Load Requirements........................................................................... 8-7 8-5 Project Effluent Discharge Permit Requirements ............................................................. 8-7 8-6 Oystream Oxidation Ditch Partial Design Information .................................................. 8-8 8-7 AquaSBR Sequencing Batch Reactor Partial Design Information............................... 8-9 8-8 Process Facility Comparison at 1.4 MGD ADF ................................................................. 8-11 8-9 Estimated Treatment Plant Construction Costs at 1.4 MGD ADF ............................ 8-11 8-10 Non Economic Comparison of SBR and Ox-Ditch Systems......................................... 8-12 BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB IV TABLE OF CONTENTS – MOAB WWTP FACILITIES MASTER PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) LIST OF FIGURES Following No. Title Page No. 2-1 Spanish Valley Vicinity Map and Planning Area Map ...................................................... 2-1 2-2 Ground Water Classification Map ........................................................................................... 2-2 2-3 Land Use Map .................................................................................................................................. 2-4 2-4 Population Projections ................................................................................................................ 2-5 3-1 Moab WWTP Location Map ....................................................................................................... 3-1 3-2 Moab WWTP Process Schematic ............................................................................................. 3-1 3-3 Moab WWTP Site Plan ................................................................................................................. 3-1 3-4 100 Year Flood Plain .................................................................................................................... 3-4 4-1 Projected Influent Flow .............................................................................................................. 4-1 5-1 Historical Effluent BOD and TSS .............................................................................................. 5-1 5-2 Overall BOD WWTP BOD Removal % .................................................................................... 5-3 5-3 Trickling Filter and Secondary Clarifier Performance .................................................... 5-2 5-4 Overall BOD Removal Performance Vs Load ...................................................................... 5-2 5-5 Trickling Filter Performance .................................................................................................... 5-2 5-6 Trickling Filter Loading Rate ................................................................................................... 5-2 7-1 Existing and Alternative Treatment Plant Sites ................................................................ 7-3 8-1 Oxidation Ditch Schematic Process Diagram ...................................................................... 8-8 8-2 Preliminary Oxidation Ditch Plant Layout........................................................................... 8-9 8-3 Sequencing Batch Reactor Process Diagram ...................................................................... 8-9 8-2 Preliminary Sequencing Batch Reactor Plant Layout .................................................. 8-10 BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB V MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Moab Wastewater Treatment Plant WWTP was initially constructed in the late 1950’s to provide primary treatment of domestic wastewater for the Moab area. A secondary treatment process was added in 1967. Additional modifications and expansions have been completed over the life of the plant, including the latest expansion that was completed in 1996. The WWTP treats wastewater from the City of Moab (City) and the Grand Water & Sewer Service Agency (GWSSA). The City owns and operates the WWTP and GWSSA contracts to send its collected wastewater for treatment and disposal. Area wastewater treatment and disposal needs have been met by the WWTP for many years. However, population growth and rising tourism visitation have resulted in increased biological loading to the WWTP which have exceeded its capacity to reliably treat influent wastewater to meet State of Utah effluent discharge standards. Upgrades to the biological treatment process are necessary to ensure full compliance with the facility discharge permit. Additionally, portions of the plant are over 55 years old and require renovation or replacement in order to provide continued reliable service. This Facility Plan identifies the best method for the City to reliably and effectively meet the area’s current and future wastewater needs. The 2010 census data population for Moab City is 5,046 residents. The Utah Governor’s Office of Management and Budget estimate for growth for Moab is approximately 1.1% annually for the next 20 years. Utah State University has also released a 30-year plan for aggressive development and growth in student and faculty populations. Wastewater treatment capacity and capability must be increased and improved to meet current and future demands. Current annual average daily wastewater flows to the WWTP are 0.98 MGD. The 20-year daily flow projections based on the above criteria are 1.47 MGD annual average, 1.69 MGD peak month and 3.32 MGD peak hourly. The 50-year daily flow projections are 2.21 MGD annual average, 2.55 peak month and 4.98 peak hourly. The recommended wastewater concentration design parameters are 345 mg/l BOD5 and 325 mg/l TSS which are based in part on current and future water conservation measures, and also accounting for septage delivered to the WWTP from the national parks, man-camps, non-sewered homes and other sources. For 20-year planning and design purposes for the Moab WWTP, the following criteria are recommended. Table ES-1 20-Year Wastewater Design Criteria Parameter Value Average Annual Daily Flow 1.5 MGD Peak Month Flow 1.75 MGD Peak Hour Flow 3.38 MGD BOD5 Peak Month Daily Load 5,035 lbs./day TSS Peak Month Daily Load 4,743 lbs./day Existing facilities and processes at the Moab WWTP are operating at their maximum capacity and capability to meet current treatment demands, and sometimes failing to meet current effluent discharge standards that results in occasional permit violations. Some small opportunity may exist to optimize the operation of the existing facilities to improve treatment performance, and which has BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB ES-1 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN been implemented previously with modest or minimal benefit. These limited changes will not provide for meeting future wastewater treatment needs. However, addition of chemical coagulants to improve the removal of wastewater solids in the plant should provide temporary benefit to help meet permit requirements until the facilities can be upgraded and put into operation. This “enhanced settling” process has been successfully applied at many WWTP locations in the United States and in Utah, and is considered to be a proven technology. Addition of chemicals for this purpose can be somewhat costly though, so it is only recommended as a stop gap measure to be terminated when new capacity is available. It may be possible to upgrade, expand and renew portions of the existing facilities at the Moab WWTP to meet future increased flow and load treatment and disposal requirements as recommended in a previous study. This approach relies on the continued operation of some aged and deteriorated facilities that will not have the same reliability and future service life as new construction. In addition, previous studies have estimated cost for these upgrades to be over $7M. Furthermore, the upgraded plant still would not be able to meet proposed nutrient removal standards for nitrogen and phosphorous which would require additional investment and still rely on aged plant facilities. Implementing these additions and changes at the current plant site is also expected to face challenges associated with space limitations, unknown buried facilities and utilities and maintaining the existing WWTP in full operation during the construction period. Instead of upgrading the existing plant, it is recommended that a new treatment facility be constructed on a parcel of land directly south of and adjacent to the existing WWTP. The new facility can be constructed without the encumbrances and concerns listed above, and can be designed to meet the necessary current and future capacity and performance requirements, including nutrient removals. The new plant would employ an “activated sludge” process to meet the increased capacity and higher performance standards and provide a higher quality effluent that can either be discharged directly to the Colorado River or used in whole or in part to enhance the nearby Nature Conservancy wetlands area. (The existing WWTP relies on a “fixed film” process that is not able to reduce nitrogen and phosphorous concentrations to sufficiently low levels.) The effluent discharge parameters in Table ES-2 are used for selection, sizing and design of the treatment facility. The anticipated removal performance for BOD5 and TSS substantially exceeds expected permit requirements. Table ES-2 Treated Effluent Discharge Criteria Parameter Permit Requirement Design Value BOD5 25 mg/l 10 mg/l TSS 25 mg/l 10 mg/l Total Phosphorous 1 mg/l 1 mg/l Total Nitrogen 10 mg/l 10 mg/l Two processes judged to be appropriate for Moab are the oxidation ditch (Oxditch) process and the Sequencing Batch Reactor (SBR), both employing variations of activated sludge. Each system provides the wastewater treatment performance and capacity needed by the City, and both are reliable choices for this application. These alternatives were evaluated for the new Moab treatment facility, and both economic and non-economic considerations regarding each selection are summarized below. More detailed information is found in the body of this report. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB ES-2 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN The estimated probable construction cost for each process is shown below. The figures do not include contingencies, engineering or legal fees, land and/or easement acquisitions or administrative and financing costs. The SBR system is shown to be approximately 10% less costly than the Oxditch system. Table ES-3 Estimated Probable Construction Cost System or Process Amount Oxidation Ditch $8.993M Sequencing Batch Reactor $8.134 M Non-economic criteria considered for this selection are given in Table ES-4. The Ox-Ditch process if favored by this evaluation, primarily due to its wide use and familiarity in Utah where many such facilities have been successfully employed for over 30 years. Only one SBR system is in operation in Utah, and that having been installed only recently. However, across the US, hundreds or more SBR facilities have been in use for similar periods. They are typically favored in cases where land availability is more limited or costly and a smaller overall footprint for the facility is needed. In Utah and the western US, these issues have not played a similarly large role in treatment plant site use and selection. Table ES-4 Non-Economic Comparison Factors Factor Oxidation Ditch SBR Noise 10 9 Traffic 10 10 Odor 10 10 Appearance 10 10 Environmental 10 10 Familiarity and Wide Use in Utah 10 5 Simplicity and East of Operation 10 9 Maintenance and Repair/Replacement Requirements 10 9 Implementability 10 10 Total Points 90 82 The SBR process is favored in order to help achieve a lower construction cost compared to the Oxditch process. The estimated power and operating cost for the SBR system is also somewhat less than the Oxditch process, resulting in a net present worth savings of $169,000 over 20 years. However, given that the estimated costs lie within estimating variability, the City may reasonably elect to consider or favor the Oxditch process based on non-economic preferences. Site visits to comparable plants may be conducted during the preliminary engineering phase of the project in order to gain more information and understanding of the facilities and better enable this selection to be made. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB ES-3 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION 1.1 BACKGROUND The Moab Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) treats wastewater flow from the City of Moab (City) and the Grand Water & Sewer Service Agency (GWSSA). The City of Moab owns and operates the WWTP. GWSSA contracts with the City to send its collected wastewater to the WWTP for treatment and disposal. The Moab WWTP was initially constructed in the late 1950’s to provide primary treatment of wastewater for the Moab area. A secondary treatment process was added in 1967. Additional modifications and expansions have been completed over the life of the plant. The latest expansion was completed in 1996, which included a new headworks facility, additional primary and secondary clarifiers, new septage receiving station and several other improvements. The WWTP has adequately meet the City’s wastewater treatment needs for many years. However, population growth and increased tourism in Moab area have resulted in increased biological loading to the WWTP. The increased loading exceeds the plant’s capacity to effectively treat influent wastewater to continuously meet the standards required by the State of Utah. Upgrades to the biological treatment process are necessary to ensure full compliance with her requirements of the facility’s discharge permit. Additionally, portions of the plant are over 60 years old and require renovation or replacement in order for the facility to provide continued reliable service. The purpose of this Facility Plan is to identify the best method for the City to reliably and effectively meet the City’s current and future wastewater needs. 1.2 OBJECTIVES Moab City has contracted with Bowen Collins & Associated (BC&A) to assist in the evaluation and master planning of the Moab WWTP. The objectives of this Wastewater Treatment Facility Plan are to: • Evaluate improvements necessary for the Moab WWTP to meet current and future water quality discharge requirements. • Develop a plan for the City to reliability and effectively meet the City’s current and future wastewater needs due to increase in population and tourism. • Develop preliminary cost estimates for recommended alternatives. • Provide an implementation plan. • Provide documentation necessary to the begin the approval and funding process. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 1-1 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 1.3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The following individuals are recognized for their cooperation and assisting in preparing this report: • Donna Metzler – Moab City Manager • Jeff Foster – Moab City Public Works Director • Greg Fosse – Moab WWTP Operator • Mark Sovine – GWSSA General Manager 1.4 PREVIOUS REPORT It should be noted that a draft Wastewater Facilities Master Plan for the Moab WWTP dated June 2013 was prepared by MWH Americas. This report was submitted and reviewed by the City but was never officially adopted. Several conditions have changed since the development of that report, which has resulted in the need for further evaluation and consideration of additional alternatives. The City of Moab has requested that BC&A utilize background and historical data from that report when applicable. Therefore, some of the information, including text and historical data from that report, has been utilized herein with the permission of the City of Moab. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 1-2 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 2 - PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION 2.1 PLANNING AREA The Moab WWTP currently treats wastewater flow from the City of Moab (City) and the Grand Water & Sewer Service Agency (GWSSA). The City of Moab and GWSSA are located within the Spanish Valley in southeastern Utah as shown in Figure 2-1. Moab City owns and operates the WWTP. GWSSA contracts with the City to send its collected wastewater to the WWTP for treatment and disposal. Section 208 of the Federal Clean Water Act required the establishment of Area Wide Water Quality Management Plans. These Water Quality Management Plans, often referred to as “208 Plans”, delineated the service areas for regional wastewater treatment plants. The service area identified in the original 208 Plan for the Moab WWTP is generally described as the area within the Spanish Valley with the Colorado River as the north boundary and the Grand County line being the south boundary. Appendix B includes the service area maps from the original 208 Plan. The original service area generally corresponds with the areas within the City of Moab and GWSSA service boundary’s. It should be noted that the portion of the Spanish Valley that is located in the northern part of San Juan County has minimal development and is currently un-sewered. However, it is expected that this area of Spanish Valley within San Juan County could experience future growth, and its expected wastewater flows from this area would reasonably be treated at the Moab WWTP. Thus, for the purpose of this planning study, it is estimated that the service area for the Moab WWTP will include the area within Moab and GWSSA service boundaries, along with the area of the Spanish Valley in northern San Juan County. Figure 2-1 summaries the service area of the Moab WWTP used in this planning study. It should also be noted that the planning area is located in the middle of the Canyonlands area of Utah and as a result received a large number of tourists and vacationers during the spring, summer and fall months. 2.2 CLIMATE The climate of the planning area is characterized by hot, dry summers and cold winters. The annual average precipitation as recorded at Moab is 7.94 inches. July and January are generally the driest months of the year, with most precipitation falling in October. The mean annual temperature for the Moab area is 56°, with the highest monthly mean occurring in July at 81°. The lowest monthly mean is 30°, which occurs in January. The frost free period for the Planning Area is about 184 days. The average monthly temperature and precipitation data are summarized on Table 2-1. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 2-1 SERVICE AREA MOAB CITY LIMITS GWSSA SERVICE AREA NORTH SAN JUANCOUNTY DEVELOPMENT GR AND COUNTY SAN JUAN COUNTY NORTH SAN JUANCOUNTY DE VELO PME NT 0 3,0 00 6,0 00 Feet P:\Moab City\WWTP\GIS\Projects\2-1_Spanish Valley Vic inity-Planning Area M ap.mx d cmoultrie 2/20/2015 2-1 SPAN ISH VALLEY VICINITYAND PLANNING AREA M AP CITY OF MOA BNORTH FIGURE NO. SCALE:NORTH: NEVADA COLOR ADO WYOMING IDAHO ARIZONA NEW MEXICO UTAH SAN JUAN GRAND MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Table 2-1 Planning Area Climate Average Daytime/Nighttime Monthly Temperatures (Fahrenheit) Precipitation (inches) JAN 49.6/18.0 .53 FEB 50.4/25.5 .62 MAR 60.2/34.2 .71 APR 72.5/41.9 .79 MAY 82.4/50.1 .57 JUNE 92.0/57.5 .45 JULY 99.0/64.1 .49 AUG 95.3/62.8 .87 SEPT 87.1/52.8 .83 OCT 73.8/40.8 1.16 NOV 56.0/30.6 .60 DEC 45.1/21.4 .64 2.3 TOPOGRAPHY AND GEOLOGY The Spanish Valley of Southeastern Utah resembles a structural trough, but its origin and configuration are more complex. The Valley is approximately 13 miles long and 1 ½ miles wide and lies along a northwesterly axis. The lowest elevation of approximately 3950 feet is found at the Colorado River in the extreme northwestern portion of the Valley. The Valley is bound on the east by the La Sal Mountains which have a maximum elevation of 12,646 feet at Mount Mellenthin. The Valley is bounded on the west side by dioritic intrusive stocks of tertiary age and are rimmed by hogsacks of sandstone formations. A more complete discussion on the geology of the surrounding area is described by Baker (1933), Hunt (1958), and Richmond (1962). Spanish Valley itself is made up of quaternary deposits ranging in thickness from 0 to 360 feet. The average thickness of the alluvial and eolian deposits in Spanish Valley is estimated to be 70 feet. This is the principal groundwater source for many of the irrigation and smaller domestic wells in Spanish Valley. Besides the unconsolidated deposits of the Valley floor the other main aquifer supplying domestic water is the Navajo sandstone aquifer. The City of Moab and the Grand Water & Sewer Service Agency’s wells both extract water largely from the Navajo sandstone as well as the quaternary deposits of the Valley. The alluvial fill in Spanish Valley can be described as a gravelly sand with a high hydraulic conductivity. From driller’s logs the composition of the Valley fill is estimated as follows: 7 percent clay, 4 percent silt, 50 percent sand, 23 percent fine to medium gravel, and 16 percent course gravel. A study of 18 wells in Spanish Valley found the average hydraulic conductivity was 80 ft/day as shown in Table 2-2 (Sumsion, 1971). From data compiled for the entire valley the average hydraulic conductivity was calculated to be approximately 140 ft/day. The septic tanks of Spanish Valley drain into this valley fill aquifer. Existing groundwater quality classifications for the Spanish Valley is shown in Figure 2-2. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 2-2 0 3,5 00 7,0 00 Feet P:\Moab City\WWTP\GIS\Projects\2-2_Ground Water Clas sification.mxd cmoultrie 12/31/2014 2-2 GROUNDWATERCLASSIFICATION M AP CITY OF MOA BNORTH FIGURE NO. SCALE:NORTH: MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Table 2-2 Aquifer Characteristics of the Valley Fill (Sumsion, 1971) Well number Specific capacity (gpm/ft of drawdown) Transmissivity (cubic ft per day per ft) Saturated thickness (ft) Hydraulic conductivity (cubic ft per day per square ft) (D-25-21) 36cda-l 41 8,000 225 36 (D-26-22) 6cbb-l 36 7,000 140 49 6cbb-2 20 3,700 125 29 7bac-l 25 4,300 125 35 8cba-l 20 3,700 40 94 8dcb-l 30 5,700 50 115 16cdd-l 36 7,000 65 107 17aac-l 48 8,700 50 174 17aad-l 18 3,100 70 44 17ada-2 10 1,600 50 32 17cab-l 20 3,700 50 75 20acd-l 20 3,700 30 124 21bdd-l 20 3,600 50 72 22cbb-l 32 5,700 75 76 22cbd-l 60 11,600 100 116 22dcb-l 90 13,900 105 132 35abd-l 30 4,700 120 39 35bdd-2 30 5,700 160 36 Averages (rounded) 30 6,000 90 80 2.4 GOVERNING BODY The City of Moab has the responsibility for collection and treatment of its wastewater. The governing body of the City is made up of a Mayor and five City Council members. The City employs a City Manager who supervises staff and implements policy as directed by the Council. The Public Works Director oversees both water and wastewater reports to the City Manager and also supervises the Water and Sewer Superintendent, who in turn supervises the Wastewater BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 2-3 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Treatment Plant Operator and the Water and Sewer Service Workers. The City collects and levies service fees for wastewater collection and establishes use ordinances. Moab City also treats sewage from the GWSSA in accordance with a contract between the two agencies. 2.5 LAND USE Land-use in Grand County is dictated by a number of limiting factors. There are a total of 2,362,880 acres within Grand County. 79.7% of the land area is owned by the Federal Government and an additional 15.69% is owned by the State of Utah. Only 4.6% is private land and 0.01% is owned by the cities and county. The existing land usage for Moab and Spanish Valley are shown in Figure 2-3. Additional developable property is present in the northern San Juan County portion of Spanish Valley. There are currently no development plans that have been formalized by the San Juan County Commission. However, the State of Utah Institutional Trustlands Administration (SITLA) has developed conceptual ideas for development that would include several thousand residences at buildout, which is anticipated to occur over a 100 year period. Currently, SITLA projects that over the next 20 years, development of some residential lots will occur, with the occupancy of these residents approaching 1/3 of the growth of Grand County. Therefore, in order to be conservative, we would add 1/3 to any growth projection for Grand County to estimate the future service population for the facility. Flow anticipated for the Utah State University Moab Campus will also be added to the anticipated flow for the facility. 2.6 CURRENT POPULATION Grand County has a total population of approximately 9,225 as determined in the 2010 Census. Moab, the county seat, is the largest city in the area with a population of about 5,046. The City of Moab, therefore, makes up approximately 55% of the population of Grand County. The only other community in Grand County included in information provided by the US Bureau of Census is Castle Valley, which currently has a population of about 390 residents, as estimated in 2009, but for which no data has been provided in the 2010 Census. The population history for Grand County and Moab is shown in Table 2-3. The population history of Moab and surrounding areas has experienced sporadic growth over the years. From 1950 to 1960 the population of Grand County more than tripled as a result of uranium mining and processing activity in the area. The boom of activity subsided and in 1965 the population began a decline which lasted until 1973. In the 1974 interest was renewed in energy and other natural resources found in the area; however, in the 1980s the uranium industry again declined, leading to a major population decline which did not stop until 1990. Population growth from 1990 through 2010 has largely been the result of tourism and recreational industries. However, this growth has been much slower and more consistent than previous cycles, with small annual population increases, and some decreases in individual years. Tourism and recreational traffic is seasonal, which causes considerable variability in the overall population of the town throughout the year, with peak visitation occurring during the weeks surrounding the Easter Holiday. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 2-4 SERVICE AREA NORTH SAN JUANCOUNTY DEVE LOPMENT GR AND COUNTY SAN JUAN COUNTY 0 3,0 00 6,0 00 Feet P:\Moab City\WWTP\GIS\Projects\2-3_Land U se Map.mxd cmoultr ie 2/20/2015 2-3 LAND USE MAPCITY OF MOA BNORTH FIGURE NO. SCALE:NORTH: NEVADA COLOR ADO WYOMING IDAHO ARIZONA NEW MEXICO UTAH SAN JUAN GRAND L E G E N D City Zoning R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 MH /RV-1 RA-1 A-2 C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 C-5 I-1 RC SAR FC-1 County County Zoning GBHC LILIVES TOC K BNDRYLLR MF RMFR-8 NCRCRG RRSLRSLR -1 SLR -2SPA/LI MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Table 2-3 Historical Populations Year Grand County Population City of Moab Population Moab % of County Moab Annual Growth % 1890 541 -- 1900 1149 376 33% -- 1910 1595 586 37% -- 1920 1808 856 47% -- 1930 1813 863 48% -- 1940 2070 1,084 52% -- 1950 1903 1,274 67% -- 1960 6345 4,682 74% -- 1970 6688 4,793 72% -- 1980 8241 5,333 65% -- 1990 6620 3,971 60% -- 2000 8485 4,779 56% -- 2001 8,423 4,821 57% 0.88% 2002 8,468 4,904 58% 1.72% 2003 8,464 4,921 58% 0.35% 2004 8,611 4,893 57% -0.57% 2005 8,826 4,958 56% 1.33% 2006 9,024 5,018 56% 1.21% 2007 9,125 5,085 56% 1.34% 2008 9,326 5,121 55% 0.71% 2009 9,493 5,148 54% 0.53% 2010 9,225 5,046 55% -1.98% 2.7 FUTURE GROWTH The State of Utah Governor’s Office of Management and Budget (GOMB) estimates the average growth rate for the Grand County, including Moab and the surrounding areas at 1.1% annually for the next 20 years, and then reducing to less than 1.0% annual growth through the following 30 years. Figure 2-4 provides a summary of the historical and estimated future populations for Grand County and Moab City based upon GOMB estimates. It should be noted that GWSSA expects higher growth rates than predicted by the GOMB. For planning purposes, a 2.0% growth rate was used for the GWSSA service area. Additionally, there are approximately 200 residences in northern San Juan County without sewer collection facilities, and there is potential that this area could be serviced by the Moab WWTP. These residences and related future growth in the northern San Juan County area will be included in the planning of the Moab WWTP. For planning purposes, the growth rate for the northern San Juan County area is estimated at 2.0% annual growth. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 2-5 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 1950 1970 1990 2010 2030 2050 2070 Figure 2-4 Population Projections Moab City Grand County Future population projections are based on Utah GOPB data. Average future growth rate is approximately 1.1% for Moab City and Grand County. MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN It should also be noted that the Utah State University has recently released a 30-year master plan that outlines an aggressive development plan for the Moab Campus. This plan includes significant increases in student population, with students coming from both inside and outside the existing Grand County population. The plan also includes residential facilities at the Campus. The potential sewer impact from this development will be included in future planning. Chapter 4 further discussed the population projections for the areas within the Moab WWTP service area and the associated wastewater flow. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 2-3 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 3 - EXISTING FACILITY DESCRIPTION 3.1 LOCATION The Moab WWTP is located at 1070 West 400 North, Moab Utah. Figure 3-1 shows the location of the treatment plant. Treated effluent is discharged to the Colorado River through a 2,000 foot long concrete pipe. The permitted discharge location is at latitude 38°34’40” and longitude 10°34’37”. Appendix C includes a copy of the Utah Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (UPDES) permit for the Moab WWTP. 3.2 EXISTING TREATMENT FACILITIES The Moab WWTP was initially constructed in the late 1950’s to provide primary treatment of wastewater. A secondary treatment process was added in 1967. Additional modifications and expansions have been completed over the life of the plant. The latest expansion was completed in 1996, which included a new headworks facility, additional primary and secondary clarifiers, new septage receiving station, and several other improvements. Figure 3-2 provides a schematic diagram of the existing treatment process. Figure 3-3 provides a site plant of the WWTP site. Figure 3-2 Moab WWTP Process Schematic BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 3-1 MOAB CITY LIMITS PLANT LOCATION1070 W 40 0 NMOAB, UT 0 1,5 00 3,0 00 Feet P:\Moab City\WWTP\GIS\Projects\3-1_M oab WWTP Location Map.m xd cmoultrie 12/31/2014 3-1 MOAB WWTPLOCATION M AP CITY OF MOA BNORTH FIGURE NO. SCALE:NORTH: D D D D D D D D DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD D D D D D D D D 9 9 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 131212 14 15 10 11 11 18 7 6 6 4 3 2 16 1 17 5 8 19 0 20 40 Feet P:\Moab City\WWTP\GIS\Projects\3-3_WWTP_Site_Plan.mxd c moultrie 12/17/2014 3-3 MOAB WWTP SITE PL ANCITY OF MOA BNORTH1INFLUENT PUMP STATION 2 INFLUENT SCREENS 3 HEADWORKS BUILDING 4 GRIT REMOV AL SYSTEM 5 FLOW CONTROL STRUCTURE 6 PRIMARY CLARIFIER 7 TRICKLING FILTER FEED PUMP STATION 8 FLOW CONTROL STRUCTURE 9 TRICKLING FILTER 10 FLOW CONTROL STRUCTURE 11 SECONDARY CLARIFIER 12 DIGESTER 13 SLUDGE DRYING BED 14 DIGESTER CONTROL BUILDING 15 SLUDGE PUMP STATION 16 EMERGENCY GENERATOR SYSTEM 17 SEPTAGE RECEIVING STATION 18 EMERGENCY EFFLUENT PUMP STATION 19 CHLORINE DISINFECTION FACILITIES INDEX FIGURE NO. SCALE:NORTH: MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 3.2.1 INFLUENT PUMP STATION All flow to the Moab WWTP enters the facility through a 24-inch diameter gravity sewer that feeds the influent pump station. The influent pump station includes two screw pumps, with room for a third screw pump. The capacity of each screw pump is approximately 2,150 gpm, which means the influent pump station has a total capacity of 3.1 MGD peak flow with a single pump operating. This influent pump station capacity is adequate for current flows. Future flows will require the addition of another screw pump. The total capacity of the influent pump station with the addition of third screw pump of equal capacity and configuration to the existing screw pumps is 4,300 gpm, or 6.2 MGD at peak flow with two pumps running and one reserved for redundancy. 3.2.2 HEADWORKS The Moab WWTP headworks features a ¾-inch automatically raked bar screen followed by a ½-inch manual bar screen, comminutor, and induced vortex grit chamber. The screens were designed for a capacity of 4.5 MGD, while the grit system was designed for a capacity of 4.2 MGD. The screening design configuration results in challenges for the operators, since the manual screen’s smaller aperture size in relation to the automatic screen results in a frequent need for manual raking. Additionally, the outdoor installation of all headworks equipment results in ice dams building up on the automatic screen in freezing weather, which results in either collection of water with the screenings or alarm conditions in the screen as it reaches a high head condition due to plugging. Grit collection is generally acceptable. Screenings and grit handling equipment is located in an indoor facility. Screenings are compacted and dried using a screw compactor, while grit is dewatered using a screw classifier. Collected solids are disposed of in the local municipal landfill. The current headworks configuration does not meet current State of Utah design guidelines. Current guidelines for a plant the size of Moab’s call for mechanically cleaned screens to have a bar spacing of less than 5/8 of an inch, a minimum of two screens, and inclusion of two grit systems. Additionally, freeze protection is required for screens installed outside. 3.2.3 PRIMARY TREATMENT Primary treatment is achieved through the use of two conventional 40-foot diameter circular clarifiers. Each clarifier has approximately 1,256 square feet of surface area. Clarifier No. 1 was part of the original primary treatment plant and has a side water depth of 7-feet, while Clarifier No. 2 was constructed in 1996 and has a side water depot of 8-feet. Section R317 of the Utah State Code recommends a loading rate of clarifiers of 1,000 gallons per day per square foot. Following this guideline each clarifier would have a rated flow of 1.26 MGD. Both clarifiers are performing very well, with better than expected settling results. Using the State’s standard sizing rate of 1,000 gallons per day per square foot, the clarifier efficiency would be approximately 31.5% at the 1.26 MGD rating above. Using the actual loading rates, predicted performance is about 37.8% (using an average flow of 0.93 MGD for the plant, split between two clarifiers for a flow per clarifier of 0.465 MGD and loading rate of 370 gpd per square foot). Performance data collected for the clarifiers since 2008 has shown an average removal efficiency exceeding the predicted performance. Chapter 5 provides further discussion on the performance of the existing primary clarifiers. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 3-2 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 3.2.4 TRICKLING FILTERS Secondary treatment at the wastewater treatment plant is provided by two single stage trickling filters. The trickling filters are both rock media filters, with motorized distributor mechanisms that were provided in the 1996 plant expansion project. Trickling filter number 1 is 72-feet diameter, while trickling filter number 2 is 80-feet diameter and both filters have a 7-foot media depth. The trickling filters are biologically overloaded under virtually all conditions, with biological loads exceeding design conditions nearly every week of the year. This is particularly an issue during the cold winter months when the facility receives its lowest flows. This results in low efficiency of removal and poor BOD removal during these times. When the hydraulic loads are increased, the removal efficiency improves, which typically corresponds to the summer months, when the temperature is warmer. 3.2.5 FINAL CLARIFIERS Final clarification is achieved through the use of two 40-foot diameter plow-type raked clarifiers. The small size of the final clarifiers has resulted in some difficulty at times in removing TSS from the wastewater flow. Initially, the clarification area was to be supplemented by means of tube settlers, but this type of modification has not proven to be effective for final clarification at the site and is no longer practiced or proposed for implementation. These final clarifiers show poor and inconsistent removal efficiency. BOD removal is typically around 40%, while TSS removal is about 70%. 3.2.6 DISINFECTION Wastewater disinfection is accomplished by the addition of gaseous chlorine to the final clarifiers. Contact time is limited to the retention time available in the final clarifiers. Due to the poor secondary clarifier performance, it is likely that some short circuiting is occurring within the clarifiers, resulting in low contact times within the clarifiers. Additionally, the State of Utah has recommended for many years that the plant separate the chlorine contact from the clarifiers. 3.2.7 BIOSOLIDS MANAGEMENT Biosolids management at the facility consists of volume reduction by anaerobic digestion, solar drying, and ultimate disposal by landfilling at the Grand County Landfill. No beneficial use has been incorporated into the biosolids management programs for the facility, as the volume of solids is relatively minimal and the additional costs and regulatory burden have not been found justifiable. Digester gas is consumed by a digester gas boiler, which is used to heat the anaerobic digester. Historically, the biggest challenge to biosolids management efforts at the facility was the management of solids during drying. The volume of the solids drying beds at the facility is inadequate at times. While solids dry very fast during hot, dry summers, if rainfall is higher than normal, it is very difficult to achieve a level of dryness that is acceptable to the landfill. The winter months provided limited solar dewatering capacity. It should be noted that Moab recently purchased a temporary mechanical dewatering unit. The dewatering unit includes a 1.0 meter belt filter press, solids feed pump, polymer feed, and other appurtenances to mechanically dewater biolsolids. The mechanical unit has allowed the Moab WWTP to better manage the biosolids and will allow dewatering to continue through the winter months. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 3-3 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 3.2.8 SEPTAGE RECEIVING The Moab WWTP also serves as the only septage receiving facility in the area. Septage is received from homes not connected to the sewer system along with recreational facilities operated by vendors for the National Park Service. The total monthly volume of septage received at the Moab WWTP for the years 2005 through 2009 in the following table. Table 3-1 Historical Septage Receipt Volumes (Gallons) 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 January 6,017 10,602 10,036 20,039 2,746 February 37,693 2,778 21,864 29,748 35,117 March 12,643 26,126 36,761 43,668 52,986 April 34,904 44,225 29,916 110,882 53,444 May 39,830 45,031 53,099 63,978 57,379 June 52,861 63,250 46,090 67,098 28,099 July 30,047 55,696 32,939 41,617 40,029 August 25,779 20,294 59,412 38,564 38,525 September 51,162 31,434 37,205 38,506 45,233 October 28,192 32,776 46,486 47,119 38,688 November 49,248 40,189 35,692 55,947 48,826 December 63,58 17,013 42,242 14,405 N/A TOTALS 374,734 389,414 451,742 571,571 441,072 The septage volume received by the Moab WWTP has increased in recent years and is now estimated at approximately 1.0 million gallons per years. This increase is associated with in the increase in tourism and visitors to the Canyonlands area. The Moab WWTP is the only septage receiving facility in the area. Septage is received from homes that are not connected to the sewer system along with recreation facilities operated by vendors for the National Park Service. Driller man-camps also deliver septage to the facility. Septage is typically very high strength with BOD5 and TSS concentrations ranging from 10-50 times of typical domestic wastewater and can add significant load to the WWTP. 3.3 FLOOD MANAGEMENT The Moab WWTP has been constructed within the 100-year flood plain. Figure 3-4 shows the location of the 100 flood plain in relation to the plant site. Some minimal berming of the site has been constructed. The 1996 Improvements Project included the recommendation of berming the entire site, however these berming improvements were never fully incorporated. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 3-4 PROPOSE D TREATME NT PLANT SITE EXISTIN G TREATMENT PLANT MOAB CITY LIMITS FLOOD ZON E BOUNDA RY FLOODWAY BOUNDARY 0 250 500 Feet P:\Moab City\WWTP\GIS\Projects\3-4_100-YR Floodplain.mxd cmoultrie 12/18/2014 3-4 100-YR FL OODPL AINCITY OF MOA BNORTH FIGURE NO. SCALE:NORTH: MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Additionally, revision of the 100-year flood plain information indicates that the flood stage is approximately 3 feet higher than the 1996 design accounted for. That means the plant is currently unprepared for a 100-year flood event. The original plan for flood management was to berm the site and to pump the effluent from the site. Flood stage is approximately 5-8 feet higher than the wastewater facility at the fenceline. Additionally, the top of wall elevation for all structures lies below the flood plain, with the exception of the trickling filters and the anaerobic digesters. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 3-5 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 4 - INFLUENT WASTEWATER CHARACTERISTICS Wastewater influent to a WWTP is characterized by measurements and analytical criteria. These criteria include flow (volume of wastewater) and strength (concentration of contaminates in the in wastewater). Wastewater strength can be quantified by the concentration of BOD5 and TSS. Combined, the flow and strength values determine the total wasteload delivered to the treatment plant. Changes in either the flow or strength can will change the overall wasteload and resulting treatment requirements. Therefore, it is important to accurately evaluate historical data in determining this information. This chapter briefly summarizes the historical and projected wastewater flow and strengths at the Moab WWTP. 4.1 INFLUENT FLOW The average annual wastewater flow to the Moab WWTP in 2014 was 0.98 million gallons per day (MGD). Flows to the Moab WWTP have seen only modest increases over the last 12 years. Table 4-1 summarizes the average annual flows from 2002-2013. The average annual increase has been less than 0.3%, which is significantly less than the 0.6% annual population growth rate for the same period. It is estimated that the lower growth rate in the influent flow is due to implementation of water conservation measures. Much of the new construction within the City has incorporated flow reducing water fixtures and other water saving measures, resulting in less water per capita being sent to the sewer system. It is believed that the impact of water conservation measures experienced at the Moab WWTP has largely already occurred. Therefore, it is recommended that the current per capita flow be used in predicting future flows to the WWTP. Future influent flow is correlated to the future population projections of Moab and the surrounding areas. As discussed in previous chapters, the GOBM estimates population in the Moab area to grow at a rate of 1.1% annually for the 20-year planning period, resulting in a similar increase in flow to the WWTP. Therefore, it is recommended that this same annual increase in influent flow be used for the area within Moab City boundary. GWSSA meters wastewater flows prior to entering the Moab City collection system. In 2014, GWSSA had an average annual flow of 0.27 mgd, approximately 27.6% of the total flow to the Moab WWTP. As discussed previously, an annual population growth rate of 2.0% was used for the GWSSA, thus annual wastewater flows are projected to increase at the same annual rate. Additionally, it is recommended that flows be allocated for the development of the USU Moab Campus. The previously submitted Draft Facilities Master Plan, as prepared by MWH, estimates the wastewater flow contribution from the USU Campus for the 20-year planning period to be approximately 144,500 gpd. The previous submitted Draft Facilities Master Plan also estimated the average annual flow from USU Campus at the 30-year build-out being 214,8000 gpd. There are approximately 200 residences in the northern portion of San Juan County on the Spanish Valley that are currently on septic tanks. There is potential that these residences, and future growth in this area could be serviced by the Moab WWTP. It is expected that this area would experience similar growth rates as GWSSA with an annual growth rate of 2.0%. It is also expected that this area would discharge similar flow and volumes as the residences within GWSSA. In 2014, GWSSA had an annual average flow of 0.27 mgd, with approximately 1,806 connections, resulting in an average flow BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 4-1 Table 4‐1 Moab WRF Influent Concentrations and Loading Average Annual Flow Annual Increase BOD Annual Increase TSS Annual Increase Daily BOD Load Annual Increase Daily TSS Load Annual Increase (mgd) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) 2002 0.95 235.3 203.8 1869.0 1619 2003 0.90 ‐6% 248.3 6% 205.3 1% 1858.0 ‐1% 1536 ‐5% 2004 0.88 ‐1% 228.4 ‐8% 230.0 12% 1685.0 ‐9% 1697 10% 2005 0.90 2% 224.2 ‐2% 247.1 7% 1683.0 0% 1855 9% 2006 0.91 2% 233.3 4% 257.7 4% 1780.0 6% 1966 6% 2007 0.95 4% 257.0 10% 240.1 ‐7% 2032.0 14% 1899 ‐3% 2008 0.94 ‐1% 257.5 0% 254.6 6% 2012.0 ‐1% 1990 5% 2009 0.96 2% 265.7 3% 267.4 5% 2116.0 5% 2130 7% 2010 0.97 2% 252.4 ‐5% 263.6 ‐1% 2121.2 0% 2204 3% 2011 0.97 0% 249.1 ‐1% 260.8 ‐1% 2007.3 ‐5% 2126 ‐4% 2012 0.97 0% 266.3 7% 259.0 ‐1% 2196.7 9% 2144 1% 2013 0.97 0% 281.6 6% 258.7 0% 2298.1 5% 2072 ‐3% Septage Estimate Volume Estimate: 1,000,000 gal per year 1 mgal per year Septage Concentration: 17,000 BOD and TSS Conc (mg/l) Annual Load: 141,780 lbs per year Daily Load: 388 lbs Equivalent Additional Daily Conc: 47 mg/L of BOD and TSS Recommended Concentrations Design BOD: 345 mg/L Design TSS: 325 mg/L 20‐year Design Wasteload Peak Month Flow 1.75 MGD (See Table 4‐2) BOD Concentration 345 mg/l Daily BOD Load 5035 lbs per day TSS Concentration 325 mg/l Daily TSS Concentration 4743 lbs per day Flow Influent Concentrations Influent Loading (not including septage) MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN of 150 gpd per residence. Thus initial flow for the existing 200 residencies in the north portion of San Juan County is projected at 30,000 gpd, and is estimated that it would increase annually at a 2% growth rate. Figure 4-1 summarizes the projected influent flows to the Moab WWTP. In addition to identifying the average annual influent wastewater flows, it is necessary to identify peaking factors for minimum and maximum instantaneous flow rates. Table 4-2 summarizes the various flows and calculated peaking factors for 2010-2013. These historical peaking factors are used to establish project minimum and maximum future flows. A peaking factor of 2.25 will be used for peak hydraulic (peak hour) conditions. Table 4-2 also summarizes the future flow projections for the areas served by the Moab WWTP. 4.2 WASTEWATER STRENGTH Wastewater strength is quantified by the concentration of BOD5 and TSS in the influent flow. BOD5 and TSS concentrations at the Moab WWTP have steadily increased over the recent years. It is estimated that water conservation measures, particularly in the restaurant and hotel facilities, have led to reductions in wastewater flow discharges, resulting in higher strength contributions from these facilities. Although average annual flows have experience little change the last few years, the wastewater strength has increased resulting in a higher wasteload to the WWTP. Table 4-1 summarizes the average annual flow, BOD5 and TSS concentrations, and associated wasteload from influent flows to the WWTP for the years 2002-2013. 4.3 SEPTAGE RECEIVING The Moab WWTP is the only septage receiving facility in the area. Septage is received from homes that are not connected to the sewer system along with recreation facilities operated by vendors for the National Park Service. Driller man-camps also deliver septage to the facility. Septage is typically very high strength with BOD5 and TSS concentrations ranging from 10-50 times of typical domestic wastewater and can add significant load to the WWTP. It should be noted that the measured influent wastewater strengths, as described in the previous paragraphs, did not account for the additional load added to the Moab WWTP by septage. Based on conversations with plant staff, it is estimated that the Moab WWTP has been receiving approximately 1 million gallons of septage per year. Although the City does not regularly monitor the strength of this material, several samples have been taken in past years which indicated BOD5 and TSS in the range of 17,000 mg/l each. It is estimated that the high strength septage increases the annual load to the WWTP by nearly 141,780 lbs. of BOD5 and TSS each year. This additional load is equivalent to an increased BOD5 and TSS influent concentration of over 47 mg/L on a continuous basis. Table 4-1 summarizes the estimated wasteload associated with the septage, along with the historical measured influent loads. 4.4 PROJECTED WASTELOAD As discussed in previous sections, it is estimated that in 2034 the average daily flow to the Moab WWTP will be 1.50 MGD, a peak 30-day average of 1.75, with a 3.38 MGD peak hydraulic flow. Although the wastewater strength has increased over the last few years, it is not believed that the strength will continue to increase in the future due as a majority of water conservations measures BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 4-2 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 20022004200620082010201220142016201820202022202420262028203020322034203620382040204220442046204820502052205420562058206020622064FLOW (MGD)Figure 4-1 Moab WWTP Projected Average Annual Flow USU San Juan Co. GWSSA Moab City Historical20-yr PlanningPeriod Table 4‐2Moab WRFFlow SummaryMoab WWTP Historical Flow SummaryConditionPeakingFactorPeakingFactorPeakingFactorPeakingFactorMinimum Day 0.69 MGD 0.71 0.71 MGD 0.73 0.74 MGD 0.76 0.72 MGD 0.740.74Minimum Month 0.78 MGD 0.81 0.79 MGD 0.82 0.80 MGD 0.82 0.82 MGD 0.840.82Average Annual 0.97 MGD 1.00 0.97 MGD 1.00 0.97 MGD 1.00 0.97 MGD 1.001.00Peak Month 1.09 MGD 1.12 1.12 MGD 1.16 1.10 MGD 1.13 1.10 MGD 1.131.14Peak Day 1.21 MGD 1.24 1.30 MGD 1.35 1.22 MGD 1.26 1.23 MGD 1.261.28Peak Hydraulic 2.10 MGD 2.16 2.20 MGD 2.28 2.15 MGD 2.21 1.94 MGD 1.992.16Agency Flow Projections2034 Flow Projections Moab WWTP 2014 Average Annual Flow: 0.98 MGD2014 Measured GWSSA Flow 0.27 MGD1.03 MGD 0.702014 City Moab Flow: 0.71 MGDMinimum Month1.18 MGD 0.80Average Annual1.47 MGD 1.00Moab 2014 Flow: 0.71 MGD Peak Month1.69 MGD 1.15Moab 20‐Year Growth Rate: 1.1% Peak Day1.92 MGD 1.30Moab Projected 2034 Flow: 0.88 MGD Peak Hydraulic3.32 MGD 2.25GWSSA 2014 Flow: 0.27MGDMoab 20‐Year Growth Rate: 2.0%Design CriteriaGWSSA Project 2034 Flow: 0.40 MGD1.50 mgdEstimated Existing Flow: 0.03MGD (if sewered)1.75 mgdMoab 20‐Year Growth Rate: 2.0%3.38 mgdProject 2034 Flow: 0.045 MGDUSU Flow Projection at 2034: 0.144 MGDTotal 2034 Project Flow to WWTP: 1.47 MGDFlow RatePeaking FactorProjected 2034 FlowsPeak HydrualicMinimum Day20 Design Flow CriteriaAverage DailyPeak Month2010 2011 2012 2013Avg Peaking FactorFlowrate Flowrate Flowrate Flowrate MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN have been implemented and the current concentration already exceeds typical domestic wastewater strength. It is recommended a wastewater strength of 345 mg/l for BOD5 and 325 mg/l for TSS be used for planning purposes. These recommended design parameter concentrations are based upon current concentrations plus the estimated wasteload from septage flows, plus a small contingency for future increases in wastewater strength. Table 4-3 summarizes the recommended wasteload for the Moab WWTP for the 20-year planning period. Table 4-3 20-year Moab WWTP Wasteload Projections Design Characteristic Load Average Annual Flow 1.5 mgd Peak 30-Day Flow (used in calculating daily load) 1.75 mgd Peak Hydraulic Flow 3.38 mgd Daily BOD Concentration 345 mg/l Daily BOD Load 5,035 lbs/day Daily TSS Concentration 325 mg/l Daily TSS Load 4,743 lbs/day BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 4-3 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 5 - EVALUATION OF EXISTING TREATMENT PROCESSES 5.1 CURRENT DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS The current discharge permit for the Moab WWTP allows discharge of treated effluent to the Colorado River. Appendix C includes a copy of the current discharge permit. The following table summarizes the requirements of the effluent: Table 5-1 Moab WWTP Discharge Permit Requirements Parameter Maximum Monthly Average Maximum Weekly Average Daily Minimum Daily Maximum BOD5 (mg/L) BOD5 Minimum Removal (%) 25 85 35 85 NA NA TSS (mg/L) TSS Minimum Removal (%) 25 85 35 NA NA NA E. Coli (No/100 ml) 126 158 NA NA TDS – Culinary Intake (mg/L) Report NA NA NA TDS – Effluent (mg/L) <400 NA NA MA WET, Acute Biomonitoring NA NA NA Pass Oil & Grease (mg/L) NA NA NA 10 pH, (Standard Units) NA NA 6.5 9.0 In general, these requirements are the standard criterial used by the State of Utah. However, Moab has to meet TDS effluent requirements as noted above, allowing up to 400 mg/L increase above the culinary intake concentrations as a result of the Colorado River monitoring requirements. 5.2 CURRENT DISCHARGE WATER QUALITY Historically, Moab WWTP has been able to meet the requirements of the discharge permit. However, over the last few years the WWTP has had multiple permit violations in relation to the level of BOD5 in the effluent. Figure 5-1 shows this measured BOD5 and TSS effluent concentrations for the year 2010-2013. The BOD5 concentration in the treated effluent has steadily increased over the last few years, leading to periodic discharge violations. It is estimated that the increased BOD5 in the effluent is a result of increased wasteload coming into the WWTP. The following paragraphs will further discuss the potential cause of this increased level of BOD5 in the treated effluent. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 5-1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Concentration (mg/L)Figure 5-1 2010-2013 Effluent Concentrations BOD TSS Linear (BOD) Linear (TSS) MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 5.3 TREATMENT PROCESS DESCRIPTION Processes that convert and remove BOD5 and TSS from the wastewater at the Moab treatment are the primary clarifiers, the trickling filters and the secondary clarifiers. The primary clarifiers are known as a “primary process” and remove much of settleable organic solids from the raw wastewater by gravity sedimentation in quiescent conditions following screening and grit removal in preliminary treatment phase. These solids are collected and pumped to the digesters for anaerobic breakdown and reduction of volatile solids before eventual dewatering and landfill disposal. Liquid removed during the dewatering process is collected and returned to the plant flow for further treatment. Primary effluent from these clarifiers is sent to the trickling filters for biological treatment. The trickling filters and secondary clarifiers together comprise what is known as “secondary treatment”. Primary effluent is spread over rock media in the trickling filters via distributor arms and this liquid trickles down over the media and collects at the base of the filters where it passes on to the secondary clarifiers. A biological slime layer consisting of attached bacteria and other micro-organisms grows on the rock media. These organisms adsorb dissolved and colloidal organic material and suspended solids from the liquid as it passes over the media and metabolize and incorporate the organics as a food and energy source. The slime layer becomes thicker over time as organisms reproduce and grow and enlarge their populations. Eventually the outer layers begin to slough off and are carried away with the treated effluent. This sloughing exposes fresh populations of organisms to the primary effluent and enhances the continuing effective uptake and removal of BOD5 and TSS. The masses of sloughed micro-organisms from the trickling filter are known as “humus” and represent the conversion of the wastewater constituents to biological solids. These solids are removed from the trickling filter effluent by gravity sedimentation in the secondary clarifiers. The solids are collected and sent to the primary clarifiers where they are co-settled with the primary sludge and removed for further treatment as discussed above. Clarified wastewater from the secondary clarifiers is collected, disinfected and then discharged to the Colorado River as final effluent. This effluent is where samples are taken for testing in order to determine conformance with UPDES discharge permit standards. 5.4 PROCESS PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION The net result of these processes provides the overall treatment required in order to meet permit standards that are established to protect human health and the environment. Each individual process should perform according to its design capability in order that the complete system operates as designed to meet regulatory requirements. Permit standards for both BOD5 and TSS require a minimum removal rate of 85% of the raw wastewater content of these constituents, and a maximum monthly average concentration of 25 mg/l. Each of the above processes contributes towards that performance. Engineering literature indicates typical performance ranges of these processes as follows. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 5-2 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Table 5-2 Typical BOD and TSS Removal Rates Process Removal Rates1 BOD5 TSS Primary Clarifiers 25-45% 50-70% Trickling Filters and Secondary Clarifiers 80-90% -- 1Metcalf and Eddy, Environmental Engineering, ©1991 Figure 5-2 shows BOD5 removal rates for the primary clarifiers, combined trickling filters and secondary clarifiers, and the overall plant for the Moab facility from February 2010 to June 2014. Samples for the analysis and development of related information were taken by plant personnel and reported with facility operating data. All of the removal rates are shown to slowly decline over this period. However, the BOD5 removal rate for the primary clarifiers in June 2014 remains above 40%, which compares favorably to the published performance range shown above. The combined trickling filter and secondary clarifier BOD5 removal rate of over 80% also compares very favorably. Finally, the overall plant performance of nearly 90% BOD5 removal exceeds the UPDES minimum removal requirements of 85%. Therefore, although effluent permit excursions have been noted in the last few years, plant performance appears to be in line with or even to exceed the relevant criteria. Figures 5-3 and 5-4 plot removal rates of BOD5 versus BOD5 loadings for the combined trickling filters and secondary clarifiers and the overall plant, respectively. Each figure shows a clear trend that removal rates increase with increasing loading rates, indicating that as the processes are more heavily loaded and stressed, they respond with improved removal efficiencies and increased performance. Figure 5-5 plots the trickling filter effluent BOD5 concentration versus influent BOD5 load and demonstrates that the effluent concentration trends upward as the load increases. This is an expected result, even though the filter performance shown in Figure 5-2 indicates that the removal rates also trend upward with increasing loads. It can be concluded that although the process responds admirably, it cannot maintain the same removals at higher versus lower loading rates. Figure 5-6 demonstrates the same relationship when considering effluent concentrations versus trickling filter specific loading rates. Various wastewater loading information is shown in Table 5-3. The column entitled “Current Plant Ultimate Design Conditions” contains design loads and capacities that were intended to result for the Moab treatment plant from the Improvements Project constructed in 1996. The column entitled “Current Plant at 1996 Conditions” indicates these criteria as they were believed to exist prior to those improvements. The improvements relied upon to theoretically generate the increased BOD5 and TSS capacities included addition of increased recirculation capability and installation of electric trickling filter drives to slow them down and increase flushing as the primary effluent is introduced to the media. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 5-3 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%BOD Removal Figure 5-2 Overall Moab WWTP BOD Removal % Primary Clarifiers Trickling Filter and Secondary Overall Linear (Primary Clarifiers)Linear (Trickling Filter and Secondary)Linear (Overall) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500Removal PercentageInfluent BOD Load (lb/d) Figure 5-3 Trickling Filter and Secondary Clarifier Performance 70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500Total BOD Removal RateBOD Load (lb/day) Figure 5-4 Overal BOD Removal Rate Vs Load Series1 Linear (Series1) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500Effluent BOD (mg/l)Influent BOD Load (lb/d) Figure 5-5 Trickling Filter Performance BOD Effluent Permit = 25 mg/l 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00 45.00 50.00Effluent BOD (mg/l)BOD Loading Rate (ppd/1000 cf) Figure 5-6 Trickling Filter Loading Rate BOD Effluent Permit = 25 mg/l Table 5-3 Moab WWTP Wastewater Loading Design Information Current Plant at 1996 Conditions(a) Current Plant Ultimate Design Conditions(a) Current Flow Conditions (b) Population 3520 5680 5100 Wastewater Flow Summer - Avg Day MGD 0.93 1.5 1.1 Winter - Avg Day MGD 0.56 0.9 0.8 Influent Organic BOD -Summer lb/day 1750 3300 2600 BOD - Winter lb/day 950 1600 2000 TSS - Summer lb/day 1880 3300 2400 TSS - Summer lb/day 1120 1900 1800 TF Organic Loading BOD -Summer lb/day 1170 2200 (c )1400 BOD - Winter lb/day 640 1070 1200 Hydraulic Feed - Summer gpm 1400 2600 1200 Hydraulic Feed - Winter gpm 1400 1400 1200 Recirc. Ratio - Summer 1.15 1.5 0.6 Recirc. Ratio - Winter 2.59 1.23 1 Notes: a- Current Plant Conditions and Ultimate Design Conditions were summarized from the Design Criteria as outlined in the construction documents for the 1996 Plant Additions Project. b- Current Flow Conditions are based upon 2010-2013 operational data. These estimates do not include the estimated 400 lb/day of BOD and TSS that is received from Septage Haulers. c- The loading rate for the trickling filters was increase by modifying the operations (i.e. increase recirc rate, increasing distributer speed, etc.) MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN The column entitled “Current Flow Conditions” shows that loads being experienced at the Moab plant today are less than the intended capabilities following the improvements project, yet effluent exceedances and permit violations are occurring. Therefore, if the improvements are being used and operated as intended and yet the expected performance is not being achieved, then those criteria may have been overly optimistic as related to the Moab facility. It must be noted that increased recirculation and reduced applicator speeds were commonly employed for this purpose, especially when they were implemented, and represented the state of art and technology at that time. These operating practices are still widely seen where trickling filters remain in use. In addition, the current loads at the plant are shown to exceed the pre-1996 values, indicating that the facility is currently performing at greater levels than the original design provided for. The effluent discharge permit violations occurring indicate that capability of the plant to perform adequately at these levels has been exceeded. Although the wastewater flowrates to the Moab plant have increased slowly over time, the increase in loading rates has been more substantial. The previous section of this report indicates that this phenomena is believed to occur as a result of increased waste load discharges resulting from recreational visitors (hotels, restaurants, etc.) combined with current water conservation practices and devices installed at these facilities. The above analysis and discussion suggests that the Moab trickling filters are currently overloaded with BOD5 that remains in the primary effluent following the primary clarifiers. The strength or concentration of this material exceeds the capability of the trickling filter organisms to adsorb and metabolize it in sufficient amounts to meet existing and future effluent permit discharge standards. This situation is believed due to the organic strength of raw wastewater that has increased over time and the limited ability to improve trickling filters performance without costly renovations (such as installation of plastic media) or replacement. 5.5 OPERATIONAL CHANGES FOR CURRENT REQUIREMENTS Operational procedures that are generally available to address this condition are to increase the recirculation rate and/or reduce the rotational speed of the distributors. Increased internal recirculation effectively reduces the applied organic concentration of the wastewater (but not the total organic amount) and may also improve distribution over the media which may allow the organisms to more effectively adsorb the wastewater constituents. The increased recirculation rate and/or slowing down the distributors should also provide improved flushing of the filter media to remove older humus layers and expose younger and more active organisms to the wastewater. Equipment required in order to effect these operational changes is currently in place at Moab as it was installed during the 1996 upgrades. Plant operations staff has reported that operational modifications have been attempted on occasion, but without noted improvements in effluent quality. If this indeed is the case, then those results bolster the observation that the overall maximum organic removal capacity of the trickling filters has been reached and even exceeded, and few if any options remain to address the conditions through operational changes to improve performance. However, further attempts at these process modifications could prove beneficial and should not be abandoned unless the efforts are shown to be ineffective over a significant implementation time of several weeks or longer. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 5-4 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 5.6 ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CURRENT REQUIREMENTS Chemical coagulant additions to either or both the primary and secondary clarifiers will provide “enhanced settling” by causing increased quantities of suspended, colloidal and even some dissolved materials to be removed. Metering of ferric chloride (FeCl3) in modest concentrations (possibly in the range of 20-30 mg/l) into the clarifiers has been used successfully in facilities across the U. S. for this purpose, including currently in at least one major wastewater treatment plant in Utah. Removal of additional material from the wastewater by this method increases the quantities of sludge that must be handled and disposed of, but also reduces the loading on the trickling filters and ultimately the BOD5 and TSS concentrations in the effluent to be discharged. Based on a 1.0 MGD average daily flowrate and an assumed FeCl3 feed concentration of 10 mg/l, an annual cost of approximately $30,000 is estimated for purchase and delivery of the chemical to the facility. Feeding only requires that a 300-gallon “tote” of the coagulant be provided from which a small metering pump can draw and meter the chemical to the wastewater flow stream at the desired feed rate. Deliveries can be made by the same vendor that currently furnishes chlorine for disinfection at the Moab plant and on the same truckloads to reduce costs. This approach is likely to improve the wastewater quality sufficiently to meet effluent discharge standards during the interim period before a new treatment facility is constructed, and which will need to run for 2-3 years. It is a simple task to set up and operate equipment for this purpose to demonstrate effectiveness and fine tune the dosage rate. Experience will indicate whether lower or higher dosages are needed to obtain compliance and control chemical costs. The estimated cost for a new metering pump and related piping, setup and electrical power is $5000 or less. The pump should be located indoors or provided with a small temporary shelter or other protection from direct sunlight, rain and snow. The future new treatment plant would not require continuing chemical coagulant additions for effluent permit compliance. Chemical additions ahead of the primary clarifiers are recommended initially. If effluent quality is not sufficiently improved by FeCl3 additions to the primary clarifiers, then applications in the secondary clarifiers may be attempted, or even at both locations. The dosage should remain constant throughout the day based on the seasonal average flow rate to the plant. The chemical should be applied at a point in the flow stream where it will be exposed to reasonable turbulence or other mixing so that it will be well dispersed and afforded the opportunity to react and initiate adequate initial coagulation for the enhanced settling process. After coagulation, the residence time in the clarifiers under quiescent conditions should result in flocculation of the coagulated materials and sedimentation with other wastewater solids. These accumulated solids will be pumped from the clarifiers to the digesters and then to the dewatering process as is currently practiced. The presence of the chemical sludge should have a limited impact on the general nature and dewaterability of the combined materials and may result in slightly increased or decreased solids content. The increased quantities of sludge will require additional operation of the dewatering equipment and increased sludge disposal requirements; however, these increases will be relatively small and well within the performance capacity of the systems and equipment currently employed at the Moab plant. Ferric chloride is acidic and corrosive and also has staining tendencies, and handling and application of this chemical requires caution. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 5-5 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Some minor staining and/or corroding of concrete and metal surfaces where it is stored and applied may occur, but are not expected to be problematic, especially since use of this material will only continue until a new treatment plant is constructed. A possible side benefit from feeding FeCl3 is the potential for reduction of odors in the biosolids or elsewhere in the plant as this is often a result or even a goal of these additions. Ferric chloride has been used as a primary coagulant and/or an odor control agent in many other facilities and applications around the country. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 5-6 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 6 - PROJECT NEED 6.1 PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATION As mentioned in Chapter 1 of this report, a draft Wastewater Facilities Master Plan for the Moab WWTP dated June 2013 was prepared by MWH Americas. The report was submitted and reviewed by the City but was never officially adopted. The report recommended improvements to the Moab WWTP that would to allow the City to meet their wastewater treatment needs for 20-years. The recommendations included major improvements or reconstruction of every process and facility within the plant. The recommendations were based on conversion to a Trickling Filter/Solids Contact (TF/SC) treatment process. The TF/SC process required construction of aeration basins and blower building within existing site. It was noted that the TF/SC process would be the first step towards conversion to a fully conventional activated sludge treatment process and that additional improvements and processes would be required should biological nutrient removal requirement’s be implemented. The following table summarizes the list of recommended improvements along with the associated cost. Table 6-1 Previous Report Recommendations and Costs Improvement Cost of Construction Influent Pump Station $235,000 Screening Improvements $456,000 Aeration Basins / Blowers $1,800,000 Secondary Clarifier $860,000 Disinfection Basin $795,000 Dewatering Facility $2,275,000 Digester Refurbishments $640,000 Total: $7,061,000.00 These improvements were scheduled to constructed within the next 10 years. It should also be noted that this improvements do not address the concern that the WWTP is located within the 100-year flood plain. Construction of a flood control berm would cost an additional $100,000 and $1.0 million, depending on the design. 6.2 PROJECT NEED The following paragraphs briefly discuss some the reasons for the additional evaluation and that this Facilities Master Plan is being developed for the Moab WWTP. 6.2.1 Adoption of Nutrient Regulations The State of Utah has recently implemented (January 2015) a rule regulating the concentration of phosphorus in treated effluent to 1.0 mg/l. As noted in the MWH America’s report, the recommended hybrid TF/SC process would need to be converted to a fully activated sludge process allowing for biological nutrient removal. The conversion would include replacing the trickling filters with additional solids contact basins. This additional construction would increase the overall cost BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 6-1 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN estimate for the project. The estimated cost for this additional solids contact basins is $3.0 to $5.0 million. It should be noted that the City of Moab could apply for an exception from the impending nutrient regulations. The requested exception would be based upon the potential minimal impact on water quality in the Colorado River. Preliminary discussions with State DWQ regulators have indicated that this exception would likely be approved, however they strongly recommend implementing biological nutrient removal during any plant upgrade project. 6.2.2 Inability to Meet Existing Discharge Requirements Population growth and increases in transient population from tourism in the area serviced by the Moab WWTP have resulted in increased biological loading to the facility. The existing treatment facility cannot effectively treat the increased load to meet the standards required by the State of Utah. The Moab WWTP has experienced a significant number of permit violations in the last few years in regard to the water quality of the effluent. Most violations have been associated with high levels of BOD concentrations in the effluent. Upgrades to the biological processes are necessary to insure full compliance with the requirements of the discharge permit. 6.2.3 Protecting the Plant from 100-Year Flood The Moab WWTP is located within the 100-year flood plain. The previous recommendations did not include improvements to protect the plant site from potential flooding. The previous report discussed the potential of constructing additional berms and the need to pump the effluent during flooding. There is concern that the electrical facilities within the plant site would remain below the flood elevation and that significant pumping facilities within the bermed areas would be required to keep flood waters out of existing facilities. Although these concepts would potentially work for the existing facilities, reconstruction of a new treatment facility would allow for raising each of the facilities eliminating the need for berming and pumping. 6.2.4 Aging Facilities The Moab WWTP was initially constructed in the late 1950’s to provide primary treatment of wastewater. A secondary treatment process was added in 1967. Additional modifications and expansions have been completed over the life of the plant. The latest expansion was completed in 1996, which included a new headworks facility, additional primary and secondary clarifiers, new septage receiving station and several other improvements. Although, the previously recommended improvements includes significant improvements to nearly every process facility within the WWTP, the recommended improvements did not address the aging support infrastructure such as electrical supply, underground piping, controls, etc. With continued maintenance and careful operation, the existing WWTP, including the support infrastructure has adequately surpassed its design life. However, it is expected that the age infrastructure will continue to fail, resulting in increased operational costs and difficulties in meeting discharge requirements. 6.2.5 Constructability Concerns The existing Moab WWTP will need to remain operational during all construction activities, as it will need to continually meet the requirements of its discharge permit. The previous recommendations included conversion to a TF/SC treatment process. The previous recommendation noted that the adoption of nutrient regulations would require additional aeration basins to be constructed where the current trickling filters are located. As previously mentioned, the State of Utah is currently in the BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 6-2 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN process of adopting a phosphorus nutrient regulation. This nutrient rule will require the TF/SC process to be fully converted to an activated sludge process with the construction of additional aeration basins. The construction process would need to phased such that the existing plant can remain operational. However, the existing key facilities, such as trickling filters, electrical equipment, and headworks are all located in critical area of the proposed project. It is noted that constructability challenges can be addressed during the final design phase by phasing the construction sequence, defining strict requirements on the contractors, etc. It should also be noted that these construction restrictions also increase the cost and extends construction period of the project. Thus, it is recommended that additional sites be evaluated allowing for a new WWTP to be constructed will the existing plant remains fully operational. 6.3 SUMMARY Based up the concerns outlined above, Moab City decided to further evaluate the options for treating its future wastewater needs. This evaluation includes further investigation of treatment process, possibility of relocating the WWTP site, and further defines the associated costs. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 6-3 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 7 DEVELOPMENT AND SCREENING OF ALTERNATIVES 7.1 DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATIVES 7.1.1 GENERAL Key components of a Facilities Plan include development and analysis of alternatives to address identified needs. The following discussion serves to define factors considered and approaches taken to combine available information and planning strategies into potentially viable alternatives and establish a foundation for selection of a recommended plan. Background information used to develop and screen alternative wastewater management plans was presented previously in this report. A crucial factor in these determinations was the decision made that the Moab WWTP must be able to provide nutrient removal capabilities (phosphorous and nitrogen) in order to meet the potential requirements of future effluent discharge permits. This approach focuses away from the possibility for continued use of the existing plant facilities since they are not well-suited or easily adaptable for that purpose. Both phosphorous removal and denitrification for nitrogen removal require processes, basin structures, piping, mechanical and electrical equipment and instrumentation that are not currently employed at the Moab plant and for which it is not economically viable to add them or convert the existing facilities. Biological removal of these nutrients requires suspended growth, activated sludge processes with anaerobic, anoxic and oxic bioreactors, mixers, recycle systems, return and waste activated pumps, piping, controls and other elements that are not compatible with the existing fixed film trickling filters at the Moab plant. The 55-year age of much of the existing plant facilities and infrastructure also creates concern regarding their condition, durability and suitability to provide continuing reliable service for many years into the future. Equipment, structures, pipelines and other plant facilities all degrade with time and each of these elements has an effective service life that typically should not be exceeded which could put the entire plant at risk for gradual or more sudden failure. A wastewater treatment plant environment is generally rugged and corrosive, and these conditions add to the nature and rate of the degradation. The reliable life of mechanical and electrical items and components is generally viewed as being approximately 20 years before major overhaul or replacement is required. For concrete structures, pipelines and similar infrastructure, a 50-year service life is considered reasonable. The age of the much of the facilities at the Moab WWTP meets or exceeds those values. Continued use of the existing Moab wastewater treatment plant into the future associated with meeting nutrient removal requirements is not technically or economically viable. This includes both optimization and/or modification of existing facilities at the plant. If nutrients are not considered, then the existing plant may continue for a time to operate to remove BOD5 and TSS. However, it has been shown previously in this report that the treatment capacity of the plant appears to have been reached relative to reliably meeting effluent discharge standards, and expansion and/or extensive modifications would be required to accommodate future flow and load increases while meeting permit limits. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 7-1 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN From a conceptual standpoint, four fundamental alternatives exist for dealing with the issues identified including the following: • No action. • Optimization of plant operations. • Modification and/or expansion of existing treatment plant. • Construction of new treatment plant. 7.1.2 NO ACTION This alternative would not provide for nutrient removal, would not create needed additional capacity for future growth and may not even allow existing conditions to continue due to effluent discharge exceedances (violations) that have occurred in recent reporting cycles. The aged condition of the existing facilities may also contribute to making continued reliable operation of the plant more difficult over time. This situation is not in the best interest of the current and future residents of City of Moab, does not provide the needed levels of protection of public health and the environment and is not considered to be a viable alternative. 7.1.3 OPTIMIZATION OF PLANT OPERATIONS Optimization of plant operations may provide some improved treatment performance improvements and/or increased capacity based on BOD5 and TSS requirements, but removal of target nutrients would not occur. The treatment plant is already generally well operated and maintained, thus the benefits of optimization alone likely would be limited. Operational modifications such as increased recycle to the trickling filters and increased flushing of trickling filter media may prove beneficial in the short-term (2-3 years) until replacement facilities are made available. It is understood that current plant operations already include these process changes periodically; however, longer term continuous implementation may still prove beneficial. Addition of chemical coagulants for enhanced clarification and removal of BOD5 and TSS by sedimentation in the clarifiers may also be implemented if needed to help meet effluent discharge standards during this time. This alternative should provide some additional short-term benefits by removing more solids from the wastewater flow and thus reducing the loading on the trickling filters. However, addition of these chemicals is costly and also requires increased solids dewatering and disposal efforts and expense, and the effect on nutrient removal may be small. Chemical addition is not a viable long-term wastewater treatment solution for Moab, but may be beneficial in the interim before a new plant is constructed. 7.1.4 MODIFICATION AND/OR EXPANSION OF EXISTING TREATMENT PLANT Modifications to and expansion of the existing plant facilities could provide both performance and capacity increases relative to meeting BOD5 and TSS discharge limit requirements. However, significant changes in removal of phosphorous and nitrogen would not occur as the existing plant is not equipped or suited for these purposes. Removal of nutrients biologically requires other processes and equipment as discussed above which would yield much the existing plant facilities non-functional. Phosphorous can also be removed through chemical addition and precipitation, but this is a very costly approach in terms of on-going chemical costs. Biological removal of phosphorous is more cost-effective and largely preferred, and nitrogen removal requires a biological approach. Even if nutrient requirements are not considered, the age and condition of the existing plant facilities remains a concern in regard to future reliable operations. Therefore, modification or expansion of the existing facilities is not considered to be a viable approach to meeting future treatment requirements, whether BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 7-2 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN or not nutrient removal is considered. 7.1.5 CONSTRUCTION OF NEW TREATMENT PLANT Construction of a new treatment plant is judged to be the most desirable and effective long-term alternative solution to meet the wastewater treatment and disposal needs for Moab. Since the original wastewater facility at Moab was first constructed, treatment standards have been raised considerably, and wastewater flow rates and biological loading rates have increased to match and occasionally exceed the capacity of the existing plant to effectively treat these flows. As a result, continued operation without a plan of action for change is expected to result in future additional discharge permit violations and limitations on future flows and loads that can be effectively handled. Addition of nutrient removal requirements requires new facilities as the existing plant cannot perform to meet those standards. A new treatment facilities possibly might be constructed on the existing plant site, but preferably on a separate and undeveloped parcel of land located just south of the existing plant. Figure 7-1 depicts these areas. This new parcel is preferred due to its green-field nature without known improvements or existing or constructed features that could impact the design, construction and cost of new treatment facilities at that location. Use of this adjacent site would enable extension of the sewer main and provision of other required utilities to be accomplished most economically. Ingress/egress is also excellent as the new site is separated from the existing plant only by the access road (400 North Street) which serves both locations. Impact on any neighboring property owners is also expected to be minimal. This approach should result in lower overall construction costs compared to constructing on the existing site as discussed below. The private landowner for the parcel in questions has been approached regarding its availability for this purpose and has responded positively. Space availability for constructing new facilities is very limited on the existing plant site. Refer to Figure 3-3. The improvements proposed in Chapter 8 of this study do not fit the constraints of the existing site and would require extensive re-consideration in order to possibly develop a way to do so. At a minimum, constructing extensive new improvements on the existing site will require greater coordination to assure that impacts to ongoing operations are limited so that discharge permit violations or disruptions to service or related occurrences are avoided. Some of the existing facilities will be effected by the work, and measures must be taken to accommodate those effects to assure uninterrupted plant performance, and additional costs will be generated as a result. In addition, work performed on a congested existing site nearly always encounters conditions that were previously unknown or unexpected, related in large part to buried features that do not appear on construction drawings or other records. Costs to remove, repair, replace or work around these and other existing improvements can be significant and result in change orders that increase construction and overall project costs. Costs for work on the existing site are generally less predictable than for the nearby green-field location and may be higher overall. Possible construction of new facilities at the existing plant site leads to the question of which if any of the existing structures, equipment, piping or other improvements could be effectively incorporated into the new work. Items including the influent pumping station, grit and screenings removal facilities, septage receiving station, clarifiers and effluent pumping station might be candidates for continued service. The remaining existing process facilities are less likely to be useful or incorporated. Reuse of some plant elements may help reduce construction costs for the new facility and limit space-related impacts on the existing site. However, as discussed above, the age of the structures creates concern regarding their ability to continue to serve for up to 50 years in the future as new facilities will be expected to do. Equipment items associated with these facilities that older than 20 years would be replaced in order to assure continued reliable service and performance. Continued use of existing BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 7-3 ALTERNATIVE TREATM ENT PLANT SITE EXISTIN G TREATMENT PLANT 4 00 N O R T H S T R E E T STEWART LANE0 50 100 Feet P:\Moab City\WWTP\GIS\Projects\7-1_Existing and Alternative Sites.mxd cmoultrie 1/5/2015 7-1 EXISTING AND ALTERNATIVETREATMENT PLANT SITES CITY OF MOA BNORTH FIGURE NO. SCALE:NORTH: MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN structures and equipment are not be given high priority for the project unless severe budget constraints or other restrictions require otherwise. Construction of new facilities and the existing plant site is not preferred. Both the existing and proposed new sites are located within the predicted flood zone from the nearly Colorado River, and measures must be taken to mitigate flooding regardless of which site is selected. Refer to Figure 3-4. Portions of the existing plant could be inundated by a predicted flood event, although some existing facilities have been constructed above the flood level. Plant operations and performance could be impacted by such an occurrence, and substantial improvements are required in order to minimize or avoid this situation. Construction of a berm or flood wall around the plant or generally filling and raising the area are the most viable approaches to meeting this concern. Use of at least one these flood mitigations methods will also be required. 7.2 REGIONALIZATION The Moab WWTP is currently the only municipal wastewater treatment facility in Grand County, Utah. Separate facilities have recently been studied for treatment of wastewater generated in Spanish Valley, but an acceptable plan was not developed. Opposition from the City of Moab and from the State Department of Environmental Quality was expressed to construction of separate wastewater treatment facilities for Spanish Valley and the remainder of Grand County. The Moab Wastewater Treatment Plant essentially already acts as a regional facility that can effectively serve those areas. The Moab WWTP will be able to provide both capacity and treatment performance for current and future wastewater flows for this entire area. 7.3 UN-SEWERED AREAS Areas of Spanish Valley are un-sewered. These homes are either already slated for potential future expansion of the sewer system or are in locations that are not accessible to current sewer systems. 7.4 CONVENTIONAL COLLECTION SYSTEM The existing collection system is a conventional collection system. The existing collection system has not been evaluated within the scope of the wastewater master plan. 7.5 ALTERNATIVE CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS No alternative conveyance systems have been evaluated as part of the master plan. The existing conventional system is expected to continue to provide the required utility within the planning period. 7.6 EVALUATION OF SEWER ALIGNMENTS Sewer alignments have not been evaluated within this master plan. Existing alignments will continue to be used for future expansion of the system. 7.7 WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT TECHNIQUES 7.7.1 CONVENTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES The use of conventional, well understood and widely accepted treatment technologies is most desirable for the Moab WWTP. This facility is crucial to sustaining proper wastewater treatment for the community. The facility currently uses conventional technologies and it is appropriate that BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 7-4 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN conventional technologies continue to be used as the existing infrastructure is in place to handle this type of construction and expansion. 7.7.2 INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES Innovative technologies could be acceptable insofar as they have been proven in applications and facilities similar to the Moab WWTP. Additionally, alternatives that have a high cost of installation and operation were not considered. The overall goal was to incorporate facilities that would be conducive to treatment within the planning horizon at the lowest cost and provide the desired performance. Only proven and reliable technologies will be used for the Moab treatment plant. 7.7.3 STAGED CONSTRUCTION Facility construction should be staged to permit construction of currently needed treatment capacity and performance with allowance for projected future growth. Additional growth and/or increased treatment requirements will be accommodated in the future by construction of additional facilities and/or modification of existing ones. Effluent discharge permit requirements, population and visitation trends, development of improved technologies and other factors will influence how and when such changes are accomplished. A staged construction approach will be used for this project. 7.7.4 MULTIPLE PURPOSE PROJECTS Facilities should be designed to incorporate multiple uses as far as possible. However, it is recognized that facility plans will need to incorporate projects within the existing wastewater facilities. Multiple uses for this project and related improvements have not been identified BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 7-5 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 8 EVALUATION OF PRINCIPAL ALTERNATIVES 8.1 ALTERNATIVE EVALUATION A number of potential wastewater treatment bioreactor types and configurations are available that are capable of providing the treatment capacity and performance required for the new Moab wastewater facility. All of them depend on variations of the oxic suspended growth activated sludge process for BOD5 and TSS conversion and removal. They also provide anaerobic and anoxic zones and equipment in order to accomplish removal of phosphorous and nitrogen compounds to acceptable levels. Fixed film processes (trickling filters, biotowers, etc.) do not provide the necessary environment to grow organisms for this type of nutrient removal and are not considered. Two alternative process configurations were selected for evaluation as given below. Each of the identified processes provide the desired BOD5, TSS and nutrient removals using the activated sludge process, but the reactor configurations, equipment, process control and other elements differ. Furthermore, there significant variations in configuration, basins, equipment, control, mixing, pumping, aeration, etc. within each of these categories depending on manufacturer offerings and preferences. The evaluated process alternatives included: • Oxidation Ditches • Sequencing Batch Reactors. These alternatives are described further below. Also included is some basic process information for further understanding of how the organic and nutrient contents of the wastewater are converted and removed. This analysis and report does not attempt to identify and select a specific process configuration and/or manufacturer for the recommended process. Rather, the benefits and costs of each (oxidation ditch and sequencing batch reactor) are compared in a general way, relying on information provided by vendors, and a representative selection from each category is used for that purpose. Final determination of the most beneficial and appropriate selection for the recommended process from the different vendors will be made during the detailed design effort. Process alternatives including more conventional activated sludge configurations, combined fixed and suspended growth processes, Aerotor/Biowheel® systems, membrane bioreactors, etc. were given limited consideration. However, these technologies were judged not to provide substantial benefit in terms of cost, performance, maintenance, etc. to warrant inclusion and more detailed evaluation. The processes selected for evaluation are among the most widely used and applied mechanical systems across the United States for municipal wastewater treatment for smaller facilities (5 MGD or less), with hundreds of installations of each over many years. The City can be confident that the selection will provide the performance, cost-effectiveness, operability and low maintenance required for its new wastewater treatment facility. 8.2 BASIC PROCESS INFORMATION 8.2.1 REMOVAL OF ORGANIC CONSTITUENTS AND AMMONIA As indicated above, variations of the activated sludge process are considered for this evaluation, and the selected version will be implemented for the new Moab WWTP. The basic requirements for the activated sludge process to convert organic BOD5 and TSS constituents to biomass and thus remove them from the wastewater are well understood and have been applied and used for nearly 100 years. The biomass, mainly bacteria, use the organic wastewater constituents as a food source. This heterotrophic suspended growth aerobic process requires aeration for oxygen for metabolic activities, mixing, alkalinity, sufficient biomass to adsorb and metabolize the constituents, sufficient BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 8-1 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN hydraulic and solids retention times for the biological reactions to occur, and gravity separation of the biomass from the effluent before discharge. Removal of ammonia, a nitrogen compound and wastewater contaminant, requires additional aeration and solids detention time for the slower growing autotrophic bacteria that convert ammonia to nitrites and nitrates (other nitrogen compounds) via an oxidative process called “nitrification”. 8.2.2 REMOVAL OF NITROGEN COMPOUNDS In order to reduce the total nitrogen content to lower levels, the nitrites and nitrates in the wastewater must be converted to elemental nitrogen gas that can be released into the atmosphere and thus removed. This “denitrification” process is also accomplished biologically by a group of facultative bacteria that use oxygen from the nitrites and nitrates for their metabolic processes instead of dissolved oxygen from aeration. Basins or zones with low dissolved oxygen levels that favor the facultative bacteria are required for this process to occur. Adequate detention times, mixing, and a sufficient organic food source are necessary to obtain acceptable results. This process is essentially added to the above conventional activated process and results in biological nutrient removal (BNR) of the nitrogen compounds. A portion of both the alkalinity and oxygen are returned to the wastewater via this process. 8.2.3 REMOVAL OF PHOSPHOROUS Phosphorous is removed biologically by yet another process variation which requires essentially zero dissolved oxygen to be present in the wastewater in a separate basin or zone provided with sufficient detention time and mixing. Orthophosphate compounds are released into the wastewater in this anaerobic or fermentation zone which are then taken up by phosphorous accumulating organisms (PAOs) in subsequent aerobic basins. This process is also added to the above activated sludge processes for further BNR treatment of the wastewater. Since the phosphorous remains present in the biomass and is not used up or converted to other compounds, care must be taken to avoid releasing it back into the effluent before discharge. 8.2.4 PROCESS DISTINCTIVES Oxidation Ditch. The term oxidation ditch (Ox-Ditch) may be a misnomer in the case of the Moab project and may more accurately be called a continuous loop reactor. Oxidation ditches were developed originally in The Netherlands and designed to operate in the extended aeration activated sludge mode which requires longer hydraulic and solids retention times and more oxygen than conventional active sludge systems. These systems were introduced widely in the United States and in Utah specifically, and designed according to extended aeration process parameters. However, over time those parameters have migrated toward conventional activated sludge values and loadings, resulting in increased performance. The Ox-Ditch process may accomplish a certain amount of denitrification internally, but the majority of the denitrification takes place in separate basins or zones where low oxygen (anoxic) conditions exist. Biological phosphorous removal capability is generally provided by use of separate anaerobic basins as described above. Separation of biosolids by gravity sedimentation from the effluent to be disinfected and discharged is accomplished in separate clarifiers. Sequencing Batch Reactor. As it name implies, a sequencing batch reactor (SBR) operates in either a continuous or semi-continuous batch mode and creates differing reactor conditions sequentially in a single basin (commonly with two or more parallel basins) by a series of fill, anaerobic react, aerobic react, anoxic react, settle and decant/discharge and solids wasting cycles. A holding basin to equalize flows for disinfection is also be provided. Aeration, mixing and inflow are turned on and off during the different periods as required to help create the desired process conditions. The basins are typically square or rectangular, as opposed to looped reactors, and employ extensive common wall construction. However, the basic aerobic, anoxic and anaerobic processes are similar between the BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 8-2 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN two approaches, and the resulting performance results are comparable. Only one SBR type plant has been installed in Utah. Oxidation ditches have found wider use, possibly due moderate land prices and greater availability that favor their larger footprint and other factors. However, sequencing batch reactors represent a suitable and cost-effect alternative that would provide excellent service for Moab. 8.3 COMMON FEATURES A number of proposed treatment plant features and equipment will be similar or identical for the two process alternatives. Detailed information regarding these facilities including individual capacities, sizes, performance, materials, etc. will be developed and/or confirmed during the design phase of the work authorized following this study. The items are given in Table 8-1 below. Table 8-1 Wastewater Treatment Plant Features Common to the Alternatives Facility Process or Equipment Comments Headworks • Mechanical screens (6 mm) and screenings washing and compacting, conveying and disposal equipment • Mechanical grit removal, classifying, washing, conveying and disposal • Parshall flume with flow measurement and recording • Septage receiving facility Grit and screenings loaded to a truck or dumpster for landfill disposal Influent Pumping Station Non-clog type wastewater pumps with flow matching control operation Chemical Addition for P Removal Aluminum or iron salt storage, metering, injection and mixing If required Filtration Cloth filters If required Disinfection Low pressure high output UV Utility Water Pumping Station High efficiency vertical turbine pumps with filter/strainer Biosolids Holding Basin Coarse bubble aeration for mixing and freshening. Decant capability. Biosolids Dewatering Facility • Polymer storage, dilution, activation, metering, injection and mixing • Biosolids pumping/metering • Mechanical biosolids dewatering • Dewatered biosolids conveying, storage and disposal Dewatered biosolids loaded to a truck or dumpster for landfill disposal Standby Power Engine-Generator Set Diesel powered unit with self-contained fuel tank and outdoor enclosure. 24-hr. capacity. Capacity to operate essential facilities Administration Building Office, small meeting room, control/media room with printer, fax, computer and file storage, restroom, shower. Maintenance and Electrical Building Tools, supplies and parts storage, work area, single vehicle bay, plant electrical center BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 8-3 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Civil/Site Improvements • Influent sewer, yard piping, utilities • Access roads • Grading, drainage, flood prevention • Low maintenance landscaping • Security fencing, signage Several of the facilities listed in the above table require or typically require a building, cover or enclosure to house equipment for purposes of security, odor and noise control, aesthetics and protection of staff and equipment from the elements. For larger plants this is often accomplished using different buildings for each process area and creation of a compound or campus situation. However, for a facility such as the size and capacity of the new Moab WWTP, it is more cost effective to combine these facilities into a limited number of buildings and similar structures, and in so doing also simplify operation and maintenance requirements with the various elements being grouped together and more closely at hand. This consolidation approach will be implemented wherever it can provide reasonable economic and/or operational benefit for the City. 8.4 EVALUATION OF MONETARY COSTS 8.4.1 SUNK COSTS Sunk costs for all existing improvements are not considered in this evaluation. 8.4.2 ALLOCATION OF COSTS FOR MULTIPLE PURPOSE PROJECTS The nature of the existing facility is not conducive to multiple purpose projects. Therefore, the full cost of the facility must be borne by the wastewater treatment operations. 8.5 RESERVE CAPACITY Facilities will allow for redundancy to prevent mechanical failure leading to violation of permit requirements. This includes the use of multiple structures and equipment items to ensure that the facility will remain operable at all times. Additionally, the facility will be designed to ensure that each process component will have sufficient excess capacity to handle future loadings along with some reserve capability should loads increase faster than anticipated. 8.6 DEMONSTRATION OF FINANCIAL CAPABILITY Both Moab City and Grand Water & Sewer have the financial capability to support construction of the new Moab WWTP and both entities have accumulated impact fees for the purpose of paying these costs. GWSSA currently holds some funding for treatment projects, while Moab City also maintains a more modest amount for this purpose. Moab City is responsible for all financial obligations of the wastewater treatment plant. The City of Moab has demonstrated an ability to balance the facility budget while maintaining the facilities appropriately. Grand Water & Sewer is for all intents and purposes a client of the Moab WWTP, paying for treatment services in proportion to flows from its collection system. 8.7 CAPITAL FINANCING PLAN Financing of any improvements likely will need to be provided from multiple sources. The first source of financing will be the development impact fee reserve funds. Additionally, the City will BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 8-4 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN seek funding from the State of Utah in the form of grants and low-interest loans. Should additional funding be required, the City will seek to finance the facility by bonding, with an increase in the cost of collection and treatment fees as required in order to pay the debt associated with facility improvements. 8.8 ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION Construction of new treatment plant facilities on the proposed site may require a NEPA study to be accomplished, depending on the financing source. The environmental impact of the two alternatives processes is believed to be equal. A new wastewater treatment plant for Moab will generate a higher quality effluent that has lower concentrations of BOD5, TSS, chlorine and nitrogen and phosphorous compounds as compared to the existing plant and the current effluent quality. This improved quality may result in the effluent being more desirable or acceptable for use in the nearby wetlands area. The existing effluent quality resulted in it being rejected for this use due to higher levels of certain constituents. A representative from the Nature Conservancy who has involvement with the wetlands area was contacted in order to ascertain whether the improved quality would make it attractive for use at that location. The Nature Conservancy expressed interest in this future use when the more suitable effluent becomes available from the new treatment facility. 8.9 EVALUATION OF RELIABILITY Reliability is considered in two ways: 1) the reliability of treatment performance to achieve required effluent discharge standards; and, 2) the reliability or susceptibility of mechanical equipment to failure. 8.10 EVALUATION OF ENERGY REQUIREMENTS Energy requirements for the different alternatives include primarily pumping, aeration and mixing costs. Significant increases in power will result in additional expenses related to construction of new facilities. Power service to the wastewater treatment plant may need to be upgraded. 8.11 EVALUATION OF IMPLEMENTABILITY Implementability considerations include compatibility with the proposed site and related constraints and other factors which may favor one system over another. 8.12 EVALUATION OF RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES No recreational opportunities are anticipated to be gained by any of the treatment alternatives. However, improvements to the treated effluent are expected to improve the general aquatic environment in the area, which is a major recreational region. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 8-5 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 8.13 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES 8.13.1 GENERAL As described above, a number of features and facilities planned for the new Moab WWTP are common to both alternatives and will be provided irrespective of the recommended core wastewater treatment process. These elements will not be included in the examination since their impact is similar and does not sway the outcome. The following tables 8-2 and 8-3 present the items that are considered unique to their respective individual process. Instrumentation, electrical power and controls for equipment are assumed as required and are not specifically listed. Table 8-2 Process Elements Unique to the Oxidation Ditch Alternative Facility Process or Equipment Bioreactors • Anaerobic, anoxic and aerobic basins • Aeration (typically diffusers and blowers or mechanical aerator/mixers) • Mixers for anaerobic and anoxic basins • Recycle pumps (if required) Secondary Clarifiers Circular, center feed, peripheral withdrawal, 12 ft. min. SWD, energy dissipating inlets, Stamford baffles, sludge collection/removal mechanisms, scum collection/removal systems and algae prevention systems RAS/WAS Pumping Station • Return activated sludge pumps • Waste activated sludge pumps Blower Building or Enclosure Blowers (if required, depending on selected aeration technology) Table 8-3 Process Elements Unique to the Sequencing Batch Reactor Alternative Facility Process or Equipment Bioreactors • Common basins for anaerobic, anoxic and aerobic processes • Aeration system • Mixing equipment • Decanting equipment • Sludge removal system • Recycle pumping (if needed) • Transfer pumping (if required) Equalization Basin • Single effluent basin to equalize effects of upstream sequencing bioreactor operation on UV disinfection system. Some UV systems may not require equalization and which will be further considered during the design effort. • Transfer pumping (if required) Blower Building or Enclosure Blowers (if required, depending on selected aeration technology) BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 8-6 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Both Ox-Ditches and SBRs are offered as engineered process packages by a number of manufacturers who include their unique offerings of equipment, control systems, configuration, operating methods and requirements and other features. This is common practice for smaller treatment plants for which a custom designed process likely would be more costly and without significant process performance, operational, efficiency or other advantages. These manufacturers typically have furnished their respective systems for many years, with many installations and have extensive experience with varying treatment goals and requirements. This experience should prove beneficial to Moab regardless of which system is recommended. Several manufacturers submitted proposals with their recommended processes, configuration and equipment for each alternative. It is not within the scope of this study to consider in depth the various elements of each proposal and the associated advantages and disadvantages within each competing alternative. Rather, the report separates and compares Ox-Ditches and SBRs on a selected representative basis in order to develop a perspective of the general benefits offered by each alternative. This and related information will allow a process recommendation to be made which can be confidently implemented in the upcoming design phase. At that time, differing manufacturer systems and equipment will be evaluated in greater detail for determination of a final selection for design, bidding and construction of the new facility. 8.13.2 PROCESS LOADING AND PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS Plant capacity and load requirements used for this analysis for the Moab WWTP are shown in Table 8-4. Influent sampling and analyses will need to be performed to confirm the alkalinity, VFAs, ammonia or TKN and total phosphorous concentration and any other questioned values prior to performing the final design. The plant elevation is 4000 ft. AMSL. Table 8-4 Plant Capacity and Load Requirements Influent Criteria 20-Year Design 50-Year Expansion Peak Month Ave. Daily Sum. Flow 1.5 mgd 3.0 mgd Peak Month Ave. Daily Winter Flow 1.2 mgd 2.4 mgd Peak Hourly Flowrate 3.38 mgd 6.0 mgd Ave. Annual BOD5 Concentration 345 mg/l 345 mg/l Peak Month BOD5 Daily Load 5,035 ppd 10,070 ppd Ave. Annual TSS Concentration 325 mg/l 325 mg/l Peak Month TSS Daily Load 4,743 ppd 9,486 ppd Min./Ave./Max. Wastewater Temps. 11°/18°/27° C 11°/18°/27° C Min./Ave./Max pH 7.2/8.0/9.0 Units 7.2/8.0/9.0 Units Alkalinity Ample Ample VFAs Ample Ample Ammonia 40 mg/l 40 mg/l Total Phosphorous 8 mg/l 8 mg/l Projected effluent discharge permit requirements used for this analysis for the Moab WWTP are shown in Table 8-5. Current and/or projected UPDES permit requirements will need to be confirmed prior to completing the final design. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 8-7 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Table 8-5 Projected Effluent Discharge Permit Requirements Parameter Monthly Ave. Weekly Ave. Min. Max. Comments BOD5 Conc. 25 mg/l - - - Current Permit BOD5 Removal 85% - - - Current Permit TSS Conc. 25 mg/l - - - Current Permit TSS Removal 85% - - - Current Permit E-coli 126/100 ml 158/100 ml - - Current Permit TRC 1.4 mg/l - - - Current Permit WET, Acute - - - LC50 >10% Effl. Current Permit Oil & Grease - - - 10 mg/l Current Permit pH - - 6.5 units 9.0 units Current Permit TDS <400 mg/l incr. - - - Current Permit TP 1.0 mg/l - - Assumed Future TN 10.0 mg/l - - Assumed Future 8.13.3 OXIDATION DITCH An oxidation ditch proposal from Westech Engineering of Salt Lake City, Utah was used for analysis of this process alternative. Several proposals were provided, and this one is used as a representation from that group. Related information is provided in Table 8-6 and as follows and based on the capacity and performance requirements shown in Tables 8-4 and 8-5. Figure 8-1 presents a generalized schematic diagram for this process. Table 8-6 Oxystream® Oxidation Ditch Partial Design Information Parameter Values @ 1.5 MGD ADF Effluent Conc. (mg/l) BOD5 TSS TN TP 10 10 10 1 Process Parameters SRT (days) MLSS (mg/l) Yield (lb./lb.) AOR (lb. O2/day) SOR (lb. O2/day) Recycle Rate RAS Rate Mech. Aeration % (lb. O2/hp-hr.) Aerobic Volume (MG) Anoxic Volume (MG) Anaerobic Volume (MG) 16 4000 0.78 7,475 13,848 4-6 Q 0.5-1 Q 3.8 1.558 0.309 0.094 BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 8-8 Oo SEPTAGE RECEIVING FACILITY (SEPTAGE)� a INFLUENT RAW WASTEWATER HEADWORKS PARSHALL MECHANICAL MECHANICAL INFLUENT FLUME SCREENS GRIT PUMPS REMOVAL MIXER (TYP) r L I I (SCREENINGS)' (GRIT)+ (GRIT AND SCREENINGS TO LANDFILL DISPOSAL) I J (RETURN ACTIVATED SLUDGE) J r I 1 L ANAEROBIC REACTOR ANOXIC REACTOR (PHOSPHOROUS REMOVAL) (NITROGEN REMOVAL) SECONDARY CLARIFIERS ALUM (IF REQUIRED FOR PHOSPHOROUS REMOVAL) RAS/WAS PUMPS (WASTE ACTIVATED SLUDGE) I I I (SCUM) ,I I I WE — FILTERS (IF REQUIRED) SOLIDS HOLDING BASIN ULTRAVIOLET DISINFECTION THICKENED SLUDGE PUMPS (DECANT) (RETURN) i (PRESSATE) (RECYCLE) EFFLUENT AND UTILITY WATER PUMPS SOLIDS DEWATERING 0-0 C) J AEROBIC REACTOR (OXIDATION DITCH) (BOD5/TSS REMOVAL) 1--.c) RECYCLE PUMPS COLORADO i %���/ RIVER ///i /�/ DEWATERED SOLIDS jr ►�/inio imir 1 -�r1'' TO LANDFILL .,�� 17k'h� ► DISPOSAL Hairs k• CLARIFIER SPLITTER BOX AERATION (TYP) Bowen Collins & Associates, Inc. ‘hiw- CONSULTING ENGINEERS Moab City Wastewater Facilities Plan Figure 8-1 Oxidation Ditch Schematic Process Diagram P:\Moab City \WWTP\Task Order 14-01 — Data and Facility Plan Amendment\6.0 Reports and Memos\6.2 Draft Report\Figures\Figure 8-1_0xidation Ditch.dwg Dec31,2014 — 8:23am MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN SVI (ml/g) Ave. Clarifier Loading Rate (gpd/sf) 100 or less 400 or less Electrical Power (hp) Aeration – Required/Provided (4 aerators) Mixing - Anoxic (2 mixers) - Anaerobic (2 mixers) Pumping - RAS (0.5 Q @ 20 ft. TDH) - Recycle Clarifier Drives (2 drives) Total 152/300 10 2 5 Internal 1 170 Depths (ft.) Bioreactors – SWD – Total Clarifiers – SWD – Total 14 15.5 12 15.5 Gross Surface Area (sf) Bioreactors Clarifiers (50 ft. dia.) Total 22,000 4,000 26,000 Concrete Volumes (CY) Bioreactors Clarifiers Total 2,200 400 2,600 Basic Process Equipment Costs (sales tax incl., not installed) Bioreactors Clarifiers Total $700,000 $200,000 $900,000 Figure 8-2 present a preliminary diagrammatic layout of the oxidation ditch system and related facilities on the preferred site for the new Moab WWTP. A 50 ft. buffer or setback is provided on three sides of the property and 30 ft. to the roadway. Room for expansion of the capacity by 50% is provided by installing a third ditch and secondary clarifier. Space is also provided for a future filtration facility if required. Approximately 3 acres of land area is occupied by the facility, similar to the existing plant. 8.13.4 SEQUENCING BATCH REACTOR A sequencing batch reactor proposal from Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. of Loves Park, IL was used for analysis of this process alternative. Several proposals were provided, and this one was used as a representation from that group. Related information is provided in Table 8-7 and as follows and based on the capacity and performance requirements shown in Tables 8-4 and 8-5. Figure 8-3 presents a generalized schematic diagram for this process. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 8-9 20 0 40 SCALE IN FEET 80 L EXISTING PLANT -6F : 4111)4 0 N TREATED EFFLUENT TO RIVER �NO I :-•41 L.. --- SITE 0 OM= r limArlif I APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF PROPERTY LINE INDEX OF NEW FACILITIES O HEADWORKS AND INFLUENT PUMP STATION O OXIDATION DITCHES (BIOREACTORS) ® FINAL CLARIFIERS ® UV DISINFECTION FACILITY ® FILTERS OF REQUIRED — FUTURE) ® RAS/WAS PUMP STATION O SOLIDS HOLDING BASIN ® SOLIDS DEWATERING BUILDING O ADMINISTRATION, MAINTENANCE, ELECTRICAL BUILDING 10 STANDBY GENERATOR 11 FUTURE OXIDATION DITCH (BIOREACTOR) 12 FUTURE CLARIFIER 0 ® L— —�Y mew o Li � �. cn 400 NORTH STREET NEW EFFLUENT SEWER PROPOSED PLANT SITE I I I I I r wit - -OrkZF ` �'—Mb r- :* r Bowen Collins & Associates, Inc. mil.- CONSULTING ENGINEERS Moab City Wastewater Facilities Plan Figure 8-2 Preliminary Oxidation Ditch Plant Layout P:\Moab City \WWTP\Task Order 14-01 — Data and Facility Plan Amendment \6,0 Reports and Memos \6.2 Draft Report \ Figures \Figure 8-2_Preliminary OD Plant LayouLdwg Dec31,2014 — 8:40am SEPTAGE RECEIVING FACILITY (INFLUENT RAW WASTEWATER) 1 * SBR PROVIDES FILL, REACT, (ANAEROBIC, AEROBIC, ANOXIC) SETTLE AND DECANT STAGES AND INCLUDES AERATION, MIXING, DECANTING, SLUDGE WASTING AND OTHER REQUIRED PROCESS EQUIPMENT. (PHOSPHOROUS, NITROGEN AND BOD5/TSS REMOVAL) r PARSHALL FLUME HEADWORKS MECHANICAL SCREENS (SCREENINGS)] ' (GRIT AND SCREENINGS TO LANDFILL DISPOSAL) /- MIXER SEQUENCING BATCH REACTOR* MECHANICAL GRIT REMOVAL AERATION (TYP) WAS PUMPS WASTE ACTIVATED SLUDGE (RETURN) L L (GRIT) ALUM OF REQUIRED FOR PHOSPHOROUS REMOVAL) FLOW EQUALIZATION BASIN (IF REQUIRED) 1 (SCUM) SOLIDS HOLDING BASIN (DECANT) THICKENED SLUDGE PUMPS (PRESSATE) INFLUENT PUMPS FILTERS (IF REQUIRED) ULTRAVIOLET EFFLUENT AND UTILITY DISINFECTION SOLIDS DEWATERING C� 0 J WATER PUMPS DEWATERED SOLIDS //A.mmi I rt,J7/Zu / / j// j � COLORADO RIVER ///i // TO LANDFILL DISPOSAL Bowen Collins IL& Associates, Inc CONSULTING ENGINEERS Moab City Wastewater Facilities Plan Figure 8-3 Sequencing Batch Reactor Schematic Process Diagram P.\Moab C'ity\WWTP\Task Order 14-01 — Data and Facility Plan Amendment \6,0 Reports and Memas\6.2 Draft Report \Figures\Figure 8-3—Sequencing Batch Reactor.dwg Dec31,2014 — 8:35am MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Table 8-7 AquaSBR® Sequencing Batch Reactor Partial Design Information Values 1.5 MGD ADF Effluent Conc. (mg/l) BOD5 TSS TN TP <25 <25 10 1 Process Parameters SRT (days) HRT (days) MLSS (mg/l) Yield (lb./lb.) AOR (lb. O2/day) Air Flowrate (scfm) F/M Ratio (lb./lb.) Cycles/Day, Hrs./Cycle 12.7 0.973 4500 0.719 7,963 6,350 0.099 5, 4.8 Electrical Power (hp) Aeration Blowers –Req’d./Provided (2 blowers) Mixing (2 mixers) Transfer Pumping (2 pumps) Average Power Used 250/375 20 6 145 Gross Surface Area (sf) Bioreactors (2) Equalization Basin Total 15,000 7,500 22,500 Bioreactor & EQ Basin Depth (ft.) – SWD – Total 16 18 Concrete Volumes (CY) Bioreactors Equalization Basin Total 1200 600 1800 Basic Process Equipment Costs (sales tax incl., not installed) Bioreactors Equalization Basin (assumed) Total $850,000 $50,000 $900,000 Figure 8-4 present a preliminary diagrammatic layout of the sequencing batch reactor system and related facilities on the preferred site for the new Moab WWTP. A 50 ft. buffer or setback is provided on three sides of the property and 30 ft. to the roadway. Room for expansion of the capacity by 50% is provided by installing a third SBR basin. Space is also provided for a future filtration facility if required. The overall footprint for the facility is somewhat smaller than the oxidation ditch system. The SBR basins are 2.5 feet deeper than the oxidation ditches. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 8-10 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 8.13.5 ECONOMIC COMPARISON OF PROCESSES Both the oxidation ditch and sequencing batch reactor processes will provide the capacity and treatment performance required to meet increasing demands and conform to projected effluent permit requirements. Table 8-8 contains pertinent information for the two process facilities for side-by-side comparison of size, power and other cost-related parameters. Table 8-8 Process Facility Comparison For1.4 MGD ADF Parameter Oxidation Ditch* Sequencing Batch Reactor** Total Hydraulic Volume (MG) 2.40 2.41 Max. Basin Depth (ft.) 15.5 18 Gross Area (sf) 26,000 22,500 Lineal Wall Footage (lf) 1,550 850 Concrete Volume (CY) 2,600 1,800 Ave. Power Required (hp) 170 145 Equipment Cost $900,000 $900,000 *Includes bioreactors and clarifiers **Includes bioreactors and EQ basin In every case, except for basin depth, the SBR process facility appears to exhibit equal or smaller quantities and related costs compared to the Ox-Ditch option. A significant difference shown is the estimated additional cost for reinforced concrete installation for the ox-ditch facilities of 800 CY. This difference is due to the basin configurations, common wall construction, etc. Additional costs for excavation, backfill and dewatering for the Ox-Ditch facility would also accrue. Costs for a RAS/WAS pumping station must be added. Power requirements for the ox-ditch process (excluding the RAS/WAS Pump Station) are also higher than the SBR system. At a combined average demand and energy rate of $0.09/KWH, the estimated additional annual power cost would be approximately $14,700 for the Ox-Ditch system, which equates to a present worth cost for 20 years at 6% interest of $169,000. Table 8-9 presents a concept level estimated project cost for the entire new treatment plant for both the SBR and Ox-Ditch processes and equipment and facilities identified in Tables 8-1, 8-6 and 8-7. The SBR system estimated costs result in $854,000 capital savings over the Ox-Ditch system, and $1,023,000 savings in 20-year net present worth costs. Based on both capital and operating costs, the SBR process facilities are less expensive than the comparable Ox-Ditch facilities and would be preferred. The spread between the two options is due to the differences in cost of the bioreactors and related facilities including clarifiers, RAS/WAS pump station, flow EQ basin and blower building. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 8-11 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Table 8-9 Estimated Treatment Plant Construction Costs at 1.4 MGD ADF Facility Ox-Ditch System SBR System Cost Headworks w/ CMU Building $ 1,230,000 $ 1,230,000 Influent Pump Station $ 264,000 $ 264,000 SBR Bioreactors -- $ 2,210,000 Flow EQ Basin -- $ 530,000 Blower Building (CMU) -- $ 135,000 Ox-Ditch Bioreactors $ 2,780,000 -- Secondary Clarifiers $ 670,000 -- RAS/WAS Pump Station (CMU Bldg.) $ 279,000 -- UV Disinfection (CMU Building) $ 405,000 $ 405,000 Utility Water Pump Sta. $ 142,500 $ 142,500 Biosolids Holding Basin $ 295,000 $ 295,000 Biosolids Dewatering (CMU Building) $ 600,000 $ 600,000 Administration Building $ 187,500 $ 187,500 Maintenance Building $ 240,000 $ 240,000 Flood Protection $ 250,000 $ 250,000 Yard Piping, Utilities & Site Improvements $ 500,000 $ 500,000 Electrical Power & Control System $ 900,000 $ 900,000 Standby Electrical Generator $ 100,000 $ 100,000 Demolition of Existing Facilities $ 150,000 $ 150,000 Totals $ 8,993,000* $ 8,139,000* *Contingencies, engineering, legal, financial, administration, easements, rights of way and property costs are not included. General cost reducing assumptions that are inherent with the above estimates are as follows. • Odor control systems not provided • Turf grass landscaping only • Concrete curbs, gutters or sidewalks not provided • Asphalt paving only from main road to Administration Building. All other roads and paths to be gravel. • Pre-engineered metal canopy for UW pumps • Pre-engineered metal building(s) for Administration and Maintenance. Plant electrical center included in Maintenance Building. These may all be combined into a single building. UV disinfection building may be changed from CMU to a pre-engineered metal building. • Engine generator with outdoor enclosure and integral fuel storage • Submersible type pumping systems are used where applicable • Intermediate and final pump stations are not required • Plant security system not provided • CMU buildings to be colored, smooth face with flat membrane roofs. Headworks and Biosolids Dewatering Buildings may be combined. Blower Building and RAS/WAS Pump Station may be combined. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 8-12 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN 8.13.6 NON-ECONOMIC COMPARISON OF PROCESSES Non-economic factors that can affect selection of the preferred treatment process for the new Moab facility include noise, traffic, odor, appearance, environmental impacts, simplicity and ease of operation, maintenance and repair/replacement requirements and familiarity and wide use in Utah and implementability. The capital and operating cost comparison is shown above. Table 8-10 presents the identified non-economic criteria and ratings on a 10-point scale based on judgments regarding how well each facility performs against the other. The higher rated facility receives full credit for the individual factor and the lower rate facility receives a reduced rating. Ties result in the maximum rating for each. Table 8-10 Non-Economic Comparison of SBR and Ox-Ditch Systems Factor Oxidation Ditch SBR Noise 10 9 Traffic 10 10 Odors 10 10 Appearance 10 10 Environmental 10 10 Familiarity and Wide Use in Utah 10 5 Simplicity – Ease of Operation 10 9 Maintenance and Repair/Replacement Requirements 10 9 Implementability 10 10 Totals Points 90 82 Over half of the factors are rated equal between the two facilities, and the Ox-Ditch system receives the maximum rating in each category. The SBR system receives a lower rating in potential noise due to the use of positive displacement blowers, although they will be housed in a building with the goal of minimal sound emissions. The low rating for the SBR system in Familiarity and Wide Use in Utah is due to the fact that only one other similar system is known to exist in the state, but Ox-Ditches have been used extensively for over 30 years, with numerous installations. Lower scores in both the Simplicity-Ease of Operation and Maintenance and Repair/Replacement Requirements also stem in part from the limited number of installations in Utah and relative uncertainties regarding these issues. On the basis of the non-economic ratings, the Ox-Ditch treatment facility would be preferred, but based on capital and operating costs, the SBR facility is the more desirable option. The net present worth advantage of over $1M for the SBR system argues strongly in favor of that system, but the extensive successful use of Ox-Ditches for many years in Utah gives that technology an edge. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 8-13 MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT FACILITIES MASTER PLAN CHAPTER 9 SELECTED AND RECOMMENDED PLAN 9.1 SELECTED AND RECOMMENDED PLAN The analyses provided in Chapter 8 favor the SBR system for capital and operating costs, and the Ox-Ditch process on non-economic criteria. Both systems would satisfy Moab’s needs for wastewater treatment performance and capacity for many years into the future. The lower net present worth for the SBR system may represent the optimum economic value for the City and the best opportunity to obtain the lowest project and long term operating costs. However, the Ox-Ditch process has equal or higher ratings in all the non-economic categories, with the biggest difference being in process familiarity and wide use in Utah since only one other SBR plant is located within the state. The privately owned parcel of land located immediately south and across 400 West Street from the existing facility has been identified as a preferred location for the new plant, regardless of the selected process. This parcel will provide sufficient space for current and future facilities and help maintain a buffer from surrounding properties. Use of the existing plant site for the new treatment facility would require further evaluations and consideration of age and performance of the existing facilities and possibly greater costs due to coordination requirements and unknown buried conditions. This option is not preferred or recommended. The City should continue negotiations with the private land owner in order to help secure the desired property for this project. Topographic, boundary and environmental surveys and geotechnical studies should be undertaken as soon as possible in to verify that there are no existing conditions that will hinder use of this property, and also determine requirements for construction dewatering, support of basin structures and buildings and other pertinent engineering and construction information. A NEPA study and review process may be needed for the property, depending on the source of funding for the work. The budget figures of $8.139 M provided in Chapter 8 for construction of the SBR facility and $8.993 M for the Ox-Ditch do not include contingencies or fees for engineering or legal services, financing or administrative costs, easements, rights-of-way and land acquisition. Combining of buildings and process functions and consolidation of site improvements that are not currently shown on the concept drawings can help to further control construction costs, and other cost reduction options may also be considered. Estimated costs for the two options are within 10% of each other, which reflects general estimating variability. Therefore, the City may elect to consider both process options in the forthcoming preliminary engineering effort if the non-economic factors related to Ox-Ditch process cause it to appear more favorable than the SBR process. Total project costs including contingencies, professional fees, land and easements, etc. as discussed above are not projected to exceed $10 M. If no significant unforeseen circumstances or resulting changes in the design or other requirements occur which affect the various cost elements, then the City should be confident of the effort being accomplished without need for additional capital beyond this amount. However, this upper limit may affect the ability to select more costly options in favor of the non-economic factors. The City should commence efforts needed for regulatory approval of this plan and to seek financing assistance as needed from state or federal agencies or other identified or preferred sources. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 9-1 APPENDICES Appendix A Wastewater Abbreviation List BOD5 Biochemical 5-day oxygen demand EPA Environmental Protection Agency FeCl3 Ferric chloride gpcd Gallon per capita per day gpm Gallons per minute Hp Horsepower lb./day Pounds per day mg/l Milligrams per liter MGD Million gallons per day RAS Return Activated Sludge SBR Sequencing Batch Reactor TSS Total suspended solids UDEQ Utah Department of Environmental Quality UPDES Utah Pollution Discharge Elimination System VFD Variable Frequency Drive WAS Waste Activated Sludge WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant Appendix B 208 Plan Figures Appendix C Moab WWTP UPDES Permit OLE COPY STATE OF UTAH DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH UTAH POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (UPDES) PERMITS Major Municipal Permit No. UT0020419 Biosolids Permit No. UTL020419 Storm Water Permit No. UTR020419 In compliance with provisions of the Utah Water Quality Act, Title 19, Chapter S, Utah Code Annotated ("UCA') 1953, as amended (the "Act"), MOAB WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY is hereby authorized to discharge from its wastewater treatment facility to receiving waters named COLORADO RIVER, to dispose of biosolids, and to discharge storm water, in accordance with specific limitations, outfalls, and other conditions set forth herein. This permit shall become effective on January 1, 2012 This permit expires at midnight on September 30, 2016. Signed this 1st day g November, 2011. alter L. Bad, P.E. Executive Secretary Utah Water Quality Board DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 Table of Contents Outline Page Number I. DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 1 A. Description of Discharge Point 1 B. Narrative Standard 1 C. Specific Limitations and Self -Monitoring Requirements 1 D. Reporting of Wastewater Monitoring Results 6 II. INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM 7 J. Self -Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. 7 K. Industrial Wastes 7 III. BIOSOLIDS REQUIREMENTS 10 A. Biosolids Treatment and Disposal 10 B. Specific Limitations and Monitoring Requirements 10 D. Special Conditions on Biosolids Storage 11 r,. ncp. cSeiliativc aaiupuug 11 F. Reporting of Monitoring Results 11 IV. STORM WATER REQUIREMENTS 14 A. Coverage of This Section 14 B. Prohibition of Non -Storm Water Discharges 14 C. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Requirements 14 D. Monitoring and Reporting Requirements 20 V. MONITORING, RECORDING & GENERAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 22 A. Representative Sampling 22 B. Monitoring Procedures 22 C. Penalties for Tampering 22 D. Compliance Schedules 22 E. Additional Monitoring by the Permittee 22 F. Records Contents 22 G. Retention of Records 22 H. Twenty-four Hour Notice of Noncompliance Reporting 23 I. Other Noncompliance Reporting 24 J. Inspection and Entry 24 VI. COMPLIANCE RESPONSIBILITIES 25 A. Duty to Comply 25 B. Penalties for Violations of Permit Conditions 25 C. Need to Halt or Reduce Activity not a Defense 25 D. Duty to Mitigate 25 E. Proper Operation and Maintenance 25 F. Removed Substances 25 G. Bypass of Treatment Facilities 26 H. Upset Conditions 27 VII. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 29 A. Planned Changes 29 B. Anticipated Noncompliance 29 C. Permit Actions 29 D. Duty to Reapply 29 E. Duty to Provide Information 29 F. Other Information 29 G. Signatory Requirements 29 H. Penalties for Falsification of Reports 30 I. Availability of Reports 31 J. Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability 31 DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 K. Property Rights 31 L. Severability 31 M. Transfers 31 N. State or Federal Laws 31 O. Water Quality - Reopener Provision 32 P. Biosolids — Reopener Provision 32 Q. Toxicity Limitation - Reopener Provision 3? R. Storm Water-Reopener Provision 33 VIII. DEFINITIONS 34 A. Wastewater 34 B. Biosolids 35 C. Storm Water 38 PART I DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 WASTEWATER I. DISCHARGE LIMITATIONS AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS A. Description of Discharge Point. The authorization to discharge wastewater provided under this part is limited to those outfalls specifically designated below as discharge locations. Discharges at any location not authorized under a UPDES permit are violations of the Act and may be subject to penalties under the Act. Knowingly discharging from an unauthorized location or failing to report an unauthorized discharge may be subject to criminal penalties as provided under the Act. Outfall Number Location of Discharge Outfall 001 Located at latitude 38°34'40" and longitude 109°34'47". The discharge is through a 2000 foot cement pipeline to the Colorado River. B. Narrative Standard. It shall be unlawful, and a violation of this permit, for the permittee to discharge or place any waste or other substance in such a way as will be or may become offensive such as unnatural deposits, floating debris, oil, scum, or other nuisances such as color, odor or taste, or cause conditions which produce undesirable aquatic life or which produce objectionable tastes in edible aquatic organisms; or result in concentrations or combinations of substances which produce undesirable physiological responses in desirable resident fish, or other desirable aquatic life, or undesirable human health effects, as determined by a bioassay or other tests performed in accordance with standard procedures. C. Specific Limitations and Self -Monitoring Requirements. 1. Effective immediately, and lasting through the life of this permit, there shall be no acute or chronic toxicity in Outfall 001 as defined in Part VIII, and determined by test procedures described in Part I. C.3. a & b of this permit. 2. Effective immediately and lasting the duration of this permit, the permittee is authorized to discharge from Outfall 001. Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below: 1 PART I DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 WASTEWATER Parameter Effluent Limitations a/ Monthly Average Weekly Average Minimum Maximum Flow, MGD 1.5 NA NA NA BOD5, mg/L BOD5 Min. % Removal 25 85 35 NA NA NA NA NA TSS, mg/L TSS Min. % Removal 25 85 35 NA NA NA NA NA E-Coli, No./1ahnL 126 158 NA NA TRC, mg/L 1.4 NA NA 1.55 WET, Acute Biomonitoring NA NA NA LCso> 10% effluent Oil & Grease, mg/L NA NA NA 10 pH, Standard Units NA NA 6.5 9.0 TDS, mg/L e/ <400 increase NA NA NA NA — Not Applicable Self -Monitoring and Reporting Requirements a/ Parameter Frequency Sample Type Units Total Flow b_/ c/ Continuous Recorder MGD BOD5, Influent d/ Effluent Weekly Weekly Composite Composite mg/L mg/L TSS, Influent d/ Effluent Weekly Weekly Composite Composite mg/L mg/L E. Coli Weekly Grab No./100mL TDS, Culinary Intake d/ Effluent Quarterly • Quarterly Grab Grab mg/L mg/L TRC Daily Grab mg/L WET, Acute Biomonitoring Quarterly Composite Pass/Fail Oil & Grease Monthly Grab mg/L PH 3 x Weekly Grab SU Metals, Influent Effluent Quarterly Quarterly Composite Composite mg/L mg/L Organic Toxics, Influent Effluent 1st, 3rd and 5th Year 1st, 3rd and 5th Year Grab Grab mg/L mg/L a/ See Definitions, Part VIII, for definition of terms. b_/ Flow measurements of influent/effluent volume shall be made in such a manner that the permittee can affirmatively demonstrate that representative values are being obtained. c/ If the rate of discharge is controlled, the rate and duration of discharge shall be reported. 2- PART I DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 WASTEWATER d/ In addition to monitoring the final discharge, influent samples shall be taken and analyzed for this constituent at the same frequency as required for this constituent in the discharge. e/ The effluent shall not exceed the culinary water intake by more than 400 mg/L of TDS (*******or the permittee could request 1 ton/day salt loading, or 366 tons/year* * * * * * *). 3. Acute/Chronic Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) Testing. a. Whole Effluent Testing — Acute Toxicity. Starting on January 1, 2012, the permittee shall conduct quarterly acute static replacement toxicity tests on a composite sample of the final effluent. The sample shall be collected at outfall 001. The monitoring frequency for acute tests shall be quarterly unless a sample is found to be acutely toxic during a routine test.. If that occurs, the monitoring frequency shall become weekly (See Part I.C. 3 c Accelerated Testing). Samples shall be collected on a two day progression; i.e., if the first sample is on a Monday, during the next sampling period, the sampling shall begin on a Wednesday, etc. If acute toxicity occurs in a test, the permittee shall promptly take all reasonable measures necessary to immediately reduce toxicity The replacement static acute toxicity tests shall be conducted in general accordance with the procedures set out in the latest revision of Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, Sth Edition, (EPA 821/R/02/012), October 2002, as per 40 CFR 136.3(a) TABLE IA -LIST OF APPROVED BIOLOGICAL METHODS. The permittee shall conduct the 48-hour static replacement toxicity test using Ceriodaphnia dubia and the acute 96-hour static replacement toxicity test using Pimephales promelas (fathead minnow). A CO2 atmosphere may be used (in conjunction with an unmodified test) in order to account for artificial pH drift, as previously authorized by the Executive Secretary. Acute toxicity occurs when 50 percent or more mortality is observed for either species at any effluent concentration greater then or equal to 100 % effluent ( LC50 lethal concentration to fifty percent of the population). Mortality in the control must simultaneously be 10 percent or less for the results to be considered valid. If more than 10 percent control mortality occurs, the test shall be repeated until satisfactory control mortality is achieved. If the permit contains a total residual chlorine limitation greater than 0.20 ma/L, the permittee may request from the Executive Secretary approval to de - chlorinate the sample, or collect the sample prior to chlorination. Quarterly test results shall be reported along with the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) submitted for the end of the reporting calendar quarter e.g., biomonitoring results for the calendar quarter ending March 31 shall be reported with the DMR due April 28, with the remaining biomonitoring - 3 - PART I DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 WASTEWATER reports submitted with DMRs due each July 28, October 28, and January 28. All test results shall be reported along with the DMR submitted for that reporting period. The format for the report shall be consistent with the EPA Region 8 website under Whole Effluent Toxicity Reporting forms: http://www. epa.gov/region8/water/wet/documents.html If the results for a minimum of ten consecutive tests indicate no acute toxicity, the permittee may request a reduction in testing frequency and/or reduction to one species. The Executive Secretary may approve, partially approve, or deny the request based on results and other available information. If approval is given, the modification will take place without a public notice. b. Accelerated Testing. When acute toxicity is indicated during routine biomonitoring as specified in this permit, the permittee shall notify the Executive Secretary in writing within five (5) days after becoming aware of the test result. The permittee shall perform an accelerated schedule of biomonitoring to establish whether a pattern of toxicity exists. Accelerated testing will begin within seven (7) days after the permittee becomes aware of the test result. Accelerated testing shall be conducted as specified under Part I. C.3. c, Pattern of Toxicity. If the accelerated testing demonstrates no pattern of toxicity, routine monitoring shall be resumed. c. Pattern of Toxicity. A pattern of toxicity is defined by the results of a series of up to five (5) biomonitoring tests pursuant to the accelerated testing requirements using 100 percent effluent on the single species found to be more sensitive, once every week for up to five (5) consecutive weeks. If two (2) consecutive tests (not including the scheduled quarterly or monthly test which triggered the search for a pattern of toxicity) do not result in acute toxicity, no further accelerated testing will be required and no pattern of toxicity will be found to exist. The permittee will provide written verification to the Executive Secretary within five (5) days, and resume routine monitoring. A pattern of toxicity is established if one of the following occurs: (1) If two (2) consecutive test results (not including the scheduled quarterly or monthly test, which triggered the search for a pattern of toxicity) indicate acute toxicity, this constitutes an established pattern of toxicity. (2) If consecutive tests continue to yield differing results each time, the permittee will be required to conduct up to a maximum of five (5) acute tests (not including the scheduled quarterly or monthly test which triggered the search for a pattern of toxicity). If three out of five test results indicate acute toxicity, this will constitute an established pattern of toxicity. d. Preliminary Toxicity Investigation. - 4 - PART I DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 WASTEWATER (1) When a pattern of toxicity is detected the permittee will notify the Executive Secretary in writing within five (5) days and begin an evaluation of the possible causes of the toxicity. The permittee will have fifteen (15) working days from demonstration of the pattern to complete a Preliminary Toxicity Investigation (PTI) and submit a written report of the results to the Executive Secretary. The PTI may include, but is not limited to, additional chemical and biological monitoring, examination of pretreatment program records, examination of discharge monitoring reports, a thorough review of the testing protocol, evaluation of treatment processes and chemical use, inspection of material storage and transfer areas to determine if a spill may have occurred, and similar procedures. (2) If the PTI identifies a probable toxicant and/or a probable source of toxicity the permittee shall submit, as part of its final results written notification of that effect to the Executive Secretary. Within thirty (30) days of completing the PTI the permittee shall submit for approval a control program to control effluent toxicity and shall proceed to implement such a plan within seven (7) days following approval. The control program, as submitted to or revised by the Executive Secretary, may be incorporated into the permit. (3) If no probable explanation for toxicity is identified in the PTI, the permittee shall notify the Executive Secretary as part of its final report, along with a schedule for conducting a Phase I Toxicity Reduction Evaluation (TRE) (See Part I.C.3.f, Toxicity Reduction Evaluation). (4) If toxicity spontaneously disappears during the PTI, the permittee shall submit written notification to that effect to the Executive Secretary as part of the reporting requirements of paragraph a of this section. e. Toxicity Reduction Evaluation (TRE). If toxicity is detected during the life of this permit and it is determined by the Executive Secretary that a TRE is necessary, the permittee shall be so notified and shall initiate a TRE immediately thereafter. The purpose of the TRE will be to establish the cause of toxicity, locate the source(s) of the toxicity, and control or provide treatmentfor the toxicity. A TRE may include but is not limited to one, all, or a combination of the following: (1) Phase I — Toxicity Characterization (2) Phase II — Toxicity Identification Procedures (3) Phase III — Toxicity Control Procedures PART I DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 WASTEWATER (4) Any other appropriate procedures for toxicity source elimination and control. If the TRE establishes that the toxicity cannot be immediately eliminated, the permittee shall submit a proposed compliance plan to the Executive Secretary. The plan shall include the proposed approach to control toxicity and a proposed compliance schedule for achieving control. If the approach and schedule are acceptable to the Executive Secretary, this permit may be reopened and modified. If the TRE shows that the toxicity is caused by a toxicant(s) that may be controlled with specific numerical limitations, the permittee may: (a) Submit an alternative control program for compliance with the numerical requirements. (b) If necessary, provide a modified biomonitoring protocol, which compensates for the pollutant(s) being controlled numerically. If acceptable to the Executive Secretary, this permit may be reopened and modified to incorporate any additional numerical limitations, a modified compliance schedule if judged necessary by the Executive Secretary, and/or a modified biomonitoring protocol. Failure to conduct an adequate TRE, or failure to submit a plan or program as described above, or the submittal of a plan or program judged inadequate by the Executive Secretary, shall be considered a violation of this permit. Upon completion of the TIE/TRE, the permittee shall return to regular whole effluent toxicity monitoring and reporting as specified in the permit. D. Reporting of Wastewater Monitoring Results. Monitoring results obtained during the previous month shall be summarized for each month and reported on a Discharge Monitoring Report Form (EPA No. 3320-1) or by NetDMR, post -marked or entered into NetDMR no later than the 28th day of the month following the completed reporting period. The first report is due on April 28, 2012. If no discharge occurs during the reporting period, "no discharge" shall be reported. Legible copies of these, and all other reports including whole effluent toxicity (WET) test reports required herein, shall be signed and certified in accordance with the requirements of Signatory Requirements (see Part VII. G), and submitted by NetDMR, or to the Division of Water Quality at the following address: Department of Environmental Quality Division of Water Quality PO Box 144870 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-4870 PART II DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 PRETREATMENT II. INDUSTRIAL PRETREATMENT PROGRAM A. Self -Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. 1. Because the design capacity of this municipal wastewater treatment facility is less than 5 MGD, the permittee will not be required to develop a State -approved industrial pretreatment program at this time. However, in order to determine if development of an industrial pretreatment program is warranted, the permittee shall conduct an industrial waste survey, as described in Part II.B.1, and submit it to the Division of Water Quality within sixty (60) calendar days of the effective date of this• permit and shall sample and analyze both the influent and effluent annually, for the following parameters. Metals Monitoring for Pretreatment Program Parameter Sample Type Frequency Units Total Arsenic Composite Quarterly mg/L Total Cadmium Total Chromium Total Copper Total Cyanide Total Lead Total Mercury Composite/Grab Total Molybdenum Composite Total Nickel Total Selenium Total Silver Total Zinc The results of these analyses shall be submitted along with the Discharge Monitoring Report (MAIM at tha anri of that rannrtina nerind B. Industrial Wastes. 1. The "Industrial Waste Survey" as required by Part II.A.1. consists of; identifying each significant industrial user (SIU), determination of the qualitative and quantitative characteristics of each discharge, and appropriate production data. A (SIU) is defined as an industrial user discharging to a publicly -owned treatment works (POTW) that satisfies any of the following: (1) has a process wastewater flow of 25,000 gallons or more per average work day; (2) has a flow greater than five percent of the flow carried by the municipal system receiving the waste; (3) is subject to Categorical Pretreatment Standards, or (4) has a reasonable potential for ad el. affecting the PnTW's operation or for violating any pretreatment UU VTerJ�ly Ull��llllg LIlV 1 V 1 .r U V�/V1 KL1 Vll V1 iVl YIv1K1.111t, KaaJ pretreatment standard or requirement. 2. The permittee must notify the Executive Secretary of any new introductions by new or existing SIUs or any substantial change in pollutants from any major industrial source. Such notice must contain the information described in 1. above -7- PART II DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 PRETREATMENT and be forwarded no later than sixty (60) days following the introduction or change. 3. Pretreatment Standards (40 CFR 403.5) developed pursuant to Section 307 of The Water Quality Act of 1987 require that under no circumstances shall the permittee allow introduction of the following pollutants into the waste treatment system from any source of non -domestic discharge: a. Pollutants which create a fire or explosion hazard in the publicly owned treatment works (POTW), including, but not limited to, wastestreams with a closed cup flashpoint of less than 140°F (60°C); b. Pollutants, which will cause corrosive structural damage to the POTW, but in no case, discharges with a pH lower than 5.0; c. Solid or viscous pollutants in amounts which will cause obstruction to the flow in the POTW resulting in interference; d. Any pollutant, including oxygen demanding pollutants (BOD, etc.) released in a discharge at such volume or strength as to cause interference in the POTW; e. Heat in amounts, which will inhibit biological activity in the POTW, resulting in interference, but in no case, heat in such quantities that the influent to the sewage treatment works exceeds 104°F (40°C); f. Petroleum oil, nonbiodegradable cutting oil, or products of mineral oil origin in amounts that will cause interference or pass through; g• Pollutants which result in the presence of toxic gases, vapor, or fumes within the POTW in a quantity that may cause worker health or safety problems; or, h. Any trucked or hauled pollutants, except at discharge points designated by the POTW. i. Any pollutant that causes pass through or interference at the POTW. 4. In addition to the general and specific limitations expressed above, more specific pretreatment limitations have been and will be promulgated for specific industrial categories under Section 307 of the Water Quality Act of 1987 as amended (WQA). (See 40 CFR, Subchapter N, Parts 400 through 500, for specific information). 5. The permittee shall provide adequate notice to the Executive Secretary and the Division of Water Quality Industrial Pretreatment Coordinator of; a. Any new introduction of pollutants into the treatment works from an indirect discharger (i.e., industrial user) which would be subject to Sections 301 or 306 of the WQA if it were directly discharging those pollutants; - 8 - PART II DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 PRETREATMENT b. Any substantial change in the volume or character of pollutants being introduced into the treatment works by a source introducing pollutants into the treatment works at the time of issuance of the permit; and c. For the purposes of this section, adequate notice shall include information on: (1) The quality and quantity of effluent to be introduced into such treatment works; and, (2) Any anticipated impact of the change on the quantity or quality of effluent to be discharged from such publicly owned treatment works. 6. At such time as a specific pretreatment limitation becomes applicable to an industrial user of the permittee, the Executive Secretary may, as appropriate, do the following: a. Amend the permittee's UPDES discharge permit to specify the additional pollutant(s) and corresponding effluent limitation(s) consistent with the applicable national pretreatment limitation; b. Require the permittee to specify, by ordinance, contract, or other enforceable means, the type of pollutant(s) and the maximum amount which may be discharged to the permittee's facility for treatment. Such requirement shall be imposed in a manner consistent with the POTW program development requirements of the General Pretreatment Regulations at 40 CFR 403; and/or, c. Require the permittee to monitor its discharge for any pollutant, which may likely be discharged from the permittee's facility, should the industrial user fail to properly pretreat its waste. 7. The Executive Secretary retains, at all times, the right to take legal action against the industrial user and/or the treatment works, in those cases where a permit violation has occurred because of the failure of an industrial user to discharge at an acceptable level. If the permittee has failed to properly delineate maximum acceptable industrial contributor levels, the Executive Secretary will look primarily to the permittee as the responsible party. 8. If local limits are developed per R317-8-8.5(4)(b) to protect the POTW from pass -through or interference, then the POTW must submit limits to DWQ for review and public notice R317-8-8.5(4)(c). PART III BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 III. BIOS OLIDS REQUIREMENTS A. Biosolids Treatment and Disposal. The authorization to dispose of biosolids provided under this permit is limited to those biosolids produced from the treatment works owned and operated by the permittee. The treatment methods and disposal practices are specifically designated below. 1. Treatment. Biosolids produced at the permittee are stabilized in the anaerobic digesters for at least 15 days at a temperature of at least 35° C (95° F). The biosolids are removed from the drying beds and formed into small windrows 3-4 feet high, and 5-6 feet wide, stored on a concrete pad and turned several times during the summer and will be tested for pathogens to meet Class A Standards. 2. Description of Biosolids Disposal Method. The Class B biosolids are disposed in the Klondike landfill. 3. Changes in Treatment Systems and Disposal Practices. Should the MWTF change their disposal methods or the biosolids generation and handling processes of the plant, the MWTF must notify the Executive Secretary at least 180 days in advance. This includes, but is not limited to, the addition or removal of any biosolids treatment units (e.g., digesters, drying beds, etc.) and/or any other change that would require a major modification of the permit. All biosolids land filled must meet the requirements of 40 CFR 258, Utah Administrative Code R315-301-5 and Section 2.12 of the latest version of the EPA Region VHI Biosolids Management Handbook. B. Specific Limitations and Monitoring Requirements. All biosolids generated by this facility to be sold or given away to the public shall meet the requirements of Part IHB.1, 2, 3 and 4 listed below. 1. Vector Attraction Reduction Requirements. The MWTF will meet vector attraction reduction through a volatile solids reduction of at least 38% There are additional vector attraction reduction alternatives available in 40 CFR 503.33. If the permittee intends to use one of these alternatives, the Executive - 10 - PART III BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 Secretary and the EPA must be informed at least thirty (30) days prior to its use. This change may be made without additional public notice. 2. Self -Monitoring Requirements. At a minimum, upon the effective date of this permit, vector attraction reduction and paint filter tests requirements shall be monitored according to 40 CFR Part 503.16. Minimum Frequency of Monitoring Amount_ of Biosolids Disposed Per Year Monitoring Frequency > 0 to < 290 DMT One Time Per Year > 290 to < 1500 DMT Four times Per Year Sample collection, preservation and analysis shall be performed in a manner consistent with the requirements of 40 CFR Part 503 and/or other criteria specified in this permit. C. Special Conditions on Biosolids Storage. For biosolids or material derived from biosolids that are stored in piles for one year or longer, measures shall be taken to ensure that erosion (whether by wind or water) does not occur. Permanent storage of biosolids is prohibited. Biosolids shall not be temporarily stored for more than two years. Written permission to store biosolids for more than two years must be obtained from the Executive Secretary. Storage of biosolids for more than two years will be allowed only if it is determined that significant treatment is occurring. D. Representative Sampling. Biosolids samples used to measure compliance with Part III.B of this permit shall be collected at locations representative of the quality of biosolids generated at the treatment works and immediately prior to land application. E. Reporting of Monitoring Results. 1. The MWTF shall provide the results of all monitoring performed in accordance with Part TT_T,R_ of the permit and information on management practices, and certifications shall be provided no later than February 19 of each year. Each report is for the previous calendar year. If no biosolids were applied to the land during the reporting period, "no biosolids were applied" shall be reported. Legible copies of these, and all other reports required herein, shall be signed and certified in accordance with Record Keeping (see Part III.G.), and submitted to the Utah Division of Water Quality and the EPA at the following addresses: - 11 - Original to: PART III BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 Biosolids Coordinator Utah Division of Water Quality P. O. Box 144870 Salt Lake City Utah, 84114-4870 Copy to: Biosolids Coordinator, 8P-W-P U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Region VIII 1595 Wynkoop Street Denver, CO 80202-1129 F. Additional Monitoring by the Permittee If the MWTF monitors any pollutant more frequently than required by this permit, using test procedures approved under 40 CFR Part 503 or as specified in this permit, the results of this monitoring shall be included in the calculation and reporting of the data submitted on the biosolids report form. Such increased frequency shall also be indicated G. Record Keeping 1. If so notified by the Executive Secretary the MWTF may be required to add additional record keeping if information provided indicates that this is necessary to protect public health and the environment. 2. The MWTF is required to keep the following information for at least 5 years: "I certify under the penalty of law, that the vector attraction requirements in Part IH..B.1, have been met. This determination has been made under my direction and supervision in accordance with the system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and evaluated the information used to determine that the vector attraction reduction requirements have been met. I am aware that there are significant penalties for false certification including the possibility of imprisonment." 3. Records of monitoring information shall include: a. The date, exact place, and time of sampling or measurements; b. The initials or name(s) of the individual(s) who performed the sampling or measurements; c. The date(s) analyses were performed; d. The time(s) analyses were initiated; e. The initials or name(s) of individual(s) who performed the analyses; PART III BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 f. References and written procedures, when available, for the analytical techniques or methods used; and, g• The results of such analyses, including the bench sheets, instrument readouts, computer disks or tapes, etc., used to determine these results. 4. The MWTF shall retain records of all monitoring information, including all calibration and maintenance records and all original strip chart recordings for continuous monitoring instrumentation, copies of all reports required by this permit and records of all data used to complete the application for this permit for the life of the permit. Data collected on site, copies of Biosolids Report forms, and a copy of this UPDES biosolids-only permit must be maintained on site during the duration of activity at the permitted location. H. Twenty-four Hour Notice of Noncompliance Reporting 1. The MWTF shall report any noncompliance including transportation accidents and spills from the transfer of biosolids which may seriously endanger health or the environment as soon as possible, but no later than 24 hours from the time the MWTF first became aware of the circumstances. The report shall be made to the Division of Water Quality at (801) 538-6146 or (801) 536-4123 (24-hour answering machine). 2. A written submission shall also be provided within five days of the time that the MWTF becomes aware of the circumstances. The written submission shall contain: a. A description of the noncompliance and its cause; b. The period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times; c. The estimated time noncompliance is expected to continue if it has not been corrected; and, d. Steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent reoccurrence of the noncompliance. 3. The Executive Secretary may waive the written report on a case -by -case basis if the oral report has been received within 24 hours by the Division of Water Quality, by phone, at (801) 538-6146. 4. Reports shall be submitted to the addresses in Part III.E.I1 Reporting of Monitoring Results.. I. Other Noncompliance Reporting. Instances of noncompliance not required to be reported within 24 hours shall be reported at the time that monitoring reports for Part III.B are submitted. The reports shall contain the information listed in Part HIT - 13 - PART IV STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 IV. STORM WATER REQUIREMENTS. A. Coverage of This Section. The requirements listed under this section shall apply to storm water discharges. Storm water discharges from the following portions of the facility may be eligible for coverage under this permit: biosolids drying beds, haul or access roads on which transportation of biosolids may occur, grit screen cleaning areas, chemical loading, unloading and storage areas, salt or sand storage areas, vehicle or equipment storage and maintenance areas, or any other wastewater treatment device or system, used in the storage, treatment, recycling, and reclamation of municipal or domestic sewage, including lands dedicated to the disposal of sewage sludge that are located within the confines of the facility that may have a reasonable expectation to contribute to pollutants in a storm water discharge. B. Prohibition of Non -Storm Water Discharges. Except for discharges identified in Part I., and discharges described below in this paragraph, non -storm water discharges are prohibited. The following non -storm water discharges may be authorized under this permit provided the non -storm water component of the discharge is in compliance with this section; discharges from fire fighting activities; fire hydrant flushing; potable water sources including waterline flushing; drinking fountain water; irrigation drainage and lawn watering; routine external building wash down water where detergents or other compounds have not been used in the process; pavement wash waters where spills or leaks of toxic or hazardous materials (including oils and fuels) have not occurred (unless all spilled material has been removed) and where detergents are not used; air conditioning condensate; uncontaminated compressor condensate; uncontaminated springs; uncontaminated ground water; and foundation or footing drains where flows are not contaminated with process materials such as solvents. C. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Requirements. The permittee must have (on site) or develop and implement a storm water pollution prevention plan as a condition of this permit. 1. Contents of the Plan. The plan shall include, at a minimum, the following items: a. Pollution Prevention Team. Each plan shall identify a specific individual or individuals within the facility organization as members of a storm water Pollution Prevention Team who are responsible for developing the storm water pollution prevention plan and assisting the facility or plant manager in its implementation, maintenance, and revision. The plan shall clearly identify the responsibilities of each team member. The activities and responsibilities of the team shall address all aspects of the facility's storm water pollution prevention plan. b. Description of Potential Pollutant Sources. Each plan shall provide a description of potential sources which may reasonably be expected to add significant amounts of pollutants to storm water discharges or which may result in the discharge of pollutants during dry weather from separate storm sewers draining the facility. Each plan shall identify all activities and significant materials, which may be reasonably expected to have the potential as a significant pollutant source. Each plan shall include, at a minimum: - 14 - (i) 0) PART IV STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 (1) Drainage. A site map indicating drainage areas and storm water outfalls. For each area of the facility that generates storm water discharges associated with the waste water treatment related activity with a reasonable potential for containing significant amounts of pollutants, a prediction of the direction of flow and an identification of the types of pollutants that are likely to be present in storm water discharges associated with the activity. Factors to consider include the toxicity of the pollutant; quantity of chemicals used, produced or discharged; the likelihood of contact with storm water; and history of significant leaks or spills of toxic or hazardous pollutants. Flows with a significant potential for causing erosion shall be identified. The site map shall include but not be limited to: (a) Drainage direction and discharge points from all wastewater associated activities including but not limited to grit screen cleaning, bio-solids drying beds and transport, chemical/material loading, unloading and storage areas, vehicle maintenance areas, salt or sand storage areas. (b) Location of any erosion and sediment control structure or other control measures utilized for reducing pollutants in storm water runoff. (c) Location of bio-solids drying beds where exposed to precipitation or where the transportation of bio-solids may be spilled onto internal roadways or tracked off site. (d) Location where grit screen cleaning or other routinely performed industrial activities are located and are exposed to precipitation. (e) Location of any handling, loading, unloading or storage of chemicals or potential pollutants such as caustics, hydraulic fluids, lubricants, solvents or other petroleum products, or hazardous wastes and where these may be exposed to precipitation. (fl Locations where any major spills or leaks of toxic or hazardous materials have occurred. (g) Location of any sand or salt piles. (h) Location of fueling stations or vehicle and equipment maintenance and cleaning areas that are exposed to precipitation. Location of receiving streams or other surface water bodies. Locations of outfalls and the types of discharges contained in the drainage areas of the outfalls. PART IV STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 (2) Inventory of Exposed Materials. An inventory of the types of materials handled at the site that potentially may be exposed to precipitation. Such inventory shall include a narrative description of significant materials that have been handled, treated, stored or disposed in a manner to allow exposure to storm water between the time of 3 years prior to the effective date of this permit and the present; method and location of onsite storage or disposal; materials management practices employed to minimize contact of materials with storm water runoff between the time of 3 years prior to the effective date of this permit and the present; the location and a description of existing structural and nonstructural control measures to reduce pollutants in storm water runoff; and a description of any treatment the storm water receives. (3) Spills and Leaks. A list of significant spills and significant leaks of toxic or hazardous pollutants that occurred at areas that are exposed to precipitation or that otherwise drain to a storm water conveyance at the facility after the date of 3 years prior to the effective date of this permit. Such list shall be updated as appropriate during the term of the permit. (4) Sampling Data. A summary of existing discharge sampling data describing pollutants in storm water discharges from the facility, including a summary of sampling data collected during the term of this permit. (5) Summary of Potential Pollutant Sources and Risk Assessment. A narrative description of the potential pollutant sources from the following activities associated with treatment works: access roads/rail lines; loading and unloading operations; outdoor storage activities; material handling sites; outdoor vehicle storage or maintenance sites; significant dust or particulate generating processes; and onsite waste disposal practices. Specific potential pollutants shall be identified where known. (6) Measures and Controls. The permittee shall develop a description of storm water management controls appropriate for the facility, and implement such controls. Theappropriateness and priorities of controls in a plan shall reflect identified potential sources of pollutants at the facility. The description of storm water management controls shall address the following minimum components, including a schedule for implementing such controls: (7) Good Housekeeping. All areas that may contribute pollutants to storm waters discharges shall be maintained in a clean, orderly manner. These are practices that would minimize the generation of pollutants at the source or before it would be necessary to employ sediment ponds or other control measures at the discharge outlets. Where applicable, such measures or other equivalent measures would include the following: sweepers and covered storage to minimize dust generation and storm runoff; conservation of vegetation where possible to minimize erosion; - 16 - PART IV STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 sweeping of haul roads, bio-solids access points, and exits to reduce or eliminate off site tracking; sweeping of sand or salt storage areas to minimize entrainment in storm water runoff; collection, removal, and proper disposal of waste oils and other fluids resulting from vehicle and equipment maintenance; other equivalent measures to address identified potential sources of pollution. (8) Preventive Maintenance. A preventive maintenance program shall involve timely inspection and maintenance of storm water management devices (e.g., cleaning oil/water separators, catch basins) as well as inspecting and testing facility equipment and systems to uncover conditions that could cause breakdowns or failures resulting in discharges of pollutants to surface waters, and ensuring appropriate maintenance of such equipment and systems. (9) Spill Prevention and Response Procedures. Areas where potential spills that can contribute pollutants to storm water discharges can occur, and their accompanying drainage points, shall be identified clearly in the storm water pollution prevention plan. Where appropriate, specifying material handling procedures, storage requirements, and use of equipment such as diversion valves in the plan should be considered. Procedures and equipment for cleaning up spills shall be identified in the plan and made available to the appropriate personnel. (10) Inspections. In addition to the comprehensive site evaluation required under paragraph (Part IV. C.1. b. (16)) of this section, qualified facility personnel shall be identified to inspect designated equipment and areas of the facility on a periodic basis. The following areas shall be included in all inspections: access roads/rail lines, equipment storage and maintenance areas (both indoor and outdoor areas); fueling; material handling areas, residual treatment, storage, and disposal areas; and wastewater treatment areas. A set of tracking or follow-up procedures shall be used to ensure that appropriate actions are taken in response to the inspections. Records of inspections shall be maintained. The use of a checklist developed by the facility is encouraged. (11) Employee Training. Employee training programs shall inform personnel responsible for implementing activities identified in the storm water pollution prevention plan or otherwise responsible for storm water management at all levels of responsibility of the components and goals of the storm water pollution prevention plan. Training should address topics such as spill response, good housekeeping and material management practices. The pollution prevention plan shall identify how often training will take place, but training should be held at least annually (once per calendar year). Employee training must, at a minimum, address the following areas when applicable to a facility: petroleum product management; process chemical management; spill prevention and control; fueling procedures; general good housekeeping PART IV STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 practices; proper procedures for using fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides. (12) Record keeping and Internal Reporting Procedures. A description of incidents (such as spills, or other discharges), along with other information describing the quality and quantity of storm water discharges shall be included in the plan required under this part. Inspections and maintenance activities shall be documented and records of such activities shall be incorporated into the plan. (13) Non -storm Water Discharges. (a) Certification. The plan shall include a certification that the discharge has been tested or evaluated for the presence of non -storm water discharges. The certification shall include the identification of potential significant sources of non -storm water at the site, a description of the results of any test and/or evaluation for the presence of non -storm water discharges, the evaluation criteria or testing method used, the date of any testing and/or evaluation, and the onsite drainage points that were directly observed during the test. Certifications shall be signed in accordance with Part VII. G of this permit. (b) Exceptions. Except for flows from fire fighting activities, sources of non -storm water listed in Part IV.B. (Prohibition of Non -storm Water Discharges) of this permit that are combined with storm water discharges associated with industrial activity must be identified in the plan. The plan shall identify and ensure the implementation of appropriate pollution prevention measures for the non -storm water component(s) of the discharge. (c) Failure to Certify. Any facility that is unable to provide the certification required (testing for non -storm water discharges), must notify the Executive Secretary within 180 days after the effective date of this permit. If the failure to certify is caused by the inability to perform adequate tests or evaluations, such notification shall describe: the procedure of any test conducted for the presence of non -storm water discharges; the results of such test or other relevant observations; potential sources of non -storm water discharges to the storm sewer; and why adequate tests for such storm sewers were not feasible. Non -storm water discharges to waters of the State, which are not, authorized by a UPDES permit are unlawful, and must be terminated. (14) Sediment and Erosion Control. The plan shall identify areas, which, due to topography, activities, or other factors, have a high potential for significant soil erosion, and identify structural, vegetative, and/or stabilization measures to be used to limit erosion. PART IV STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 (15) Management of Runoff. The plan shall contain a narrative consideration of the appropriateness of traditional storm water management practices (practices other than those which control the generation or source(s) of pollutants) used to divert, infiltrate, reuse, or otherwise manage storm water runoff in a manner that reduces pollutants in storm water discharges from the site. The plan shall provide that measures that the permittee determines to be reasonable and appropriate shall be implemented and maintained. The potential of various sources at the facility to contribute pollutants to storm water discharges associated with industrial activity Part IV.C.I.b (Description of Potential Pollutant Sources) of this permit] shall be considered when determining reasonable and appropriate measures. Appropriate measures or other equivalent measures may include: vegetative swales and practices, reuse of collected storm water (such as for a process or as an irrigation source), inlet controls (such as oil/water separators), snow management activities, infiltration devices, wet detention/retention devices and discharging storm water through the waste water facility for treatment. (16) Comprehensive Site Compliance Evaluation. Qualified personnel shall conduct site compliance evaluations at appropriate intervals specified in the plan, but in no case less than once a year. Such evaluations shall provide: (a) Areas contributing to a storm water discharge associated with industrial activity shall be visually inspected for evidence of, or the potential for, pollutants entering the drainage system. Measures to reduce pollutant loadings shall be evaluated to determine whether they are adequate and properly implemented in accordance with the terms of the permit or whether additional control measures are needed. Structural storm water management measures, sediment and erosion control measures, and other structural pollution prevention measures identified in the plan shall be observed to ensure that they are operating correctly. A visual inspection of equipment needed to implement the plan, such as spill response equipment, shall be made. (b) Based on the results of the evaluation, the description of potential pollutant sources identified in the plan in accordance with Part IV C.1.b (Description of Potential Pollutant Sources) of this section and pollution prevention measures and controls identified in the plan in accordance with Part IV. C.1. b. (6) (Measures and Controls) of this section shall be revised as appropriate within 2 weeks of such evaluation and shall provide for implementation of any changes to the plan in a timely manner, but in no case more than 12 weeks after the evaluation. (c) A report summarizing the scope of the evaluation, personnel making the evaluation, the date(s) of the evaluation, major observations relating to the implementation of the storm water pollution - 19 - PART IV STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 prevention plan, and actions taken in accordance with paragraph i. (above) shall be made and retained as part of the storm water pollution prevention plan for at least 3 years after the date of the evaluation. The report shall identify any incidents of noncompliance. Where a report does not identify any incidents of noncompliance, the report shall contain a certification that the facility is in compliance with the storm water pollution prevention plan and this permit. The report shall be signed in accordance with Part VII. G (Signatory Requirements) of this permit. (17) Deadlines for Plan Preparation and Compliance. The permittee shall prepare and implement a plan in compliance with the provisions of this section within 270 days of the effective date of this permit. If the permittee already has a plan, it shall be revised according to Part IV. C.1. b. (16), Comprehensive Site Evaluation. (18) Keeping Plans Current. The permittee shall amend the plan whenever there is a change in design, construction, operation, or maintenance, that has a significant effect on the potential for the discharge of pollutants to the waters of the state or if the storm water pollution prevention plan proves to be ineffective in eliminating or significantly minimizing pollutants from sources identified by the plan, or in otherwise achieving the general objective of controlling pollutants in storm water discharges associated with the activities at the facility. D. Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. 1. Quarterly Visual Examination of Storm Water Quality. Facilities shall perform and document a visual examination of a storm water discharge associated with industrial activity from each outfall, except discharges exempted below. The examination must be made at least once in each of the following designated periods during daylight hours unless there is insufficient rainfall or snow melt to produce a runoff event: January through March; April through June; July through September; and October through December. a. Sample and Data Collection. Examinations shall be made of samples collected within the first 30 minutes (or as soon thereafter as practical, but not to exceed 1 hour) of when the runoff or snowmelt begins discharging. The examinations shall document observations of color, odor, clarity, floating solids, settled solids, suspended solids, foam, oil sheen, and other obvious indicators of storm water pollution. The examination must be conducted in a well lit area. No analytical tests are required to be performed on the samples. All such samples shall be collected from the discharge resulting from a storm event that is greater than 0.1 inches in magnitude and that occurs at least 72 hours from the previously measurable (greater than 0.1 inch rainfall) storm event. Where practicable, the same individual should carry out the collection and examination of discharges for entire permit term. PART IV STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 b. Visual Storm Water Discharge Examination Reports. Visual examination reports must be maintained onsite in the pollution prevention plan. The report shall include the examination date and time, examination personnel, the nature of the discharge (i.e., runoff or snow melt), visual quality of the storm water discharge (including observations of color, odor, clarity, floating solids, settled solids, suspended solids, foam, oil sheen, and other obvious indicators of storm water pollution), and probable sources of any observed storm water contamination. c. Representative Discharge. When the permittee has two or more outfalls that, based on a consideration of industrial activity, significant materials, and management practices and activities within the area drained by the outfall, the permittee reasonably believes discharge substantially identical effluents, the permittee may collect a sample of effluent of one of such outfalls and report that the observation data also applies to the substantially identical outfall(s) provided that the permittee includes in the storm water pollution prevention plan a description of the location of the outfalls and explains in detail why the outfalls are expected to discharge substantially identical effluents. In addition, for each outfall that the permittee believes is representative, an estimate of the size of the drainage area (in square feet) and an estimate of the runoff coefficient of the drainage area [e.g., low (under 40 percent), medium (40 to 65 percent), or high (above 65 percent)] shall be provided in the plan. d. Adverse Conditions. When a discharger is unable to collect samples over the course of the visual examination period as a result of adverse climatic conditions, the discharger must document the reason for not performing the visual examination and retain this documentation onsite with the results of the visual examination. Adverse weather conditions, which may prohibit the collection of samples, include weather conditions that create dangerous conditions for personnel (such as local flooding, high winds, hurricane, tornadoes, electrical storms, etc.) or otherwise make the collection of a sample impracticable (drought, extended frozen conditions, etc.). e. Inactive and Unstaffed Site. When a discharger is unable to conduct visual storm water examinations at an inactive and unstaffed site, the operator of the facility may exercise a waiver of the monitoring requirement as long as the facility remains inactive and unstaffed. The facility must maintain a certification with the pollution prevention plan stating that the site is inactive and unstaffed so that performing visual examinations during a qualifying event is not feasible. PART V DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 V. MONITORING, RECORDING & GENERAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS A. Representative Sampling. Samples taken in compliance with the monitoring requirements established under Part I shall be collected from the effluent stream prior to discharge into the receiving waters. Samples and measurements shall be representative of the volume and nature of the monitored discharge. Samples of biosolids shall be collected at a location representative of the quality of biosolids immediately prior to the use -disposal practice. B. Monitoring Procedures. Monitoring must be conducted according to test procedures approved under Utah Administrative Code ("UAC') R317-2-10 and 40CFR Part 503, unless other test procedures have been specified in this permit. C. Penalties for Tampering. The Act provides that any person who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly renders inaccurate, any monitoring device or method required to ,be maintained under this permit shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 per violation, or by imprisonment for not more than six months per violation, or by both. D. Compliance Schedules. Reports of compliance or noncompliance with, or any progress reports on, interim and final requirements contained in any Compliance Schedule of this permit shall be submitted no later than 14 days following each schedule date. E. Additional Monitoring by the Permittee. If the permittee monitors any parameter more frequently than required by this permit, using test procedures approved under UAC R317-2-10 and 40 CFR 503 or as specified in this permit, the results of this monitoring shall be included in the calculation and reporting of the data submitted in the DMR or the Biosolids Report Form. Such increased frequency shall also be indicated. Only those parameters required by the permit need to be reported. F. Records Contents. Records of monitoring information shall include: 1. The date, exact place, and time of sampling or measurements: 2. The individual(s) who performed the sampling or measurements; 3. The date(s) and time(s) analyses were performed; 4. The individual(s) who performed the analyses; 5. The analytical techniques or methods used; and, 6. The results of such analyses. G. Retention of Records. The permittee shall retain records of all monitoring information, including all calibration and maintenance records and all original strip chart recordings for continuous monitoring instrumentation, copies of all reports required by this permit, and records of all data used to complete the application for this permit, for a period of at least five years from the date of the sample, measurement, report or application. This period may be extended by request of the - 22 - PART V DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 Executive Secretary at any time. A copy of this UPDES permit must be maintained on site during the duration of activity at the permitted location H. Twenty-four Hour Notice of Noncompliance Reporting. 1. The permittee shall (orally) report any noncompliance including transportation accidents, spills, and uncontrolled runoff from biosolids transfer or land application sites which may seriously endanger health or environment, as soon as possible, but no later than twenty-four (24) hours from the time the permittee first became aware of circumstances. The report shall be made to the Division of Water Quality, (801) 536-4300, or 24-hour answering service (801) 536-4123. 2. The following occurrences of noncompliance shall be reported by telephone (801) 536-4123 as soon as possible but no later than 24 hours from the time the permittee becomes aware of the circumstances: a. Any noncompliance which may endanger health or the environment; b. Any unanticipated bypass, which exceeds any effluent limitation in the permit (See Part VI. G, Bypass of Treatment Facilities.); c. Any upset which exceeds any effluent limitation in the permit (See Part VIII, Upset Conditions.); d. Violation of a maximum daily discharge limitation for any of the pollutants listed in the permit; or, e. Violation of any of the Table 3 metals limits, the pathogen limits, the vector attraction reduction limits or the management practices for biosolids that have been sold or given away. 3. A written submission shall also be provided within five days of the time that the permittee becomes aware of the circumstances. The written submission shall contain: a. A description of the noncompliance and its cause; b. The period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times; c. The estimated time noncompliance is expected to continue if it has not been corrected; d. Steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent reoccurrence of the noncompliance; and, e. Steps taken, if any, to mitigate the adverse impacts on the environment and human health during the noncompliance period. - 23 - PART V DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 SIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 4. The Executive Secretary may waive the written report on a case -by -case basis if the oral report has been received within 24 hours by the Division of Water Quality, (801) 538-6146. 5. Reports shall be submitted to the addresses in Part I.D, Reporting of Monitoring Results. I. Other Noncompliance Reporting. Instances of noncompliance not required to be reported within 24 hours shall be reported at the time that monitoring reports for Part I.D are submitted. The reports shall contain the information listed in Part V.H.3 J. Inspection and Entry The permittee shall allow the Executive Secretary, or an authorized representative, upon the presentationof credentials and other documents as may be required by law, to: 1. Enter upon the permittee's premises where a regulated facility or activity is located or conducted, or where records must be kept under the conditions of the permit; 2. Have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that must be kept under the conditions of this permit; 3. Inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment (including monitoring and control equipment), practices, or operations regulated or required under this permit, including but not limited to, biosolids treatment, collection, storage facilities or area, transport vehicles and containers, and land application sites; 4. Sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purpose of assuring permit compliance or as otherwise authorized by the Act, any substances or parameters at any location, including, but not limited to, digested biosolids before dewatering, dewatered biosolids, biosolids transfer or staging areas, any ground or surface waters at the land application sites or biosolids, soils, or vegetation on the land application sites; and, 5. The permittee shall make the necessary arrangements with the landowner or leaseholder to obtain permission or clearance, the Executive Secretary, or authorized representative, upon the presentation of credentials and other documents as may be required by law, will be permitted to enter without delay for the purposes of performing their responsibilities. PART VI DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 VI. COMPLIANCE RESPONSIBILITIES A. Duty to Comply. The permittee must comply with all conditions of this permit. Any permit noncompliance constitutes a violation of the Act and is grounds for enforcement action; for permit termination, revocation and reissuance, or modification; or for denial of a permit renewal application. The permittee shall give advance notice to the Executive Secretary of any planned changes in the permitted facility or activity, which may result in noncompliance with permit requirements. B. Penalties for Violations of Permit Conditions. The Act provides that any person who violates a permit condition implementing provisions of the Act is subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $10,000 per day of such violation. Any person who willfully or negligently violates permit conditions or the Act is subject to a fine not exceeding $25,000 per day of violation. Any person convicted under UCA 19-5-11 S(2) a second time shall be punished by a fine not exceeding $50,000 per day. Except as provided at Part VI.G, Bypass of Treatment Facilities and Part VIII, Upset Conditions, nothing in this permit shall be construed to relieve the permittee of the civil or criminal penalties for noncompliance. C. Need to Halt or Reduce Activity not a Defense. It shall not be a defense for a permittee in an enforcement action that it would have been necessary to halt or reduce the permitted activity in order to maintain compliance with the conditions of this permit. D. Duty to Mitigate. The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent any discharge in violation of this permit, which has a reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human health or the environment. The permittee shall also take all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent any land application in violation of this permit. E. Proper Operation and Maintenance. The permittee shall at all times properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems of treatment and control (and related appurtenances) which are installed or used by the permittee to achieve compliance with the conditions of this permit. Proper operation and maintenance also includes adequate laboratory controls and quality assurance procedures. This provision requires the operation of back-up or auxiliary facilities or similar systems, which are installed by a permittee only when the operation is necessary to achieve compliance with the conditions of the permit. F. Removed Substances. Collected screening, grit, solids, sludge, or other pollutants removed in the course of treatment shall be disposed of in such a manner so as to prevent any pollutant from entering any waters of the state or creating a health hazard. Sludge/digester supernatant and filter backwash - 25 - PART VI DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 shall not directly enter either the final effluent or waters of the state by any other direct route. G. Bypass of Treatment Facilities. 1. Bypass Not Exceeding Limitations. The permittee may allow any bypass to occur which does not cause effluent limitations to be exceeded, but only if it also is for essential maintenance to assure efficient operation. These bypasses are not subject to paragraph 2 and 3 of this section. 2. Prohibition of Bypass. a. Bypass is prohibited, and the Executive Secretary may take enforcement action against a permittee for bypass, unless: (1) Bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of human life, personal injury, or severe property damage; (2) There were no feasible alternatives to bypass, such as the use of auxiliary treatment facilities, retention of untreated wastes, or maintenance during normal periods of equipment downtime. This condition is not satisfied if adequate backup equipment should have been installed in the exercise of reasonable engineering judgement to prevent a bypass which occurred during normal periods of equipment downtime or preventive maintenance, and (3) The permittee submitted notices as required under section VI.G.3. b. The executive Secretary may approve an anticipated bypass, after considering its adverse effects, if the Executive Secretary determines that it will meet the three conditions listed in sections VI. G.2. a (1), (2) and (3). 3. Notice. a. Anticipated bypass. Except as provided above in section VI. G.2 and below in section VI. G.3. b, if the permittee knows in advance of the need for a bypass, it shall submit prior notice, at least ninety days before the date of bypass. The prior notice shall include the following unless otherwise waived by the Executive Secretary: (1) Evaluation of alternative to bypass, including cost -benefit analysis containing an assessment of anticipated resource damages: - 26 - PART VI DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 (2) A specific bypass plan describing the work to be performed including scheduled dates and times. The permittee must notify the Executive Secretary in advance of any changes to the bypass schedule; (3) Description of specific measures to be taken to minimize environmental and public health impacts; (4) A notification plan sufficient to alert all downstream users, the public and others reasonably expected to be impacted by the bypass; (5) A water quality iIJJGJJ111Gnt plan to include sufficient monitoring of the receiving water before, during and following the bypass to enable evaluation of public health risks and environmental impacts; and, (6) Any additional information requested by the Executive Secretary. b. Emergency Bypass. Where ninety days advance notice is not possible, the permittee must notify the Executive Secretary, and the Director of the Department of Natural Resources, as soon as it becomes aware of the need to bypass and provide to the Executive Secretary the information in section W.. G.3. a. (1) through (6) to the extent practicable. c. Unanticipated bypass. The permittee shall submit notice of an unanticipated bypass to the Executive Secretary as required under Part IV A Twenty Four flour Reporting. The pelnnittee shall also immediately notify the Director of the Department of Natural Resources, the public and downstream • users and shall implement measures to minimize impacts to public health and environment to the extent practicable. H. Upset Conditions. 1. Effect of an upset. An upset constitutes an affirmative defense to an action brought for noncompliance with technology based permit effluent limitations if the requirements of paragraph 2 of this section are met. Executive Secretary's administrative determination regarding a claim of upset cannot be judiciously challenged by the permittee until such time as an action is initiated for noncompliance. 2. Conditions necessary for a demonstration of upset. A permittee who wishes to establish the affirmative defense of upset shall demonstrate, - 27 - PART VI DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 through properly signed, contemporaneous operating logs, or other relevant evidence that: a. An upset occurred and that the permittee can identify the cause(s) of the upset; b. The permitted facility was at the time being properly operated; c. The permittee submitted notice of the upset as required under Part V.H, Twenty-four Hour Notice of Noncompliance Reporting; and, d. The permittee complied with any remedial measures required under Part VI.D, Duty to Mitigate. 3. Burden of proof. In any enforcement proceeding, the permittee seeking to establish the occurrence of an upset has the burden of proof. - 28 - PART VII DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 VII. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS A. Planned Changes. The permittee shall give notice to the Executive Secretary as soon as possible of any planned physical alterations or additions to the permitted facility. Notice is required only when the alteration or addition could significantly change the nature or increase the quantity of parameters discharged or pollutant sold or given away. This notification applies to pollutants, which are not subject to effluent limitations in the permit. In addition, if there are any planned substantial changes to the permittee's existing sludge facilities or their manner of operation or to current sludge management practices of storage and disposal, the permittee shall give notice to the Executive Secretary of any planned changes at least 30 days prior to their implementation. B. Anticipated Noncompliance. The permittee shall give advance notice to the Executive Secretary of any planned changes in the permitted facility or activity, which may result in noncompliance with permit requirements. C. Permit Actions. This permit may be modified, revoked and reissued, or terminated for cause. The filing of a request by the permittee for a permit modification, revocation and reissuance, or termination, or a notification of planned changes or anticipated noncompliance, does not stay any permit condition. D. Duty to Reapply. If the permittee wishes to continue an activity regulated by this permit after the expiration date of this permit, the permittee shall apply for and obtain a new permit. The application shall be submitted at least 180 days before the expiration date of this permit. E. Duty to Provide Information. The permittee shall furnish to the Executive Secretary, within a reasonable time, any information which the Executive Secretary may request to determine whether cause exists for modifying, revoking and reissuing, or terminating this permit, or to determine compliance with this permit. The permittee shall also furnish to the Executive Secretary, upon request, copies of records required to be kept by this permit. F. Other Information. When the permittee becomes aware that it failed to submit any relevant facts in a permit application, or submitted incorrect information in a permit application or any report to the Executive Secretary, it shall promptly submit such facts or information. G. Signatory Requirements. All applications, reports or information submitted to the Executive Secretary shall be signed and certified. - 29 - PART VII DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 1. All permit applications shall be signed by either a principal executive officer or ranking elected official. 2. All reports required by the permit and other information requested by the Executive Secretary shall be signed by a person described above or by a duly authorized representative of that person. A person is a duly authorized representative only if: a. The authorization is made in writing by a person described above and submitted to the Executive Secretary, and, b. The authorization specifies either an individual or a position having responsibility for the overall operation of the regulated facility, such as the position of plant manager, superintendent, position of equivalent responsibility, or an individual or position having overall responsibility for environmental matters. A duly authorized representative may thus be either a named individual or any individual occupying a named position. 3. Changes to authorization. If an authorization under paragraph VII. G.2 is no longer accurate because a different individual or position has responsibility for the overall operation of the facility, a new authorization satisfying the requirements of paragraph VII. G.2. must be submitted to the Executive Secretary prior to or together with any reports, information, or applications to be signed by an authorized representative. 4. Certification. Any person signing a document under this section shall make the following certification: "I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons -who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations." H. Penalties for Falsification of Reports. The Act provides that any person who knowingly makes any false statement, representation, or certification in any record or other document submitted or required to be maintained under this permit, including monitoring reports or reports of compliance or noncompliance shall, upon conviction be punished by a fine of not more than - 30 - PART VII DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 $10,000.00 per violation, or by imprisonment for not more than six months per violation, or by both. I. Availability of Reports. Except for data determined to be confidential under UAC R317-8-3.2, all reports prepared in accordance with the terms of this permit shall be available for public inspection at the office of Executive Secretary. As required by the Act, permit applications, permits and effluent data shall not be considered confidential. J. Oil and Hazardous Substance Liability. Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the permittee of any legal action or relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties to which the permittee is or may be subject under the Act. K. Property Rights. The issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights of any sort, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it authorize any injury to private property or any invasion of personal rights, nor any infringement of federal, state or local laws or regulations. L. Severability. The provisions of this permit are severable, and if any provisions of this permit, or the application of any provision of this permit to any circumstance, is held invalid, the application of such provision to other circumstances, and the remainder of this permit, shall not be affected thereby. M. Transfers. This permit may be automatically transferred to a new permittee if: 1. The current permittee notifies the Executive Secretary at least 20 days in advance of the proposed transfer date; 2. The notice includes a written agreement between the existing and new permittee's containing a specific date for transfer of permit responsibility, coverage, and liability between them; and, 3. The Executive Secretary does not notify the existing permittee and the proposed new permittee of his or her intent to modify, or revoke and reissue the permit. If this notice is not received, the transfer is effective on the date specified in the agreement mentioned in paragraph 2 above. N. State or Federal Laws. Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action or relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties established pursuant to any applicable state law or regulation under authority preserved by UCA 19-5-117 and Section 510 of the Act or any applicable Federal or State transportation - 31 - PART VII DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 regulations, such as but not limited to the Department of Transportation regulations. O. Water Quality - Reopener Provision. This permit may be reopened and modified (following proper administrative procedures) to include the appropriate effluent limitations and compliance schedule, if necessary, if one or more of the following events occurs: 1. Water Quality Standards for the receiving water(s) to which the permittee discharges are modified in such a manner as to require different effluent limits than contained in this permit. 2. A final wasteload allocation is developed and approved by the State and/or EPA for incorporation in this permit. 3. Revisions to the current CWA § 208 areawide treatment management plans or promulgations/revisions to TMDLs (40 CFR 130.7) approved by the EPA and adopted by DWQ which calls for different effluent limitations than contained in this permit. P. Biosolids — Reopener Provision. This permit may be reopened and modified (following proper administrative procedures) to include the appropriate biosolids limitations (and compliance schedule, if necessary), management practices, other appropriate requirements to protect public health and the environment, or if there have been substantial changes (or such changes are planned) in biosolids use or disposal practices; applicable management practices or numerical limitations for pollutants in biosolids have been promulgated which are more stringent than the requirements in this permit; and/or it has been determined that the permittees biosolids use or land application practices do not comply with existing applicable state of federal regulations. Q. Toxicity Limitation - Reopener Provision. This permit may be reopened and modified (following proper administrative procedures) to include, whole effluent toxicity (WET) limitations, a compliance date, a compliance schedule, a change in the whole effluent toxicity (biomonitoring) protocol, additional or modified numerical limitations, or any other conditions related to the control of toxicants if one or more of the following events occur; 1. Toxicity is detected, as per Part I. C.3. b of this permit, during the duration of this permit. - 32 - PART VII DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 2. The THE results indicate that compliance with the toxic limits will require an implementation schedule past the date for compliance and the Executive Secretary agrees with the conclusion. 3. The THE results indicate that the toxicant(s) represent pollutant(s) that may be controlled with specific numerical limits, and the Executive Secretary agrees that numerical controls are the most appropriate course of action. 4. Following the implementation of numerical control(s) of toxicant(s), the Executive Secretary agrees that a modified biomonitoring protocol is necessary to compensate for those toxicant that are controlled numerically. 5. The THE reveals other unique conditions or characteristics, which in the opinion of the permit issuing authority justify the incorporation of unanticipated special conditions in the permit. R. Storm Water-Reopener Provision. At any time during the duration (life) of this permit, this permit may be reopened and modified (following proper administrative procedures) as per UAC R317.8, to include, any applicable storm water provisions and requirements, a storm water pollution prevention plan, a compliance schedule, a compliance date, monitoring and/or reporting requirements, or any other conditions related to the control of storm water discharges to "waters -of -State". - 33 - PART VIII DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 VIII. DEFINITIONS A. Wastewater. 1. The "7-day (and weekly) average", other than for e-coli bacteria, fecal coliform bacteria, and total coliform bacteria, is the arithmetic average of all samples collected during a consecutive 7-day period or calendar week, whichever is applicable. Geometric means shall be calculated for e-coli bacteria, fecal coliform bacteria, and total coliform bacteria. The 7-day and weekly averages are applicable only to those effluent characteristics for which there are 7-day average effluent limitations. The calendar week, which begins on Sunday and ends on Saturday, shall be used for purposes of reporting self -monitoring data on discharge monitoring report forms. Weekly averages shall be calculated for all calendar weeks with Saturdays in the month. If a calendar week overlaps two months (i.e., the Sunday is in one month and the Saturday in the following month), the weekly average calculated for that calendar week shall be included in the data for the month that contains Saturday. 2. The "30-day (and monthly) average," other than for e-coli bacteria, fecal coliform bacteria and total coliform bacteria, is the arithmetic average of all samples collected during a consecutive 30-day period or calendar month, whichever is applicable. Geometric means shall be calculated for e-coli bacteria, fecal coliform bacteria and total coliform bacteria. The calendar month shall be used for purposes of reporting self -monitoring data on discharge monitoring report forms. 3. "Act," means the Utah Water Quality Act. 4. "Acute toxicity" occurs when 50 percent or more mortality is observed for either test species at any effluent concentration (lethal concentration or LCso "). 5. "Bypass," means the diversion of waste streams from any portion of a treatment facility. 6. "Chronic toxicity" occurs when the survival, growth, or reproduction for either test species exposed to a specific percent effluent dilution is significantly less (at the 95 percent confidence level) than the survival, growth, or reproduction of the control specimens. 7. "IC25" is the concentration of toxicant (given in % effluent) that would cause a 25% reduction in mean young per female, or a 25% reduction in overall growth for the test population. - 34 - PART VIII DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 8. "Composite Samples" shall be flow proportioned. The composite sample shall, as a minimum, contain at least four (4) samples collected over the compositing period. Unless otherwise specified, the time between the collection of the first sample and the last sample shall not be less than six (6) hours nor more than 24 hours. Acceptable methods for preparation of composite samples are as follows: a. Constant time interval between samples, sample volume proportional to flow rate at time of sampling; b. Constant time interval between samples, sample volume proportional to total flow (volume) since last sample, For the first sample, the flow rate at the time the sample was collected may be used; c. Constant sample volume, time interval between samples proportional to flow (i.e., sample taken every "X" gallons of flow); and, d. Continuous sample volume, with sample collection rate proportional to flow rate. 9. "CWA," means The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, by The Clean Water Act of 1987. 10. "Daily Maximum" (Daily Max.) is the maximum value allowable in any single sample or instantaneous measurement. 11. "EPA," means the United States Environmental Protection Agency. 12. "Executive Secretary," means Executive Secretary of the Utah Water Quality Board. 13. A "grab" sample, for monitoring requirements, is defined as a single "dip and take" sample collected at a representative point in the discharge stream. 14. An "instantaneous" measurement, for monitoring requirements, is defined as a single reading, observation, or measurement. 15. "Severe Property Damage," means substantial physical damage to property, damage to the treatment facilities which causes them to become inoperable, or substantial and permanent loss of natural resources which can reasonably be expected to occur in the absence of a bypass. Severe PART VIII DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 property damage does not mean economic loss caused by delays in production. 16. "Upset," means an exceptional incident in which there is unintentional and temporary noncompliance with technology -based permit effluent limitations because of factors beyond the reasonable control of the permittee. An upset does not include noncompliance to the extent caused by operational error, improperly designed treatment facilities, inadequate treatment facilities, lack of preventative maintenance, or careless or improper operation. B. Biosolids. 1. `Biosolids," means any material or material derived from sewage solids that have been biologically treated. 2. "Dry Weight -Basis," means 100 percent solids (i.e. zero percent moisture). 3. "Land Application" is the spraying or spreading of biosolids onto the land surface; the injection of biosolids below the land surface; or the incorporation of biosolids into the land so that the biosolids can either condition the soil or fertilize crops or vegetation grown in the soil. Land application includes distribution and marketing (i.e. the selling or giving away of the biosolids). 4. "Pathogen," means an organism that is capable of producing an infection or disease in a susceptible host. 5. "Pollutant" for the purposes of this permit is an organic substance, an inorganic substance, a combination of organic and inorganic substances, or pathogenic organisms that after discharge and upon exposure, ingestion, inhalation, or assimilation into an organism either directly from the environment or indirectly by ingestion through the food -chain, could on the basis of information available to the Administrator of EPA, cause death, disease, behavioral abnormalities, cancer, genetic mutations, physiological malfunctions (including malfunction in reproduction), or physical deformations in either organisms or offspring of the organisms. 6. "Runoff' is rainwater, leachate, or other liquid that drains over any part of a land surface and runs off the land surface. - 36 - PART VIII DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 7. "Similar Container" is either an open or closed receptacle. This includes, but is not limited to, a bucket, a box, a carton, and a vehicle or trailer with a load capacity of one metric ton or less. 8. "Total Solids" are the materials in the biosolids that remain as a residue if the biosolids are dried at 103° or 105° Celsius. 9. "Treatment Works" are either Federally owned, publicly owned, or privately owned devices or systems used to treat (including recycling and reclamation) either domestic sewage or a combination of domestic sewage and industrial waste or liquid manure. in. "Vectnr Attraction" is the characteristic of hiosolids that attracts rodents, flies mosquito's or other organisms capable of transporting infectious agents. 11. "Animals" for the purpose of this permit are domestic livestock. 12. "Annual Whole Sludge Application Rate" is the amount of sewage sludge (dry -weight basis) that can be applied to a unit area of land during a cropping cycle: 13. "Agronomic Rate is the whole sludge application rate (dry -weight basis) designed to: (1) provide the amount of nitrogen needed by the crop or vegetation grown on the land; and (2) minimize the amount of nitrogen in the sewage sludge that passes below the root zone of the crop or vegetation grown on the land to the ground water. 14. "An_lual Pollutant T.oading Rate" is the maximum amount of a pollutant (dry -weight basis) that can be applied to a unit area of land during a 365- day period. 15. "Application Site or Land Application Site" means all contiguous areas of a users' property intended for sludge application. 16. "Cumulative Pollutant Loading Rate" is the maximum amount of an inorganic pollutant (dry -weight basis) that can be applied to a unit area of land. 17. "Grit and Screenings" are sand, gravel, cinders, other materials with a high specific gravity and relatively large materials such as rags generated during preliminary treatment of domestic sewage at a treatment works and shall be disposed of according to 40 CFR 258. PART VIII DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 18. "High Potential for Public Contact Site" is land with a high potential for contact by the public. This includes, but is not limited to, public parks, ball fields, cemeteries, plant nurseries, turf farms, and golf courses. 19. "Low Potential for Public Contact Site" is the land with a low potential for contact by the public. This includes, but is not limited to, farms, ranches, reclamation areas, and other lands which are private lands, restricted public lands, or lands which are not generally accessible to or used by the public. 20. "Monthly Average" is the arithmetic mean of all measurements taken during the month. 21. "Volatile Solids" is the amount of the total solids in sewage sludge lost when the sludge is combusted at 550 degrees Celsius for 15-20 minutes in the presence of excess air. C. Storm Water. 1. `Best Management Practices" ("BMPs") means schedules of activities, prohibitions of practices, maintenance procedures, and other management practices to prevent or reduce the pollution of waters of the State. BMPs also include treatment requirements, operating procedures, and practices to control facility site runoff, spillage or leaks, sludge or waste disposal, or drainage from raw material storage. 2. "Coal pile runoff' means the rainfall runoff from or through any coal storage pile. 3. "Co -located industrial activity" means when a facility has industrial activities being conducted onsite that are described under more than one of the coverage sections. of Appendix II in the General Multi -Sector Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity. Facilities with co -located industrial activities shall comply with all applicable monitoring and pollution prevention plan requirements of each section in which a co -located industrial activity is described. 4. "Commercial Treatment and Disposal Facilities" means facilities that receive, on a commercial basis, any produced hazardous waste (not their own) and treat or dispose of those wastes as a service to the generators. Such facilities treating and/or disposing exclusively residential hazardous wastes are not included in this definition. - 38 - PART VIII DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 5. "Landfill" means an area of land or an excavation in which wastes are placed for permanent disposal, and that is not a land application unit, surface impoundment, injection well, or waste pile. 6. "Land application unit" means an area where wastes are applied onto or incorporated into the soil surface (excluding manure spreading operations) for treatment or disposal. 7. "Municipal separate storm sewer system" (large and/or medium) means all municipal separate storm sewers that are either: a. Located in an incorporated place (city) with a population of 100,000 or more as determined by the latest Decennial Census by the Bureau of Census (at the issuance date of this permit, Salt Lake City is the only city in Utah that falls in this category); or b. Located in the counties with unincorporated urbanized populations of 100,000 or more, except municipal separate storm sewers that are located in the incorporated places, townships or towns within such counties (at the issuance date of this permit Salt Lake County is the only county that falls in this category); or Owned or operated by a municipality other than those described in paragraph a. or b. (above) and that are designated by the Executive Secretary as part of the large or medium municipal separate storm sewer system. 8. "NOI" means "notice of intent", it is an application form that is used to obtain coverage under the General Multi -Sector Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity. 9. "NOT" means "notice of termination", it is a form used to terminate coverage under the General Multi -Sector Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Industrial Activity. 10. "Point source" means any discernible, confined, and discrete conveyance, including but not limited to, any pipe, ditch, channel, tunnel, conduit, well, discrete fissure, container, rolling stock, concentrated animal feeding operation, landfill leachate collection system, vessel or other floating craft from which pollutants are or may be discharged. This term does not include return flows from irrigated agriculture or agricultural storm water runoff. v v - 39 - PART VIII DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 SIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 11. "Section 313 water priority chemical" means a chemical or chemical categories that: a. Are listed at 40 CFR 372.65 pursuant to Section 313 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right -to -Know Act (EPCRA) (also known as Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986); b. Are present at or above threshold levels at a facility subject to EPCRA Section 313 reporting requirements; and c. Meet at least one of the following criteria: (1) Are listed in Appendix D of 40 CFR Part 122 on either Table II (organic priority pollutants), Table III (certain metals, cyanides, and phenols) or Table V (certain toxic pollutants and hazardous substances); (2) Are listed as a hazardous substance pursuant to Section 311(b)(2)(A) of the CWA at 40 CFR 116.4; or (3) Are pollutants for which EPA has published acute or chronic water quality criteria. See Appendix III of this permit. This appendix was revised based on final rulemaking EPA published in the Federal Register November 30, 1994. 12. "Significant materials" includes, but is not limited to: raw materials; fuels; materials such as solvents, detergents, and plastic pellets; finished materials such as metallic products; raw materials used in food processing or production; hazardous substances designated under Section 101(14) of CERCLA; any chemical the facility is required to report pursuant to EPCRA Section 313; fertilizers; pesticides; and waste products such as ashes, slag and sludge that have the potential to be released with storm water discharges. 13. "Significant spills" includes, but is not limited to: releases of oil or hazardous substances in excess of reportable quantities under Section 311 of the Clean Water Act (see 40 CFR 110.10 and CFR 117.21) or Section 102 of CERCLA (see 40 CFR 302.4). 14. "Storm water" means storm water runoff, snowmelt runoff, and surface runoff and drainage. - 40 - PART VIII DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 BIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 15. "SWDMR" means "storm water discharge monitoring report", a report of the results of storm water monitoring required by the permit. The Division of Water Quality provides the storm water discharge monitoring report form. 16. "Storm water associated with industrial activity" (UAC R317-8-3.8(6)(c) & (d)) means the discharge from any conveyance that is used for collecting and conveying storm water and that is directly related to manufacturing, processing or raw materials storage areas at an industrial plant. The term does not include discharges from facilities or activities excluded from the UPDES program. For the categories of industries identified in paragraphs (a) through (j) of this definition, the term includes, but is not limited to, storm :eater discharges from industrial plant yards; immediate access roads and rail lines used or traveled by carriers of raw materials, manufactured products, waste material, or by-products used or created by the facility; material handling sites; refuse sites; sites used for the application or disposal of process waste waters (as defined in 40 CFR Part 401); sites used for the storage and maintenance of material handling equipment;. sites used for residual treatment, storage, or disposal; shipping and receiving areas; manufacturing buildings; storage areas (including tank farms) for raw materials, and intermediate and finished products; and areas where industrial activity has taken place in the past and significant materials remain and are exposed to storm water. For the categories of industries identified in paragraph (k) of this definition, the term includes only storm water discharges from all areas (except access roads and rail lines) listed in the previous sentence where material handling equipment or activities, raw materials, intermediate products, final products, waste materials, by-products, or industrial machinery are exposed to storm water. For the purposes of this paragraph, material handling activities include the storage, loading and unloading, transportation, or conveyance of any raw material, intermediate product, finished product, by-product or waste product. The term excludes areas located on plant lands separate from the plant's industrial activities, such as office buildings and accompanying parking lots as long as the drainage from the -excluded areas is not mixed with storm water drained from the above described areas. Industrial facilities (including industrial facilities that are Federally, State, or municipally owned or operated that meet the description of the facilities listed in paragraphs (a) to (k) of this definition) include those facilities designated under UAC R317-8-3.8(1)(a)5. The following categories of facilities are considered to be engaging in "industrial activity" for purposes of this subsection: a. Facilities subject to storm water effluent limitations guidelines, new source performance standards, or toxic pollutant effluent standards PART VIII DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 SIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 under 40 CFR Subchapter N (except facilities with toxic pollutant effluent standards that are exempted under category (k) of this definition); b. Facilities classified as Standard Industrial Classifications 24 (except 2434), 26 (except 265 and 267), 28 (except 283 and 285), 29, 311, 32 (except 323), 33, 3441, 373; c. Facilities classified as Standard Industrial Classifications 10 through 14 (mineral industry) including active or inactive mining operations (except for areas of coal mining operations no longer meeting the definition of a reclamation area under 40 CFR 434.11(1) because the performance bond issued to the facility by the appropriate SMCRA authority has been released, or except for areas of non -coal mining operations that have been released from applicable State or Federal reclamation requirements after December 17, 1990) and oil and gas exploration, production, processing, or treatment operations, or transmission facilities that discharge storm water contaminated by contact with or that has come into contact with, any overburden, raw material, intermediate products, finished products, byproducts or waste products located on the site of such operations; inactive mining operations are mining sites that are not being actively mined, but that have an identifiable owner/operator; d. Hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal facilities, including those that are operating under interim status or a permit under Subtitle C of RCRA; e. Landfills, land application sites, and open dumps that have received any industrial wastes (waste that is received from any of the facilities described under this subsection) including those that are subject to regulation under Subtitle D of RCRA; f. Facilities involved in the recycling of materials, including metal scrapyards, battery reclaimers, salvage yards, and automobile junkyards, including but limited to those classified as Standard Industrial Classification 5015 and 5093; g. Steam electric power generating facilities, including coal handling sites; h. Transportation facilities classified as Standard Industrial Classifications 40, 41, 42 (except 4221-25), 43, 44, 45 and 5171 that have vehicle maintenance shops, equipment cleaning operations, or PART VIII DISCHARGE PERMIT NO. UT0020419 SIOSOLIDS PERMIT NO. UTL-020419 STORM WATER PERMIT NO. UTR020419 airport deicing operations. Only those portions of the facility that are either involved in vehicle maintenance (including vehicle rehabilitation, mechanical repairs, painting, fueling, and lubrication), equipment cleaning operations, airport deicing operations, or that are otherwise identified under paragraphs (a) to (g) or (I) to (k) of this subsection are associated with industrial activity; i. Treatment works treating domestic sewage or any other sewage sludge or wastewater treatment device or system, used in the storage treatment, recycling, and reclamation of municipal or domestic sewage, including land dedicated to the disposal of sewage sludge that are located within the confines of the facility, with a design flow of 1.0 mgd or more, or required to have an approved pretreatment program under 40 CFR Part 403. Not included are farm lands, domestic gardens or lands used for sludge management where sludge is beneficially reused and that are not physically located in the confines of the facility, or areas that are in compliance with 40 CFR Part 503; J• Construction activity including clearing, grading and excavation activities except:. operations that result in the disturbance of less than 5 acres of total land area that are not part of a larger common plan of development or sale; k. Facilities under Standard Industrial Classifications 20, 21, 22, 23, 2434, 25, 265, 267, 27, 283, 285, 30, 31 (except 311), 323, 34 (except 3441), 35, 36, 37 (except 373), 38, 39, 4221-25, (and that are not otherwise included within categories (a) to (j)) 17. "Waste pile" means any non -containerized accumulation of solid, non - flowing waste that is used for treatment or storage. - 43 - Appendix D Historical Plant Data 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 Daily Flow (mgd)Moab WRF Historical Daily Flow 0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 300.0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Avg Influent Conc (mg/L)Moab WWTP Influent Concentration BOD TSS 0.0 500.0 1000.0 1500.0 2000.0 2500.0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013Avg Influent Load (mg/L)Moab WWTP Influent Load BOD TSS 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 Concentration (mg/L)2010-2013 Influent Concentrations BOD TSS Linear (BOD) Linear (TSS) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3Removal Plant Flow (mgd) Primary Clarifier BOD and TSS Removal BOD TSS 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3Removal Plant Flow (mgd) Trickling Filter and Secondary Clarifier BOD& TSS Removal BOD TSS 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3Removal Plant Flow (mgd) Trickling Filter BOD and TSS Removal BOD TSS 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3Removal Plant Flow (mgd) Secondary Clarifier BOD and TSS Removal 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80BOD RemovalRecirculation Ratio Recirculation Ratio versus Trickling Filter and Secondary BOD Removal 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 1.80Effluent BOD (mg/L)Recirculation Ratio Recirculation Ratio to Effluent BOD Appendix E Oxidation Ditch OxyStream Process Design WEgrECH Project Information Project Name: Moab Solicitation Project Number: Engineer: Bowen & Collins Completed by: Date: 10/3/2014 Checked by: 1460320 WI52 Design Parameters Design Flow Influent Wastestream Site Specific Information Q 1.50 MGD Tmin 11.0 °C BOD 345 mg/L Tmax 27.0 °C TSS 325 mg/L Elevation 4000 ft. TKN 55.0 mg/L MLSS 4000 mg/L NO3 0 mg/L Residual DO (Co) 2.0 mg/L TP 10.0 mg/L Simult. nit/denit 0% Effluent Limits Design Information BOD 10 mg/L SRT 16.0 days TSS 10 mg/L Yield 0.78 lb/lb NH3 1.0 mg/L Min. Aerator ORG N 1.00 mg/L Efficiency 3.8 lbs/HP•hr NO3 8.0 mg/L Oxygen coef 1.23 lb/lb TKN 2.0 mg/L N Synthesis 5.0% * TN 10.0 mg/L Cs temp/elev 6.67 mg/L TP 1.0 mg/L Alpha 0.92 Beta 0.97 * N Synthesis should be between 5-6% based on studies by J. Kourik and J. I. Rodale in 1986 and 1960, respectively. Designing Your Edible Landscape Naturally, 1986; Complete Book of Composting, 1960 Process Calculations Aerobic Volume Calculations BOD Removed Sludge Produced (WAS) _ (BODi - BODe) x 8.34 x Q _ (345 - 10) x 8.34 x 1.5 = 4190.85 lbs BOD/day _ (BODi - BODe) x 8.34 x Q x Yield _ (345 - 10) x 8.34 x 1.5 x 0.78 = 3248.43 lbs TSS/day Aerobic Volume = SRT x Sludge Produced / (MLSS x 8.34) = 16 x 3248 / (4,000 x 8.34) = 1.558 Mgal BOD Loading = (BODi x Q x 8.34) / (Aerobic Volume x 133.68) _ (345 x 1.5 x 8.34) / (1.558 x 133.68) 20.72 lbs BOD/1,000 cu-ft Page 1 of 2 OxyStream Process Design 111,EsTECM Anoxic Volume Calculations N Synthesis = 5% x Sludge Produced / (Q x 8.34) = 5% x 3248 / (1.5 x 8.34) = 13 mg/L Oxidized Ammonia Nitrate Generated Simult. Nit/Denit (SNdN) = (TKNi - NH3e - Org N - N Synthesis) x Q x 8.34 = (55 - 1 - 1 - 13) x 1.5 x 8.34 = 500.4 lbs N/day = Oxidized Ammonia - NO3e = (55 - 1 - 1 - 13) - 8 = 32.0 mg N/L = % of Nitrate Removed in Aerobic Tank = 0%x32 = 0.00 mg/L Anoxic Volume = ((Nitrate Generated-SNdN)/1.026^(T-20)-(0.03 x BODi)) x Q/(0.029 x MLSS) = ((32 - 0)/1.026^(11- 20) - (0.03 x 345)) x 1.5 / (0.029 x 4000) = 0.387 Mgal Anaerobic Volume Calculations Retention Time = 90 Minutes Anaerobic Volume Aerator Power Actual 02 Req (AOR) = HRTxQ/ 24 hr/ 60min = 90x1.5/24/60 = 0.094 Mgal Calculations • _ (BOD Removed x 02 Coeff) + (Oxidized NH3 x 02 Coeff) = (4190.9 x 1.23) + (500.4 x 4.60) = 7475 lbs 02/day Standard 02 R (SOR) HP required eq. = AOR x 9.02/(a(f3CS - CO)) x 1.024(20-T) = 7475 x 9.02 / (0.92(0.97 x 6.67 - 2) x 1.024^(20 - 27) = 13848 lbs 02/day = SOR / 24 hrs x Landy7 Efficiency = 13848 / (24 x 3.8) = 152 HP Page 2 of 2 OxyStream Process Design WESTECH Project Information Project Name: Moab Solicitation Project Number: Engineer: Bowen & Collins Completed by: Date: 10/3/2014 Checked by: 1460320 WI52 Design Parameters Peak Flow Influent Wastestream Site Specific Information Q 3.00 MGD Tmin 11.0 °C BOD 345 mg/L Tmax 27.0 °C TSS 325 mg/L Elevation 4000 ft. TKN 55.0 mg/L MLSS 4000 mg/L NO3 0 mg/L Residual DO (Co) 0.0 mg/L TP 10.0 mg/L Simult. nit/denit 0% Effluent Limits Design Information BOD 10 mg/L SRT 16.0 days TSS 10 mg/L Yield 0.78 lb/lb NH3 1.0 mg/L Min. Aerator ORG N 1.00 mg/L Efficiency 3•8 lbs/HP•hr NO3 8.0 mg/L Oxygen coef 1.23 lb/lb TKN 2.0 mg/L N Synthesis 5.0% * TN 10.0 mg/L Cs temp/elev 6.67 mg/L TP 1.0 mg/L Alpha 0.92 Beta 0.97 * N Synthesis should be between 5-6% based on studies by J. Kourik and J. I. Rodale in 1986 and 1960, respectively, Designing Your Edible Landscape Naturally, 1986; Complete Book of Composting, 1960 Process Calculations Aerobic Volume Calculations BOD Removed = (BODi - BODe) x 8.34 x Q _ (345 - 10) x 8.34 x 3 = 8381.7 lbs BOD/day Sludge Produced (WAS) _ (BODi - BODe) x 8.34 x Q x Yield _ (345 - 10) x 8.34 x 3 x 0.78 = 6496.86 lbs TSS/day Aerobic Volume = SRT x Sludge Produced / (MLSS x 8.34) = 16 x 6497 / (4000 x 8.34) = 3.116 Mgal BOD Loading = (BODi x Q x 8.34) / (Aerobic Volume x 133.68) _ (345 x 3 x 8.34) / (3.116 x 133.68) 20.72 lbs BOD/1,000 cu-ft Page 1 of 2 OxyStream Process Design virEs-rECH Anoxic Volume Calculations N Synthesis = 5% x Sludge Produced / (Q x 8.34) = 5% x 6497 / (3 x 8.34) = 13 mg/L Oxidized Ammonia = (TKNi - NH3e - Org N - N Synthesis) x Q x 8.34 = (55 - 1 - 1 - 13) x 3 x 8.34 = 1000.8 lbs N/day Nitrate Generated = Oxidized Ammonia - NO3e = (55 - 1 - 1 - 13) - 8 = 32.0 mg N/L Simult. Nit/Denit = % of Nitrate Removed in Aerobic Tank (SNdN) = 0% x 32 = 0.00 mg/L Anoxic Volume = ((Nitrate Generated-SNdN)/1.026^(T-20)-(0.03 x BODi)) x Q/(0.029 x MLSS) = ((32 - 0)/1.026^(11- 20) - (0.03 x 345)) x 3 / (0.029 x 4000) = 0.775 Mgal Anaerobic Volume Calculations Retention Time = 90 Minutes Anaerobic Volume = HRT x Q / 24 hr / 60 min = 90x3/24/60 = 0.188 Mgal Aerator Power Calculations Actual 02 Req. = (BOD Removed x 02 Coeff) + (Oxidized NH3 x 02 Coeff) (AOR) = (8381.7 x 1.23) + (1000.8 x 4.60) = 14950 lbs 02/day Standard 02 Req. = AOR x 9.02/(a(13CS - CO)) x 1.024(20-T) (SOR) = 14950 x 9.02 / (0.92(0.97 x 6.67 - 0) x 1.024^(20 - 27) = 19139 lbs 02/day HP required = SOR / 24 hrs x Landy7 Efficiency = 19139 / (24 x 3.8) = 210 HP Page 2 of 2 OxyStream Layout and Concrete Estimate lA/EsirECH Project Information Project Name: Engineer: Date: Moab Solicitation Bowen & Collins 10/8/2014 Project Number: Completed by: Checked by: 1460320 ATW Design Parameters Ditch Parameters # of Ditches 2 Aerators/Ditch 2 Depth 14 ft Channel Width 28 ft Straight Length 89.02 ft Channel Freeboard 1.5 ft Aeration Freeboard 6 ft Volume Aerobic 0.78 Mgal Anoxic 0.1545 Mgal Anaerobic) 0.02 Mgal Anaerobic2 0.02 Mgal TOTAL 0.9815 Mgal Assumptions Exterior Walls Interior Walls Deck Floor Footings Footings Footprint Aerobic Anoxic 57.00 25.88 ft Anaerobic) 22.00 10.20 ft Anaerobic2 22.00 10.20 ft TOTAL (2 ditches) 117.33 185.43 ft 14 in thick 12 in thick 12 in thick 10 in thick 18 in thick 60 in tall Width Length 57.00 145.02 ft Concrete Estimate OxyStream BASIN OUTER WALLS OxyStream BASIN INNER WALLS OxyStream BASIN FLOOR OxyStream BASIN FOOTINGS Aerator Deck(s) Total Estimated Concrete 339 cu-yd 467 cu-yd 612 cu-yd 330 cu-yd 286 cu-yd 2034 cu-yd Page 1 of 2 ITEM "A" - Two (2) OxyStream-rm Biological Nutrient Removal Systems WesTech Equipment Model Number AES2C3 The Biological Treatment Equipment will consist of: Four (4) Slow Speed Surface Aerators, Four (4) Submersible Anaerobic Mixers Two (2) Submersible Anoxic Mixers Two (2) Manually Operated By -Pass Channel Flow Control Gates One (1) Advanced OxyStream Control System for the OxyStreamTM Systems Four (4) 75 HP Variable Frequency Drives WesTech has also included anchors and fasteners, drawings, startup services, a 1 Year Warranty, and 0&M Manuals. FOUR (4) MECHANICAL SURFACE AERATORS A 75 HP TEFC, inverter duty, drive motor suitable for 460 VAC, 3 phase, 60 Hz supply power, 1800 rpm with a service factor of 1.15 on the sine wave power (1.0 on inverter power). The motor will be rated at 40°C ambient with class F insulation and shall comply with the applicable provision of NEMA with a minimum of B-10 bearing life of 200,000 hours. Each motor will be supplied with a thermostatic heat protection device and a 120 VAC space heater. A high efficiency helical gear type reducer sized with a minimum service factor of 2.5 times the motor HP, equipped with a dry well, 120 VAC oil immersion heater, and low oil cutout switch. All bearings will have a minimum B-10 bearing life of 100,000 hours, except the bearing attached to the output shaft will have a bearing life of 250,000 hours. A plate -style impeller with equally spaced blades of 1/2 inch minimum steel plate. The impeller shall be of sufficient size to withstand the design torque and hydraulic loading and to develop the minimum channel velocity required and specified oxygen transfer efficiency. Four (4) A307 ZP jack studs will be provided for a minimum of 6" vertical adjustment of the aerator. Two (2) steel mounting bars for mounting the drive unit to the jackstuds. FOUR (4) SUBMERSIBLE MIXERS FOR USE IN THE ANAEROBIC ZONE The submersible mixers will be of the closed coupled design and include one 1 HP (nominal) motor wired for 480 VAC, 60 cycle, 3-phase current with a service factor of 1.15. The mixer will include an axial -pumping stainless steel propeller, 30 ft power cable, 30 ft lifting cable (316SS), stainless steel guide rails with floor and wall mount brackets. Each mixer will include a portable crane assemble with a manual winch and a 316SS platform socket. TWO (2) SUBMERSIBLE MIXERS FOR USE IN THE ANOXIC ZONE The submersible mixers will be of the closed coupled design and include one 5 HP (nominal) motor wired for 480 VAC, 60 cycle, 3-phase current with a service factor of 1.15. The mixer will include an axial -pumping stainless steel propeller, 30 ft power cable, 30 ft lifting cable (316SS), stainless steel guide rails with floor and wall mount brackets. Each mixer will include a portable crane assemble with a manual winch and a 316SS platform socket. TWO (2) FLOW CONTROL GATES A handwheel-driven gear reducer that allows 112.5° of travel in the forward and reverse direction. The unit will include a 20" 304 SS hand wheel, stand, gear reducer, rotating shaft, locking mechanism with 1 5/8° increments, guide bearings, A36 steel flow vane, and stops, with 304 SS fasteners and anchor bolts. ONE (1) ADVANCED OxySTREAMTM CONTROL SYSTEM (AOCS) The AOCS will include a Hoffman NEMA 4 mild steel enclosure. The control panel will be provided with door -mounted 8" color touch screen. Internally, will be an Allen Bradley SLC 5/05 PLC with all supporting I/O cards, racks, UPS, and power supply. The control system will receive an input from the locally mounted dissolved oxygen sensing system and return a signal to the aerator VFDs. The control panel is wired to accept a single 120 VAC, 1 phase, 60 Hz power feed from the customer. A 10 amp single -pole circuit breaker with padlockable disconnect handle is provided for short-circuit protection. All wiring for field connection will be brought to a terminal strip. All interconnecting wiring is by others. WesTech will supply all of the software and programming for the PLC. The panels will be built, assembled, and tested at WesTech. Two (2) Hach DO probes with mounting equipment will be installed on the oxidation ditches for controlling the speed of the aerators. FOUR (4) VARIABLE FREQUENCY DRIVES Each surface aerator is controlled by a 75 HP VFD. Each VFD will be housed in a Hoffman NEMA 4 mild steel enclosure with door -mounted selector switches, potentiometers, and status lights. The panel will include a 1kVA control power transformer to provide 120 VAC for internal controls. The panel will come complete with line reactors, all necessary relays, terminal blocks, and support components. The control panel is wired to accept a single 480 VAC, 3 phase, 60 Hz power feed from the customer. A 3-pole circuit breaker with padlockable disconnect handle is provided for short- circuit protection. All wiring for field connections will be brought to a terminal strip. All interconnecting wiring is by others. • SURFACE PREP AND PAINT All ferrous metal surfaces, except motors, speed reducers, and stainless steel, will be factory prepped in accordance with SSPC-SP10 and coated with two (2) coats of Tnemec Polyamidoamine Epoxy. The motors and gear reducers will be supplied with manufacturer's standard coating system. " T O T A L S E R V I C E T o i n c l u d e t w o ( 2 ) t r i p s a n d f o u r ( 4 ) d a y s f o r i n s p e c t i o n , s t a r t - u p , a n d i n s t r u c t i o n o f p l a n t p e r s o n n e l . " S P A R E P A R T S O n e ( 1 ) l o w o i l c u t - o u t s w i t c h O n e ( 1 ) f l e x i b l e m o t o r c o u p l i n g " C L A R I F I C A T I O N S / C O M M E N T S T h e p r o p o s e d s y s t e m w a s d e s i g n e d b a s e d o n t h e i n f o r m a t i o n p r o v i d e d a n d W e s T e c h ' s s t a n d a r d e q u i p m e n t . T h e p r o p o s e d e q u i p m e n t i s b a c k e d b y a 1 Y e a r w a r r a n t y . N O T E : A N Y I T E M N O T L I S T E D A B O V E T O B E F U R N I S H E D B Y O T H E R S . O P T I O N A L I T E M S N o n e I T E M S N O T B Y W E S T E C H E l e c t r i c a l w i r i n g , c o n d u i t o r e l e c t r i c a l e q u i p m e n t , p i p i n g , v a l v e s , o r f i t t i n g s , l u b r i c a t i n g o i l o r g r e a s e , s h o p o r f i e l d p a i n t i n g , f i e l d w e l d i n g , e r e c t i o n , p e r f o r m a n c e t e s t i n g , u n l o a d i n g , s t o r a g e , c o n c r e t e w o r k , f i e l d s e r v i c e , ( e x c e p t a s s p e c i f i c a l l y n o t e d ) . T h i s p r o p o s a l s e c t i o n h a s b e e n r e v i e w e d f o r a c c u r a c y a n d i s a p p r o v e d f o r i s s u e : B y : a h r t ; 4 1 , l e a e 4 G : 4 4 1 4 , D a t e : 1 0 / 3 / 2 0 1 4 I T E M E Q U I P M E N T P R I C E ( U . S . ) T w o ( 2 ) O x y S t r e a m T M B i o l o g i c a l N u t r i e n t R e m o v a l S y s t e m s $ 6 1 1 , 9 0 0 MOTOR MOUNTING BAR f 3" ADJUSTMENT TOP OF DECK E LEV. 4020.00' V / COUPLING -- MAX. LIQUID LEVEL ELEV.4014.Il07 -_ 5" APPR REDUCER -JACKSTUD 3' 914" 086.63 in ILLUSTRATIVE ELEVATION 81" 6 2"± Z"O 6'-0" MOTOR: HORSEPOWER:75 HP SERVICE FACTOR: 1.15 INSULATION: CLASS F ENCLOSURE:TEFC SPEED: 1800 RPM (1785 rpm FULL LOAD) 460V/3 PH/60 Hz B10 BEARING LIFE: 200,000 Hrs CONDENSATE DRAINS SPACE HEATER (120 V) AMBIENT TEMP: 40°C N/C THERMOSTAT MOTOR WEIGHT: 1020 Ibs (approx.) REDUCER: GEAR RATIO: 51.293:1 SERVICE FACTOR: 2.5 B10 BEARING LIFE: 100,000 HRS MIN. INPUT SHAFT 250,000 HRS MIN. OUTPUT SHAFT CONSTRUCTION: CAST IRON DIPSTICK & OIL DRAIN w/ VALVE (1") EFFICIENCY: 97% MIN. IMMERSION HEATER MECHANICAL OIL PUMP w/LOW OIL SWITCH REDUCER WEIGHT: 2568 Ibs (DRY) (approx.) IMPELLER: MANUFACTURER: WESTECH MODEL: LANDY-7 2200 TYPE: 7-BLADE IMPELLER SHAFT SIZE: 12" OPERATIONAL SPEED: 34.80 RPM DIRECTION OF OPERATION: 2 CW; 2 CCW MATERIAL: A36 STEEL, 1/2" MIN PLATE IMPELLER WEIGHT: 1712 Ibs (approx.) JACKSTUDS: DIAMETER: 2 1/2" PROJECTION: 1'-2 1/4" MATERIAL: A307 ZP WEIGHT: 521bs each (approx.) ADJUSTMENT: ±3" COUPLING: SIZE: 12" PIPE FLANGE MATERIAL: CAST IRON WEIGHT: 435 Ibs MOUNTING BARS: THICKNESS: 2 1/2" MATERIAL: A36 STEEL WEIGHT: 613 Ibs ISO CUT -AWAY VIEW MOUNTING BARS DIR IMPELLER OUTLINE JACKSTUD LAYOUT CLOCKWISE ROTATION SHOWN MIRROR ABOUT CENTERWALL CENTERLINE FOR COUNTER -CLOCKWISE FOR SUBMITTAL ONLY NOT FOR FABRICATION OR FIELD ASSEMBLY NOTES: <?)(11PELLER SUBMERGENCE, AS SHOWN, IS THE MAXIMUM ERATING LIQUID LEVEL AND MAXIMUM OXYGEN TRANSFER. EQUIPMENT SHOULD BE OPERATED AT OR BELOW THIS LEVEL AS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE OPTIMAL DISSOLVED OXYGEN LEVEL. FOR OPERATING LEVEL, PLEASE REFER TO PERFORMANCE CURVES. >NALL CLEARANCE OF 2"±1/2" IS CRITICAL AND MUST BE HELD. 3. TOTAL WEIGHT OF EQUIPMENT: 6568 Ibs. WEIGHT OF SINGLE HEAVIEST ITEM: 2568 Ibs. PROJECT 1460320 MOAB, UT MOAB, UT USA WESTECH THIS DRAWING nE S1.4aFia NEE MiERT ,�Mon 'warm puSE woCLSE.IN.KUOI F}CeMna.� aWOWD14WnY..1.0. i0/um, ic TITLE OxySTREAM - GENERAL ARRANGEMENT AES2C3 75 HP MOUTH VA23 AGE■ Arrrwvcn DOCUMENT NUMBER D4Te 2014-10-07 SHEET REV J REV I REVISION DESCRIPTION I ECN 1 DESIGNER 1 APPROVER 1 DATE REFERENCE DOCUMENTS 1460320-1001 1 OF CAvaulbDesign\Proposals \146\1460320 Moab, UT\ Drawings \1460320-1001-OxySlream 0 ewlri .Pow 183'-34" (Q + RAS 89'-4" 10`-3" 26.-0" 4 22 -0" TYP A` TOP OF WALL ELEV. 4015.50V o -- FLOW DIR 28'-0" TYP FLOW DIR FLOW DIR FLOW DIR O TO CLARIFIERS 117'-6" A TOP OF DECK - ELEV.4020.00'❑ MAX LIQUID LEVEL ELEV. 4014.00' 14'-0" SIDE WATER DEPTH I 9 SECTION A -A TANK FLOOR ELEV. 4000.00'\ PROJECT 1460320 MOAB, UT MOAB, UT USA WESTECH Rmo.LOovPoromemo um, ota onvov Min rslitl ,frtoo N•2 +�:Non-AR•=':''. AKw�l ewe}eONOPOOR f voIRIR 1PTAND / eu[R•Yf0 . MINOR' MO Vwrtrn PofMW+ WAVIl[O•o See TnE OxySTREAM- GENERALARRANGEMENT AES2C3 75 HP DESIGNER VA23 C NECKER APPROVER AIL 2014-10-07 DOCUMENT NUMBER SHEET REV 1460320-1001 2 OF 3 C:vault+Doslgnnopos06114411480320Moab. UnDrawfngs11460320-1001-aryStnam D mvFngJdw PROJECT 1460320 MOAB, UT MOAB, UT USA WESTECH • s151,061rror 61:0C.Wn112.n nc nw.91 ranravnrx.+ OVA+env.Przarr+da FMAL1P.Ien.Fwsav nwurc+r cr RmfM — • weOM:MGMawmUO!CI w..rnRLIMoiIEDCH rxrwaI..+c Mal" 7•1.47 mlrvmaaalvw FMLI.o+.ae+*n as TITLE OxySTREAM - GENERAL ARRANGEMENT AES2C3 75 HP DESIGNER VA23 CHECKER APPROVER CATE 2014-10-07 DOCUMENT NUMBER SHEET REV 1460320-1001 3 OF 3 CAvaLADDealgnWroporgieli957i00320 Moab. UVOim71ng911460.320.1001 •CaySucam D awlrm.Ww 01, ammo V ; • _.._ '"� WE STE C 1-11 Process Equipment. Process Driven. Oxic anon ditch Innovation Oxidation ditch technology has proven to be effective for biological wastewater treatment applications throughout the world for three main reasons: • High dilution factor as the influent enters the ditch with a high recirculation rate as the MLSS flows around the basin. • The simplicity of the oxidation ditch equipment makes it easy to operate. • When combined with a properly designed secondary clarifier, the oxidation ditch produces a predictable, high -quality effluent. The OxyStream" Advantage The OxyStreamTM process combines vertically -mounted, low speed surface aerators with an oxidation ditch designed to maximize oxygen transfer efficiency while maintaining the greatest flexibility for power turndown. In addition, the OxyStreamTM has greater side water depths and fewer required aerators than a conventional brush rotor or disc rotor oxidation ditch. The vertical slow -speed surface aerator eliminates maintenance -prone horizontal shafts, pillow block bearings, and drive units near the water surface. Process System WesTech provides a complete and complimentary process design for every OxyStreamTm application. After a thorough review of the influent characteristics, WesTech's engineers generate process calculations and size the reactors. The oxidation ditch dimensions and oxygen requirements then dictate the proper impeller size and aerator horsepower. If required, biological selector zones may be added to create a process flow sheet that can meet the most stringent nutrient limits. The OxyStreamTM system is backed by a WesTech process guarantee and includes operator process training. East Canyon WRF Park City, Utah Milton WRF, Florida Ac vancinc Surface Acration Pioneers in Aerator Technology Landustrie has been a pioneer in surface aerator technology since the 1950s. The LANDY impeller from Landustrie has been extensively researched, tested, and later certified for use in oxidation ditch systems by independent consultants. Landustrie has developed hydraulic models and impeller selection programs from full-scale installations and test tank studies. Using these tools, they have installed their LANDY impeller throughout the world. WesTech has licensed this surface aerator technology and benefitted from the vast experience of Landustrie. Continued Research and Development Research and development of the LANDY impeller continues today not only at full-scale installations throughout the world, but also at a specially designed 500,000-gallon factory test tank. This test facility enables us to measure oxygen transfer effeciency, mixing efficiency, torque, vibration, axial forces and radial forces. The adjustable bridge and moveable walls create an accurate simulation of different site conditions. This current testing program has brought numerous new surface aerator advancements to the industry. Superior Aeration The LANDY 7 impeller increases oxygen transfer efficiency and reduces axial and radial loads. The LANDY 7 also provides a guaranteed minimum efficiency of 3.8 pounds of oxygen per horsepower hour when installed in an oxidation ditch arrangement. This improved transfer efficiency saves significant operational costs over the life of the equipment. The reduced axial and radial loads increase the life of the drive unit and reduce the size of support structures and beams required for mounting the surface aerators. O OxyStreamTM Five Stage Advanced Biological Nutrient Removal System and Components COMPONENTS Selector Zone Mixer These mixers are sized to keep the solids in suspension for optimal contact time. Vertical turbine mixers are shown, however floating and submersible types can be used as well. O Surface Aerators The surface aerators provide efficient aeration and mixing in both the aerobic channels and re -aeration zone. This gate allows the nitrate recycle stream to flow from the aerobic channels to the pre -anoxic zone without any pumping. 0 Dissolved Oxygen Probe The Dissolved Oxygen (DO) probe controls the oxygen input of the surface aerators. The DO should be low prior to entering the pre -anoxic zone. m Aeration Deck The aeration deck contains all splashing and aerosols from the aerator. It also provides a safe environment for routine maintenance. C)=1111:12iM G The flow moves over the weir to the secondary clarifier for liquid -solids separation. The weir can be adjusted to set the proper impeller submergence. Turning Vanes These walls minimize hydraulic losses, increase channel velocity, and prevent solids settling in the bend of the reactor. STAGES 0 Anaerobic Selector In this zone, return activated sludge and the influent wastewater mix together without oxygen or nitrate present, promoting increased phosphorus uptake in the aerobic channels. 2 ) Pre -Anoxic Zone The activated sludge and wastewater mixture then combines with a nitrate recycle stream in the pre -anoxic zone, removing nitrogen as gas through the denitrification process. Aerobic Channels The proper amount of oxygen and mixing allows the complete oxidation of BOD and ammonia. Organisms selected in the fermentation stage accumulate phosphorus for removal in the waste sludge. Post -Anoxic Zone This zone removes any remaining nitrate through endogenous respiration. There should be negligible amounts of oxygen and BOD available in this reactor. Re -Aeration Zone The activated sludge receives oxygen in the final step to prevent anaerobic conditions and the secondary release of phosphorus. Enhanc c Proc ss Contro OVERVIEW MIXERS MIXER i K INFLUENT 8 RAS 5crvon SUM, AERATOR CLARIFIER AOCS Screen Shot Basic Setup The AOCS includes a complete set of control and monitoring equipment to automate operation and facilitate system optimization. A dissolved oxygen (DO) or oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) probe mounts in a strategic location. The signal from this probe is analyzed and transmitted to the programmable logic controller (PLC). The PLC receives this information and instructs the variable frequency drives (VFD) of the surface aerators to turn on, turn off, speed up, or slow down according to the process demand. In addition, all of the surface aerators, selector zone mixers, and associated equipment parameters can be monitored from this controller. WesTech supplies our customers with electrical control schematics, custom software, touch screen interface, and complete systems that are assembled and tested at our facility prior to shipment. Benefits • Energy Savings • Improved Process Performance • Equipment Monitoring • Automated Operation ROCS Benefits The Advanced OxyStreamTM Control System (AOCS) offers four main benefits to our customers: • Automatically adjusts aerator power input to match the oxygen demand using control parameter probes in the reactor. • Optimizes the treatment performance by increasing or restricting aeration in specific zones of the process train. • Monitors the status of all mechanical process equipment at a single location. • Provides the customer with an easy touch screen interface for system adjustments and process control. y 1.2 Q r— Power Turndown ... 1.1 • U 0.5 0.5 0 25 50 75 100 125 Power Usage (%) DO Analyzer PLC _J sic Retrof Silver Creek WWTP, Park City, Utah ts Turnkey Installation WesTech has the unique ability to provide turnkey installation of our equipment to meet demanding completion schedules. When old aeration equipment fails, we can evaluate the conditions and provide a fast, effective solution. WesTech can even retrofit oxidation ditches without taking the treatment train out of service. If your existing equipment breaks down, WesTech wants to help fix the problem. Performance Guarantee Just like our new installations, every WesTech retrofit installation carries our performance guarantee. After the retrofit, WesTech can conduct velocity tests in the aerobic channels, direct oxygen transfer tests in clean or dirty water conditions, and present process training courses for the operation staff. WesTech continues to improve process performance at existing treatment plants with our equipment and services. • Performance Guarantee • Uses Less Power • Improves Pumping Capacities • Minimizes Downtime • Extends Gear Reducer Life with Lower Operational Forces Retrofit Your Surface Aerators In addition to new installations, WesTech has upgraded several existing oxidation ditches, aeration basins, and aerobic digesters with LANDY 7 aerators. WesTech works closely with customers that need to expand their plant with more efficient aerators, larger horsepower aerators, or additional reactors. The design of the LANDY 7 impeller allows WesTech to replace existing aerators with minimal modifications to the concrete or steel support structures. LANDY 7 Impeller the Most Efficient Surface Aerator Biological Process Solutions WesTech leads the wastewater industry with emerging process technology that provides the most efficient and reliable treatment available. WesTech can offer a unique process solution to each specific project, effluent limit, and receiving stream. STM-AerotorTM IFAS Process Landox Process Aerobic Digesters • Denitrification Filters • Floating Aerators • HydroDoc TM • BioDoc® • ClearLogic TM MBR • BioTreaterTM How Does Working with an Employee -Owned Company Benefit You? Founded in 1973, WesTech designs, engineers, and supplies water, wastewater, and process equipment for municipal and industrial customers around the world. From headworks to tertiary treatment, from petrochemical process to water reclamation and drinking water, from small communities to large cities and factories, WesTech offers a wide array of custom process solutions for any application. Call today or visit us online to learn how our process equipment and experience can benefit your plant. ...CALL TODAY TO DISCUSS YOUR PROCESS EQUIPMENT NEEDS. WE STE CH Process Equipment. Process Driven. Tel: 801.265.1000 Fax: 801.265.1080 www.westech-inc.com info@westech-inc.com 3665 South West Temple Salt Lake City, Utah 84165-0068 Represented by: ©WesTech Engineering, Inc. 2011 2 u e 3 WESTECH Add value to your next project by buying WesTech process equipment. Your customers will thank you for years to come. WesTech equipment is designed and backed by experienced teams of engineers who know how to add value to each step of your treatment process. From equipment start-up through years of reliable operation, WesTech will help you meet every challenge. WesTech's openness and responsiveness will exceed your expectations. With WesTech you will experience: Comprehensive customer service High -quality process equipment Unmatched responsiveness Proven treatment expertise Municipal Drinking Water WesTech offers market -leading water treatment solutions with a full line of process equipment. Whether designing for groundwater or surface water, you will find your solution with WesTech. Municipal Wastewater WesTech has earned a solid reputation for reliable wastewater process equipment and service. WesTech provides an extensive line of treatment equipment to ensure success of newly constructed facilities and to improve the performance of existing ones. Pismo Beach, CA L Quality Water Treatment WesTech helps customers treat challenging water sources by implementing sound solutions with quality process equipment. Customers benefit from WesTech's process expertise to produce better water for the communities they serve around the world. Groundwater WesTech offers a wide variety of equipment for groundwater treatment for potable use. Whether your treatment objective is gas removal, iron and manganese removal, color removal, softening, or even filtering a source under the direct influence of surface water, WesTech has your solution. Surface Water WesTech offers a holistic approach to surface water treatment for potable use. Depending upon the raw water quality, flow rate, and operational preferences, WesTech can provide conventional treatment systems, combination treatment units, package plants, high -rate processes, or even customized solutions. GF Better Water! General Filter microfloc WesTech has revived two of the most trusted and respected brands in water treatment. The engineers of MicroflocTm and General Filter products are the pioneers of today's most standard and trusted water treatment processes. See more at: westech-inc.com/betterwater 4. Thickening Gravity sludge thickeners are an easy and cost- effective approach to minimizing the volume of waste solids. Our experts size thickeners to achieve the highest concentration of sludge with the smallest footprint. 5. Backwash Recovery Water conservation is an important consideration in today's water treatment plants. Spent filter backwash treatment can easily be incorporated into your plant design or existing facility. WesTech solutions can result in a water recovery efficiency of >99%. Package Systems Package systems, like the Trident® HS, fit in small space requirements and provide high flow rates per unit area. These smaller systems remove turbidity, suspended solids, color, iron, manganese, taste and odor, and pathogens at a lower capital cost than conventional systems. over 4/000 water installations 1. Aeration Aeration is an effective and low-cost solution to oxidize iron and manganese. It can also provide high -efficiency removal of gases such as hydrogen sulfide, carbon dioxide, methane, and volatile organic carbons, which results in better process performance and/or improvement of taste and odor. 2. Flocculation and Clarification Source waters with moderate -to -high turbidity and/or organics require pretreatment. WesTech can provide conventional layouts with separate flocculation and clarification, or combination units such as solids contact clarifiers and even high -rate processes that can squeeze into very small footprints. Need soft water? No problem, WesTech does that too. 3. Filtration Filters come in all shapes, sizes, and configurations. WesTech will help you select the right filter. This might include a cluster filter with self -generating backwash, packaged steel tank filters, pressure filters, or even a membrane filter. Selecting filter internals such as underdrains, washtroughs, and media is just as important, and WesTech has more options and expertise than anyone else in the market. One of the many possible WesTech water treatment flaw schemes. Reliable Wastewater Solutions Quality Equipment Because of the quality systems WesTech employs, plant operators enjoy equipment with longer life cycles and lower maintenance costs. Equipment components are shop assembled prior to shipment to the job site. This simple step results in trouble - free construction and successful start-ups. WesTech enjoys more than 40 years of experience in municipal wastewater treatment. WesTech starts with creating value and ensuring success for engineers, contractors, and plant operators. Customers praise not only WesTech's equipment, but also their overall experience with WesTech's team. Fast Response WesTech makes sure you receive all the needed details for your project design in a fast and responsive manner. WesTech's detailed process calculations, drawings, and custom specifications help you get your job done faster. Ease of Installation With thousands of installations throughout the world, WesTech has gained the necessary knowledge to design equipment and provide support so that each installation goes as smoothly as possible. Contractors get full support in equipment installation and start-up. Superior Customer Service WesTech takes pride in customer service and stands behind every project. As WesTech's customer, you will know that WesTech is just as invested in the success of your project as you are. over 7,000 wastewater installations 1. Preliminary Treatment Effective screening of inorganics and removal of grit improves the effectiveness of your down- stream processes and the longevity of your equipment. WesTech's full line of quality preliminary treatment equipment acts as a reliable first step in making your plant run efficiently and consistently. 2. CSO/SSO Treatment WesTech offers equipment and solutions for combined sewer overflow (CSO) and storm sewer overflow (SSO) systems for those communities where excessive wet weather events can overwhelm the treatment plant. 3. Primary and Secondary Clarification WesTech's name is synonymous with innovative sedimentation solutions for primary and secondary clarification. WesTech's vast experience, testing, and research of the clarification process provides clear effluent, increased overflow rates, and thicker underflow concentrations. 4. Biological Treatment With the most efficient and reliable treatment processes available, WesTech can customize each biological treatment system to achieve your plant's discharge needs. 5. Thickening Thickeners improve the operation of your digestion process. WesTech's gravity thickeners and rotary drum thickeners have a proven history. For biological nutrient removal applications or sites with limited area, dissolved air flotation thickeners offer many advantages. 6. Anaerobic Digestion Whether for waste -to -energy or for conditioning of biosolids prior to disposal, WesTech offers complete digestion systems. WesTech's systems provide effective and reliable solids storage, heating, and mixing of biosolids, as well as the capture of biogas to convert into usable energy. 7. Tertiary Treatment With growing demand for high -quality effluent and the reuse of treated wastewater, WesTech has your solution. WesTech offers a full range of tertiary treatment equipment for new construction, plant upgrades, and in -basin retrofits. One of the many possible WesTech wastewater treatment flow schemes. What You Night Not Know WesTech is known for integrity, customer service, and process expertise. While it has long been an important player in municipal water and wastewater, there is a lot more to know about WesTech. • WesTech is an employee -owned company. This creates a deep commitment to the success of each project. • Three major U.S. locations include Salt Lake City, Chicago, and Ames. • International offices include Brazil, China, India, and South Africa. • WesTech's expertise in minerals beneficiation is being used around the globe. WesTech's products are in active use on every major continent. • Industrially, WesTech equipment performs at refineries, power plants, agricultural operations, manufacturing sites, steel mills, and much more. • In 2012, WesTech acquired two of the most highly preferred and well- known conventional water treatment lines in U.S. history. The innovative Microfloc and General Filter lines have loyal followings because of their superior engineering. This acquisition ties WesTech even more closely to municipal engineers and plant owners. • WesTech has been operating for more than 40 years and now counts more than 15,000 installations worldwide. • WesTech's corporate goal challenges us to provide greater value to our customers than any other competitor in the market. Support and Service Whether it is lab testing to determine the right process or having its field service personnel install new parts, WesTech commits to keep your plant running. • Electrical / programming • Field service • Full -service parts department • Lab testing • Upgrades and retrofits Demand WesTech All equipment is not equal. All projects are not equal. All companies are not equal. WesTech's Value Talk to our team and to your local representative to learn how WesTech improves your project. We're confident your experience with WesTech will be one of the best experiences in your career. Additionally, we will deliver more long-term value and reliability to your project than any other competitor in the market. Global Response WesTech equipment includes the support of a global network of experienced engineers and qualified sales agents. WesTech maintains offices and partnerships throughout the world to give you access to our products and services. Contact WesTech to arrange a visit with a local representative in your area. WesTech Process Equipment Industrial Aerators Minerals ATOMERATORTm Pressurized Aerators Cascading Aerators Forced Draft Aerators Induced Draft Aerators 1.014,1, BiologicatTreaatm�ent- BioDoem Rotary Distributors BioTreatersTM ClearLogicTm MBRs HydroDocTm Rotary Distributors Landox Process OxyStreamTm Oxidation Ditches Slow Speed Surface Aerators STM-AerotorTM IFAS Systems rrel Clarifiers ,14 Adsorption Clarifiers® Buoyant Media Clarifiers CONTRAFASTO Thickening Clarifiers CONTRAFLO® Clarifiers COP"' Clarifiers COP"' Suction Header Clarifiers Flocculating Clarifiers RapiSand-rm Ballasted Flocculation Systems Rim Drive Clarifiers Solids CONTACT CLARIFIERS"' SPIRACONETm Clarifiers Suction Pipe Clarifiers SuperSettlerTm Clarifiers Traveling Bridge Clarifiers ZICKERT Shark"' Sludge Removal System Water Dewatering Wastewater Ceramic Disc Vacuum Filters Disc Vacuum Filters Horizontal Belt Vacuum Filters Plate and Frame Filters Precoat Vacuum Drum Filters Rotary Vacuum Drum Filters Tower Press Filter lDigestion Equipment DuoSpherem Digester Covers DuoSphereTm Gasholders ExtremeDutyTm Sludge Mixers Heat Exchangers Steel Beam Covers Steel Truss Covers Dissolved Air Flotation DAF Clarifiers / Thickeners DGF / DNF Clarifiers 491 Dual Output Drives Peripheral Traction Drives Precision Bearing Drives Cage Drives Shaft Drives Rake Lifting Mechanisms Replacement Drives Drives Filtration Cation Exchange Softeners CenTROL@ Gravity Filters ESSD@ Washtroughs Granular Activated Carbon Filters MULTICELLO Horizontal Pressure Filters Multi TechTm Multiple Barrier Filters MULTIBLOCKO Filter Underdrain MULTICRETET"' II Filter Underdrain MULTIWASHO Filtration Process Open Top Gravity Filters SuperDiscTm" Filters SuperSandTm Filters Vertical Pressure Filters WWETCO FlexFiltersTm [,71, Flocculation Horizontal Paddle Flocculators Vertical Paddle Flocculators Grit Removal CleanGritTm Washers Gritt MittTm Classifiers Vortex Grit Separators ®L ' Membranes AltaFilterTm Ultrafiltration AltaPac- Ultrafiltration ClearLogicTm MBR Reverse Osmosis Package Treatment Systems AERALATERO Iron Removal Systems AltaPacTm Ultrafiltration Systems Aquarius@ Systems BioTreatersTM ClearLogicTm MBRs STM-AerotorTM IFAS Systems Tri-Mite@ Package Water Treatment Systems TriconTm Adsorption Clarification Trident@ HS Package Water Treatment Systems Trident@ HSC Package Water Treatment Systems Trident@ HSR Package Water Treatment Systems Trident@ Package Water Treatment Systems Water BoyTm Packaged Systems Screening CleanFloTm Screens CleanFloTm All -In -One Combined Headworks Systems CleanFloTm Element Belt Screen CleanFloTm Monoscreen@ Fine Screen CleanFloTm MultiRake Bar Screen CleanFloTm Rotoscreen0 Fine Screen CleanFloTm SHEARTm Rotary Drum Screen CleanFloTm Spiral Screen CleanFloTm" Vertical Spiral Screen CleanWashTm Screenings Washer / Compactors Pressure Screw (SWP/CPS) ROMAG CSO Deflection Screens Septage Receiving Stations [W1 Thickeners AItaFIoTm High Rate Thickeners CONTRAFASTO Thickening Clarifiers Deep BedTM Paste Thickeners Gravity Sludge Thickeners HiDensityTm Paste Thickeners HiFIoTm High Rate Thickeners Traction Drive Thickeners ®� Other Carbon Retention Screens Electrical Control Systems Installation and Electrical Services Ion Exchange Systems Linear Screens Magnetic Belt Separators Oil/Water Separators Rectangular Circular Scale Pit Scraper/Skimmers Sludge SuckerTm Sludge Removal Systems Parts and Field Service See our website or contact us for the latest equipment line. westech-inc.com or 801.265.1000 WE STE C WesTech Engineering, Inc. 2013 Represented by: Tel: 801.265.1000 westech-inc.com info@westech-inc.com Salt Lake City, Utah, USA Appendix FE Sequencing Batch Reactor Correspondence ID#: AAL-31434 October 17, 2014 Bowen Collins & Associates Attn: Robert Mayers, P.E. Project: MOAB UT RE: New Moab Wastewater Treatment Facility Solicitation for Pre-Design Proposals AASI Design #138604 Enclosed please find Design #138604 with supporting materials for the AquaSBR® Sequencing Batch Reactor equipment to meet the requirements for the secondary biological treatment process as specified in the New Moab Wastewater Treatment Facility Solicitation for Pre-Design Proposals, including Addendum Number 1. The AquaSBR system is a true batch system which isolates each tank and allows for lower and more consistent nutrient levels in the effluent as well as equalization of short fluctuations in flow and/or loading. Some highlights of the design approach include: - A dual-basin system including square, common-walled tank construction. Future flows would require the addition of two (2) basins of equal size. Note that basin dimensions are adjustable to better fit any specific site constraints. - Aeration requirements based on 1.3 lbs O2 / lb BOD applied, 4.7 lbs O2 / lb TKN applied, and 2.0 residual DO with no nutrient credit taken. - Retrievable fine bubble diffusers for lower operation and maintenance costs and ease of access for the operations staff. Please note that sludge production numbers are shown on the design summary page, however, no equipment for a sludge holding basin is currently included in our scope of supply. The preliminary price for Design #138604 is $737,000, which includes freight to the jobsite and our standard start-up supervision services. Page 2 of 2 October 17, 2014 Project Applications Engineer Sincerely, Angelica Sunday isiWest / ph#: 970/535-0571 / fx#: 970/744-4955CC: Jeremy Jensen, P.E. / jjensen@isiwest.com Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Thomas Sichz, P.E. / TSichz@aqua-aerobic.com We appreciate the opportunity to submit our design for this project and look forward to discussing it with you in detail. Please feel free to contact me (phone: 815-639-4563; email: asunday@aqua-aerobic.com) or our sales representative firm (listed below) if you have any questions. Moab Wastewater Treatment Facility, UT Table of Contents October 17th, 2014 Cover letter Section 1. Design #138604 Section 2. Layout Drawing Section 3. Installation Hours Estimate Operation and Maintenance Estimate Energy Consumption vs. Organic Loading Section 4. Operational Description Key Features Section 5. Reference List Plant Data Sheets Site Photographs Section 6. Equipment Brochure Section 7. Support Services Section 8. Corporate Capabilities PROCESS DESIGN REPORT Designed By: Angelica Sunday on Friday, October 17, 2014 Design#: 138604 Option: Preliminary Design The enclosed information is based on preliminary data which we have received from you. There may be factors unknown to us which would alter the enclosed recommendation. These recommendations are based on models and assumptions widely used in the industry. While we attempt to keep these current, Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. assumes no responsibility for their validity or any risks associated with their use. Also, because of the various factors stated above, Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. assumes no responsibility for any liability resulting from any use made by you of the enclosed recommendations. Copyright 2014, Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc MOAB UT Design Notes Pre-SBR - Neutralization is recommended/required ahead of the SBR if the pH is expected to fall outside of 6.5-8.5 for significant durations. - Coarse solids removal/reduction is recommended prior to the SBR. SBR - The maximum flow, as shown on the design, has been assumed as a hydraulic maximum and does not represent an additional organic load. - When flows are in excess of the maximum daily flow of 2.25 MGD, the SBR system has been designed to advance cycles in order to process a peak hydraulic flow of 3.0 MGD. - Depending upon the magnitude and duration of the peak flow, effluent quality may be degraded. - The decanter performance is based upon a free-air discharge following the valve and immediately adjacent to the basin. Actual decanter performance depends upon the complete installation including specific liquid and piping elevations and any associated field piping losses to the final point of discharge. Modification of the high water level, low water level, centerline of discharge, and / or cycle structure may be required to achieve discharge of full batch volume based on actual site installation specifics. Aeration - The aeration system has been designed to provide 1.3 lbs. O2/lb. BOD5 applied and 4.7 lbs. O2/lb. NH3-N applied at the design average loading conditions. - Depending on the actual yard piping from the blowers to the diffuser system and the heat losses associated with the yard piping, additional provisions for cooling of the air (i.e. incorporating heat exchangers) and/or modification of in-basin piping and/or diffuser sleeve material may be required. Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. reserves the right to modify the following equipment offering to ensure compatibility of all in-basin components with actual air temperatures. Process/Site - An elevation and ambient temperatures have been assumed as displayed on the design. - The anticipated effluent Total Nitrogen requirement is predicated upon an influent waste temperature of 11° C or greater. - Sufficient alkalinity is required for nitrification, as approximately 7.1 mg alkalinity (as CaCO3) is required for every mg of NH3-N nitrified. If the raw water alkalinity cannot support this consumption, while maintaining a residual concentration of 50 mg/l, supplemental alkalinity shall be provided (by others). - This system has been designed to be expandable from a Phase I flows of 1.5 MGD average, 2.25 MGD maximum, and 3.0 peak, to an ultimate, Phase II flows of 3.0 MGD average, 4.5 MGD maximum, and 6.0 MGD peak. The influent valves in Phase I have been sized to accomodate Phase II flows. Phase II will require two (2) additional 82'x82' SBR basins, additional blowers, and controls expansion. The engineer should give thought to piping and site layout to facilitate the expansion. - To achieve the effluent monthly average total phosphorus limit, the biological process and chemical feed systems need to be designed to facilitate optimum performance. - Influent to the biological system is a typical municipal wastewater application with a TP range of 6–8 mg/l. Influent TP shall be either in a particle associated form or in a reactive soluble phosphate form or in a soluble form that can be converted to reactive phosphorus in the biological system. Soluble hydrolyzable and organic phosphates are not removable by chemical precipitation with metal salts. A water quality analysis is required to determine the phosphorus speciation with respect to soluble and insoluble reactive, acid hydrolyzable and total phosphorus at the system influent, point(s) of chemical addition, and final effluent. - Chemical feed lines (i.e. metal salts) shall be furnished to each reactor, aerobic digester and dewatering supernatant streams as necessary. - pH monitoring of the upstream biological reactor is required when adding metal salts. 10/14/2014 10:18:13AM Page 2 of 6Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc CONFIDENTIAL MOAB UT / Design#: 138604 - The basin dimensions reported on the design have been assumed based upon the required volumes and assumed basin geometry. Actual basin geometry may be circular, square, rectangular or sloped with construction materials including concrete, steel or earthen. - Rectangular or sloped basin construction with length to width ratios greater than 1.5:1 may require alterations in the equipment recommendation. - The basins are not included and shall be provided by others. - Influent is assumed to enter the reactor above the waterline, located appropriately to avoid proximity to the decanter, splashing or direct discharge in the immediate vicinity of other equipment. - If the influent is to be located submerged below the waterline, adequate hydraulic capacity shall be made in the headworks to prevent backflow from one reactor to the other during transition of influent. - A minimum freeboard of 2.0 ft. is recommended for diffused aeration. - The control panel does not include motor starters. Motor starters should be provided in a separate MCC (by others). - Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. (AASI) is familiar with the Buy American provision of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 as well as other Buy American provisions (i.e. FAR 52.225, EXIM Bank, USAid, etc.). AASI can provide a system that is in full compliance with Buy American provisions. As the project develops AASI can work with you to ensure full compliance with a Buy American provision, if required. Please contact the factory should compliance with a Buy American provision be required. 10/14/2014 10:18:13AM Page 3 of 6Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc CONFIDENTIAL MOAB UT / Design#: 138604 Equipment AquaSBR - Sequencing Batch Reactor - Design Summary DESIGN INFLUENT CONDITIONS Avg. Design Flow Max Design Flow = 5678 m3/day = 8517 m3/day = 1.5 MGD = 2.25 MGD Peak Hyd. Flow = 3 MGD = 11356 m3/day (with advancing cycles) DESIGN PARAMETERS Influent mg/l Required <= mg/l Anticipated <= mg/l Effluent Bio/Chem Oxygen Demand:345 2525BOD5BOD5BOD5 Total Suspended Solids:325TSS 25 25TSSTSS Total Nitrogen:10TN TN 10---- Phosphorus:Total P 8 Total P 1 Total P 1 SITE CONDITIONS Maximum Minimum Design Elevation (MSL) Ambient Air Temperatures: Influent Waste Temperatures: 100 F 37.8 C 20 F -6.7 C 100 F 37.8 C 4,026 ft 81 F 27.0 C 52 F 11.0 C 81 F 27.0 C 1,227.1 m SBR BASIN DESIGN VALUES Water Depth Basin Vol./Basin No./Basin Geometry:Min Min= 11.5 ft = (3.5 m)= 0.580 MG = (2,194.7 m³)= 2 Square Basin(s)* Freeboard:Avg Avg= 14.5 ft = (4.4 m)= 0.730 MG = (2,762.5 m³)= 2.0 ft = (0.6 m) Length of Basin:= 82.0 ft = (25.0 m)Max = 16.0 ft = (4.9 m)Max = 0.805 MG = (3,046.5 m³) Width of Basin:= 82.0 ft = (25.0 m) Number of Cycles:= 5 per Day/Basin Cycle Duration:= 4.8 Hours/Cycle Food/Mass (F/M) ratio:= 0.099 lbs. BOD5/lb. MLSS-Day MLSS Concentration:= 4500 mg/l @ Min. Water Depth Hydraulic Retention Time:= 0.973 Days @ Avg. Water Depth Solids Retention Time:= 12.7 Days Est. Net Sludge Yield:= 0.719 lbs. WAS/lb. BOD5 Est. Dry Solids Produced:= 3101.3 lbs. WAS/Day Est. Solids Flow Rate:= 400 GPM (37184 GAL/Day) = (1406.7 kg/Day) = (140.8 m³/Day) = 4167.0 GPM (as avg. from high to low water level)= (262.9 l/sec)Decant Flow Rate @ MDF: LWL to CenterLine Discharge:= 2.2 ft = (0.7 m) = 4.70 = 1.30Lbs. O2/lb. BOD5 Lbs. O2/lb. TKN Actual Oxygen Required:= 7963 lbs./Day = (3611.8 kg/Day) Air Flowrate/Basin:= 3175 SCFM = (90.0 Sm3/min) Max. Discharge Pressure:= 8.5 PSIG = (59 KPA) Avg. Power Required:= 2592.2 KW-Hrs/Day 10/14/2014 10:18:13AM Page 4 of 6Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc CONFIDENTIAL MOAB UT / Design#: 138604 -------- *Concrete estimate is approximately 24,468 ft3, assuming 1 ft wall and floor thickness. NH3-N 40Ammonia Nitrogen: Equipment Summary AquaSBR Influent Valves 2 Influent Valve(s) will be provided as follows: - 18 inch electrically operated plug valve(s). Mixers 2 AquaDDM Direct Drive Mixer(s) will be provided as follows: - 20 HP Aqua-Aerobic Systems Endura Series Model FSS DDM Mixer(s). Mixer Mooring 2 Mixer cable mooring system(s) consisting of: - #8 AWG four-conductor electrical service cable(s). - Aerial support tie(s). - Electrical cable strain relief grip(s), 2 eye, wire mesh. - 304 stainless steel mooring cable(s). - Maintenance mooring cable loop(s). - Stainless steel mooring spring(s). Decanters 2 Decanter assembly(ies) consisting of: - 10x9 decanter(s) with fiberglass float, 304 stainless steel weir, galvanized restrained mooring frame, and painted steel power section with #14-10 conductor power cable. - Decant pipe(s). - 4" schedule 40 galvanized restrained mooring post(s) with base plate. - Galvanized steel dewatering support posts. - 16 inch electrically operated butterfly valve(s). Transfer Pumps/Valves 2 Submersible Pump Assembly(ies) consisting of the following items: - 3 HP Submersible Pump(s) with painted cast iron pump housing, discharge elbow, and multi-conductor electrical cable. - Manual plug valve(s). - 3 inch diameter swing check valve. - Galvanized steel slide rail assembly(ies). Retrievable Fine Bubble Diffusers 22 Retrievable Fine Bubble Diffuser Assembly(ies) consisting of: - 25 diffuser tubes consisting of two flexible EPDM porous membrane sheaths mounted on a rigid support pipe with 304 stainless steel band clamps. - 304 stainless steel manifold weldment. - 304 stainless steel leveling angles. - 304 stainless steel leveling studs. - Galvanized vertical support beam. - Galvanized vertical air column assembly. - Galvanized upper vertical beam and pulley assembly. - Galvanized top support bracket. - 3" EPDM flexible air line with ny-glass quick disconnect end fittings. - Galvanized threaded flange. - 3" manual isolation butterfly valve with cast iron body, EPDM seat, aluminum bronze disk and one-piece steel shaft. 10/14/2014 10:18:13AM Page 5 of 6Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc CONFIDENTIAL MOAB UT / Design#: 138604 - Ny-glass quick disconnect cam lock adapter. - 304 stainless steel adhesive anchors. - Brace angles. 1 Diffuser Electric Winch(es) will be provided as follows: - Portable electric winch. Positive Displacement Blowers 3 Positive Displacement Blower Package(s), with each package consisting of: - Positive Displacement Blower Package with common base, V-belt drive, enclosed drive guard, pressure gauge, pressure relief valve, vibration pads, and blower oil for initial operation. - 304 stainless steel anchors. - 125 HP motor with slide base. - Blower startup by the blower packager is included. - Inlet filter and inlet silencer. - Discharge silencer, check valve, manual butterfly isolation valve, and flexible discharge connector. Air Valves 2 Air Control Valve(s) will be provided as follows: - 12 inch electrically operated butterfly valve(s). Level Sensor Assemblies 2 Pressure Transducer Assembly(ies) each consisting of: - Submersible pressure transducer(s). - Mounting bracket weldment(s). - Transducer mounting pipe weldment(s). - 304 stainless steel anchors. 2 Level Sensor Assembly(ies) will be provided as follows: - Float switch(es). - Float switch mounting bracket(s). - 304 stainless steel anchors. Instrumentation 2 Dissolved Oxygen Assembly(ies) consisting of: - Thermo Fisher RDO dissolved oxygen probe with electric cable. Probe includes stainless steel stationary bracket and retrievable pole probe mounting assembly. One (1) probe per basin. - Thermo Fisher AV38 controller and display module(s). Controls Controls wo/Starters 1 Controls Package(s) will be provided as follows: - NEMA 12 panel enclosure suitable for indoor installation and constructed of painted steel. - Fuse(s) and fuse block(s). - Allen Bradley 1769-L30ER Compactlogix integral programmable controller. - Operator interface(s). - Remote Access Ethernet Modem. 10/14/2014 10:18:13AM Page 6 of 6Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc CONFIDENTIAL MOAB UT / Design#: 138604 NOTE: ALL VALVE VAULTS, DISCONNECT BOXES,INFLUENT PIPING, EFFLUENT PIPING, SLUDGE /TRANSFER PIPING, AND WALKWAYS ARE SHOWN FORREFERENCE ONLY AND ARE TO BE SUPPLIED ANDINSTALLED BY OTHERS.NOTE: BASIN OVERFLOWS MUST BE PROVIDED.NOTE: INFLUENT VALVE ISOLATION OR BY-PASS MUSTBE PROVIDED BY THE INSTALLING CONTRACTOR.NOTE: VENTING OF DECANT LINE MAY BE REQUIREDDEPENDING ON DOWN STREAM CONDITIONS.RETRIEVABLE FINE BUBBLE DIFFUSER:NOTE: BLOWER DISCHARGE MANIFOLD AND PIPING LOSSES ARE ASSUMED AT0.50 psi. FROM TERMINATION FLANGE OF THE BLOWER TO THE DIFFUSERISOLATION VALVE. ENGINEER TO VERIFY ACTUAL LINE LOSSES DO NOT EXCEEDTHE ABOVE. INLET LOSSES ARE ASSUMED AT 0.25 PSI FOR INLET SILENCER ANDA CLEAN FILTER. NO INLET LOSSES HAVE BEEN ASSUMED FOR INLET FILTERPIPING, AND IT IS ASSUMED THAT THE FILTER IS LOCATED ON EACH BLOWER.DIFFUSED AIR SYSTEM:NOTE: DEPENDING ON THE ACTUAL YARD PIPING FROM THE BLOWERS TO THEDIFFUSER SYSTEM AND THE HEAT LOSSES ASSOCIATED WITH THE YARD PIPING,ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS FOR COOLING OF THE AIR (I.E. INCORPORATING HEATEXCHANGERS) AND/OR MODIFICATION OF IN-BASIN PIPING AND/OR DIFFUSERSLEEVE MATERIAL MAY BE REQUIRED. AQUA-AEROBIC SYSTEMS, INC. RESERVESTHE RIGHT TO MODIFY THE FOLLOWING EQUIPMENT OFFERING TO ENSURECOMPATIBILITY OF ALL IN-BASIN COMPONENTS WITH ACTUAL AIR TEMPERATURES.GROUTING:NOTE: IF BASINS WITH SLOPED FLOORS ARE UTILIZED, SUPPLY OF GROUT PADSBENEATH THE PROPOSED EQUIPMENT TO PROVIDE FOR A LEVEL INSTALLATIONELEVATION FOR THE EQUIPMENT IS TO BE PROVIDED BY THE INSTALLINGCONTRACTOR/PURCHASER.ELECTRICAL CABLETETHERED TO MOORING(TYP)ELECTRICALLY OPERATEDINFLUENT VALVE(TYP)ELECTRICALLY OPERATEDDECANT VALVE (TYP)LEVEL SENSING FLOAT SWITCH(TYP)DECANTER(TYP)MIXER WITH CABLE MOORING(TYP)RETRIEVABLE FINEBUBBLE DIFFUSER(TYP)SLUDGE PUMP ASSEMBLY(TYP)LEVEL SENSINGPRESSURE TRANSDUCER(TYP)82.0' X 82.0'18.0' BASIN DEPTH16.0' MAXIMUM WATER DEPTH11.5' MINIMUM WATER DEPTHSBR BASINDCBA12348765Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. All Rights Reserved. This Drawing May Not Be Copied All Or In Part Without The Express Written Permission Of Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc.JOB NAME:JOB LOCATION:DREV ERN / ECOBYDRAWING NAME:REVISION DESCRIPTIONDRAWING NUMBER:WEIGHT:DRAWN BY:TYPE:SIMILAR TO:MATERIAL:DATE:SHEET: OFSIZE:SCALE:DATEAQUA-AEROBIC SYSTEMS, INC.®ANSIFRACTIONAL DIMENSIONSALL TWO PLACE DECIMALSALL THREE PLACE DECIMALSALL ANGLESDO NOTSCALEDRAWING+/- 1/16+/- 0.010+/- 0.005+/- 1/2°UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIEDALL DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHESSBR PLANVIEW81134353001GRB 2014-10-161 1MOAB WWTPUTD.O. ASSEMBLY(TYP)SBR BASIN #1SBR BASIN#2FUTURE BASINS Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Rev 6.13.2011 Estimated Labor Hours for Installation of AquaSBR® Sequencing Batch Reactor System Equipment for Moab, UT Design No. 138604 dated 10/17/2014 Electric Valves: The following electrically operated valves are included in Aqua-Aerobic Systems' scope of supply. The electrically operated valves require conduit installation and field wiring from the valve to the control panel by the installing contractor. Valve installation times are not included in the labor hours estimate. Valve installation times should be provided by the installing contractor. 2 Influent Valve(s) 2 Decant Valve(s) 2 Air Control Valve(s) Cable Moored Mixer Assembly: See footnote #1, #2. Assemble mixer power section, float assembly, and intake volute assembly (if required). Set mixer into position on basin floor, adjust and secure all cable hardware and cable floats. Field wire electrical cable into basin junction box. (Junction box/disconnect provided by others.) Assemble unit (if required). = 2 men 0.25 hour Placement & cable mooring installation = 2 men 0.75 hour Field wire unit to junction box/disconnect = 1 man 1.25 hours Sub-total hrs/mixer = 3.25 x 2 mixer(s) = 6.5 man hours Estimated Labor Hours for Installation of AquaSBR System Equipment Page 2 of 7 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Rev 6.13.2011 Submersible Pump and Slide-Rail System: See footnote #2. Set and anchor pump base to basin floor or sump. Set and anchor upper guide bar bracket to basin wall or extension bracket if required. Field cut 2 slide-rail pipes to length required. Install piping and valve(s). Set and anchor pipe support brackets to basin wall, if applicable. Slip pump over slide-rails and lower into position. Field wire electrical cable into basin junction box. (Junction box/disconnect provided by others.) Anchor pump base = 1 man 0.5 hour Cut slide rails & anchor guide bracket = 1 man 0.5 hour Install piping and valves = 2 men 1.5 hours Field wire pump to junction box/disconnect = 1 man 0.5 hour Sub-total hrs/pump = 4.5 x 2 pump(s) = 9 man hours Decanter Assembly (Pipe Discharge): See footnote #1, #2. Assemble power frame, float, and mooring frame. Assemble weir and center column pipe together. Set and anchor (3) dewatering supports to basin floor. Set weir on supports and attach power frame/float. Assemble discharge expansion joints, elbows, and discharge pipe. Set and anchor guide post to basin floor. Fill guide post with concrete. Set and anchor discharge saddle pipe support to basin floor. Field wire power section to basin junction box/disconnect. (Junction box/disconnect by others.) Set and assemble power frame/float = 2 men 2.0 hours Assemble weir and center pipe = 1 man 0.5 hour Set and anchor dewatering supports = 2 men 2.0 hours Assemble decanter and piping = 4 men 8.0 hours Set and anchor guide post and fill w/concrete = 2 men 1.75 hours Set and anchor discharge pipe support = 2 men 1.0 hour Field wire actuator to junction box/disconnect = 1 man 2.0 hours Sub-total hrs/decanter = 48.0 x 2 unit(s) = 96.0 man hours Fine Bubble - Retrievable Bank Configuration, Manual or Electric Winch See footnote #1. Estimated Labor Hours for Installation of AquaSBR System Equipment Page 3 of 7 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Rev 6.13.2011 Place beam/track weldment on basin floor and anchor in position. Install beam/track weldment into base with crane or lifting device and attach beam to basin wall using mounting plate holes in beam as a template to locate and drill all anchor locations (six anchors/beam and base weldment). Set and anchor beam plates to wall with adhesive anchors provided. Field weld top adjustable bracket to beam/track socket. Disconnect lifting cable from shipping position of vertical air column. With a crane attached, lift vertical air column and slip over beam flange so that the air column guide brackets and wheel slide down both sides of beam flange. Secure air column at bottom of beam and remove slack in cable with winch. Guide wheel must rest on floor. Place diffuser frame weldment on basin floor and field attach frame angles. Install pivotal lifting mechanism into beam socket and secure lifting cable to bracket of lifting mechanism. Assemble diffuser tubes to the manifold weldment. With crane, lift manifold assembly and attach to mounting flange of vertical air column. Assemble leveling studs and level diffusers/frame. Attach diagonal support angles to secure manifold to air column. Attach side support angles to frame securing ends of diffuser tubes to the frame assembly. Slip neoprene vibration pads between frame and bottom of diffuser, and at the top of the diffusers and top retaining angles. Attach retaining angles to secure to frame. Leave clean-out plates off at this time for future blow-out of piping system. Check each bolt to ensure double jam locking of nuts to prevent damage from vibration. Attach 3" flange and isolation valve to air piping system at top of basin. Do not assemble hose assemblies at this time. Repeat procedure for all diffuser banks. Remove all debris from entire basin floor. After blower packages have been tested, run blowers approximately 10 minutes with all isolation valves open to clean out air manifold piping system. Assemble hose assembly to piping and vertical air column with quick connection fittings provided. Start blowers again and run approximately 10 minutes to clean-out air column and manifold weldments through clean-out ports. Finish assembly of clean-out plates with gaskets on all diffuser banks. Estimated Labor Hours for Installation of AquaSBR System Equipment Page 4 of 7 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Rev 6.13.2011 Assemble beam and air column 2 men 0.5 hr/bank x 22 banks = 22 hrs Set and anchor beam plates to wall 2 men 1.0 hr/bank x 22 banks = 44 hrs Field weld top adjustable bracket to beam 1 man .25 hr/bank x 22 banks = 5.5 hrs Assemble and level frame 2 men 0.5 hr/bank x 22 banks = 22 hrs Assemble manifold & support angles 2 men 0.5 hr/bank x 22 banks = 22 hrs Assemble diffusers (25 tubes x 22 banks = 550 tubes) 1 man 1.0 min/tube x 550 tubes ÷ 60 min./hr = 9.2 hrs Install vibration pads & retaining angles 1 man 0.5 hr/bank x 22 banks = 11 hrs Inspection of all bolts to insure all hardware is secured and jammed “locked” for vibration 1 man .25 hr/bank x 22 banks = 5.5 hrs Clean out manifold piping and assemble valve & hose assembly 1 man 0.50 hr/bank x 22 banks = 11 hrs Clean up of basin floor 1 man 6 hrs/basin x 2 basin(s) = 12 hrs Sub-total diffuser installation = 164.2 man hours Estimated Labor Hours for Installation of AquaSBR System Equipment Page 5 of 7 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Rev 6.13.2011 Positive Displacement Blowers: See footnote #1, #2. Set and anchor blower assembly base, with vibration pads on foundation. Remove intake filter and re-assemble in vertical position for outdoor installations. All pipe fittings required must be supplied by others. Indoor installations may leave intake filter assembled to blower provided proper building ventilation is available. Install loose items such as check valve, isolation valve, expansion joint, pressure gauge, etc. to discharge piping. Check installation drawings for proper sequence of components and hardware provided with equipment. Field wire blower motor to local disconnect switch. Check motor and blower lubrication and add if required prior to start-up. (See oil capacity chart in O&M manual.) Once air manifold system and diffuser systems have been completed, and blower impellers have been rotated by hand to make certain there is no binding or internal contact. Set and anchor blower = 2 men 0.5 hr/blower Install discharge pipe components = 1 man 1.0 hr/blower Field wire motor = 1 man 1.0 hr/blower Lubrication check/15 minute start-up = 1 man 0.5 hr/blower Belt inspection = 1 man 0.5 hr/blower Sub-total hrs/blower = 4.0 x 3 blower(s) = 12.0 man hours Dissolved Oxygen Sensors: Set and anchor DO sensors to basin wall. Anchor local panel to basin wall (panel supports by others). Field wire sensors to local panel and local panel to SBR control panel. Field wiring of the local control panel cannot be estimated due to varying local codes for each project. Set and anchor sensors = 1 man 1.0 hour Set and anchor local panel = 1 man 1.0 hour Sub-total hrs/DO sensor = 2.0 x 2 sensor(s) = 2.0 man hours Estimated Labor Hours for Installation of AquaSBR System Equipment Page 6 of 7 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Rev 6.13.2011 Pressure Transducers: Set and anchor cable to basin wall. Assemble level transducer onto cable. Field wire transducers to SBR Control panel. Field wiring cannot be estimated due to varying local codes for each project. Set and anchor cable = 2 men 1.0 hours Assemble transducer = 2 man 1.0 hours Sub-total hrs/transducers = 4.0 x 2 unit(s) = 4.0 man hours Liquid Level Sensors: See footnote #2. Anchor wall bracket to basin wall. Install the cordgrip and tighten the cordgrip at the recommended length above each float switch and field wire each float switch into to the junction box. (Junction box by others.) Do not trim excess float switch wire. Set and anchor wall bracket = 1 man .50 hour Field wire float switch = 1 man .50 hours Sub-total hr/assembly = 1.0 x 2 sensor(s) = 1.0 man hours SBR Control Panel: Field wiring of the control panel cannot be estimated due to customized controls and varying local codes for each project. Set and anchor control panel = 2 men 0.5 hour Sub-total hrs/control panel = 1.0 x 1 control panel = 1.0 man hour Footnotes: 1. A crane and crane operator will be required for installation of the equipment. This operation is not included in the installation hours. 2. Wiring times given are based upon wiring of the unit to a junction box/disconnect at the basin wall. Junction box/disconnects are to be supplied by others. Wiring and conduit installation from the junction box/disconnects to the control panel have not been included in the estimated installation hours. Estimated installation hours for conduit and field wiring should be provided by the installing contractor. General Notes: Estimated Labor Hours for Installation of AquaSBR System Equipment Page 7 of 7 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Rev 6.13.2011 1. All electrical field wiring times are minimum estimates, and will vary with the size of project, site conditions, and local codes. 2. All installation times are estimates, and will vary with the size of project, site conditions, experience with equipment, and local codes. Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc.Page 1 of 1 Qty Unit Service Required Cost/Unit 1 Year 3 Year 5 Year 2 SBR AquaDDM Mixer Motor grease: per year 4.00$ 8.00$ 3 SBR P.D. Blower*Oil Change 4/year 50.00$ 600.00$ 3 SBR P.D. Blower*Replace Inlet Air Filter Elements: One/6 months 135.00$ 810.00$ 3 SBR P.D. Blower*Belt replacement: One/5 years 236.00$ 708.00$ 3 SBR P.D. Blower*P.D. Blower repair kit: One/5 Years 1,135.00$ 3,405.00$ 2 SBR Decanter Replace:Actuator,Capacitor,Limit Switch/3 years 719.00$ 1,438.00$ 2 SBR D.O. Sensors Replace: sensor head one/year 126.00$ 252.00$ 1100 SBR FB Diff. Membranes 25% Diffuser membrane replacement/5 years 31.00$ 8,525.00$ 2 SBR Sludge Pump Repair kit 451.00$ 902.00$ 1 Controller Replace Relays, Switches, Fuses /Year 50.00$ 50.00$ 1 Controller Replace Microprocessor Battery One/3 Years 26.00$ 26.00$ 1 Year 3 Year 5 Year EQUIPMENT TOTALS:1,720.00$ 1,464.00$ 13,540.00$ Power Costs of all equipment as proposed: ** 2,592 =Kilowatt hours/day Estimated $/kwhr 0.08$ 75,692$ Estimated General Operation & Maintenance*** 34.9 =Man Hours/week for Process Testing 6 =Man Hours/week for General Plant Cleanup and Routine Maintenance Notes * Stand-by blower unit included in estimate for budget purposes. Maintenance costs of stand-by unit may be reduced based upon the actual hours of operation. ** This is based upon operation at 100% of design conditions. ***The values listed are for estimating purposes only. The actual amount of operator attention provided will be dependent upon local requirements and the size of the staff available for testing. All estimates are based upon equipment maintenance and operation in accordance with the O & M instructions provided by Aqua-Aerobic Systems. They are based on typical SBR Installations with a normal preventative maintenance schedule for the equipment. The actual maintenance man hours required for each project will vary depending upon site and climate conditions, which may alter the frequency of the maintenance schedule. Estimated Operation & Maintenance Costs for MOAB UT Design No. 138604 dated October 17, 2014 Confidential Copyright 2014 - Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Page 1 of 2 AQUASBR ENERGY CONSUMPTION ANALYSIS The Aqua MixAir system provides separation of aeration and mixing in a system. The floating direct drive AquaDDM mixer provides a powerful downflow discharge for maximum solids suspension and aeration enhancement throughout the basin. Mixing efficiency can be 2-4 time more efficient than a diffuser system utilized for mixing. The use of the AquaDDM mixer also enables the AquaSBR to operate for nutrient removal (nitrates and enhanced biological phosphorus removal) by providing a mixed, non-aerated anoxic environment during selected phases of operation, this also aids on the control filamentous organisms. Anoxic/Anaerobic Mixing Aerobic Mixing The mixer allows the system to be operated in DO control mode with no risk of unwanted solids settling even at under loaded conditions. DO control and optimization allows for more efficient blower usage and resultant power consumption savings. This mode of operation also ensures that that excess D.O. concentrations are not reached in the basin, giving the operator a better control of the process. Energy savings can be experienced by turning the aeration off at low loading conditions. Additional power savings can be experienced when the system is underloaded and anoxic conditions are created in the system which allows for denitrification. This denitrification results in recovery of a portion of the oxygen in the system. Confidential Copyright 2014 - Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Page 2 of 2 Average Flow % Design WAS Pump Mixer Total Operating (MGD)Flow (kW-hr/day)(kW-hr/day)(kW-hr/day)Cost/year 0.200 10.0%0.29 432.2 648.2 $18,927 0.400 20.0%0.58 432.2 864.2 $25,235 0.600 30.0%0.87 432.2 1080.2 $31,542 0.800 40.0%1.16 432.2 1296.2 $37,849 1.000 50.0%1.45 432.2 1512.2 $44,156 1.200 60.0%1.74 432.2 1728.2 $50,463 1.400 70.0%2.03 432.2 1944.2 $56,771 1.600 80.0%2.32 432.2 2160.2 $63,078 1.800 90.0%2.61 432.2 2376.2 $69,385 2.000 100.0%2.9 432.2 2592.2 $75,692 NOTE: Power costs are based on a rate of: $0.08 per kW-hr. 2157.1 1294.3 1510.0 1725.7 1941.4 431.4 647.1 1078.6 ESTIMATED kW-HOURS AND ANNUAL COSTS: 215.7 Mix-Air system 862.8 (kW-hr/day) Blowers 0.0 500.0 1000.0 1500.0 2000.0 2500.0 3000.0 10% 30% 50% 70% 90% Power(kW-hrs/day) Percent Load Power vs. Organic Load Note: The power required at 100% of Design Flow is based upon the estimated oxygen utilization rate (OUR) at the given design conditions, as determined through kinetic calculations. This power estimate does not include safety factors on the oxygen supply that would normally be applied to account for the maximum daily O2 demand. Note that the AquaDDM mixer operates for the same portion of each cycle, regardless of loading, the mixer power consumption remains independent of loading. Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. AquaSBR® Sequencing Batch Reactor Operational Description Phase Descriptions for Diffused Aeration Mix Fill Phase Prior to the start of the Mix Fill phase, the reactor contents exist in a stratified condition. The bottom portion of the reactor consists of settled sludge, and the top portion consists of a clear supernatant. At this point in time, the reactor has recently completed a Decant cycle, and the overall water depth is equal to the minimum side water depth (SWD). The reactor environment has been "conditioned" by events that occurred during the prior cycle. First, the reactor environment has been conditioned by the termination of flow (and associated organic loading) to the reactor as the React Fill phase was completed. Second, the completion of the React phase provided the opportunity for the wastewater contaminants in the reactor to be "polished off". Third, the absence of mixing and aeration during the Settle, Decant, Idle and Waste Sludge phases further conditioned the reactor environment. Typically, the settled sludge zone will contain the majority of the microbial life. This microbial life continues a certain level of respiration and effectively depletes this settled sludge zone of any dissolved oxygen (D.O.). The supernatant layer above the settled sludge zone represents a significant fraction (typically 50 % to 70 %) of the reactor volume. Since the majority of the microbial life has settled to the bottom of the reactor, the relative effect of microbial respiration in the supernatant layer (compared to the sludge mass layer) is generally reduced. Therefore, the D.O. concentration in the supernatant layer typically ranges from 0.50 to 1.5 mg/l prior to the start of the Mix Fill phase. The water in the supernatant layer is generally of reasonably good quality with respect to the concentration of specific wastewater parameters. Residual soluble levels of organic material (as determined by a BOD5 measurement) are present in concentrations at or below the anticipated effluent value. Total suspended solids (TSS), total nitrogen (Tot-N) and total phosphorus (Total P) are also present in concentrations at or below the anticipated effluent concentrations. AquaSBR® Operational Description Page 2 of 16 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. As the Mix Fill phase of operation begins, wastewater flow is initiated to the reactor and the AquaDDM mixer is turned on. At this point, the AquaDDM begins mixing the reactor while the air supply system remains off and is not providing oxygen to the reactor. The stratified condition of the reactor that existed in the preceding phases is now converted to a completely mixed condition. The settled biomass is now resuspended and combined with the previously isolated supernatant layer and the raw wastewater entering the reactor. A schematic of this phase of operation, along with its associated process and mechanical considerations, is shown in Figure 1. Mix Fill Phase (Figure 1) Process Considerations Mechanical Considerations Zero or Near Zero D.O. Mixer Operating Complete Mix Conditions Influent Valve Open/Transfer Pump Operating Denitrification Aeration System Off Phosphorus Release Sludge Pump Off Sludge Conditioning Decant Weir Closed Filamentous Control As raw wastewater continues to flow into the reactor, the completely mixed condition results in the dispersal of the microbial life and incoming wastewater throughout the reactor. The residual level of D.O. that existed in the supernatant layer is rapidly depleted as a result of microbial respiration being effective throughout the entire reactor volume. AquaSBR® Operational Description Page 3 of 16 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. As raw wastewater enters the reactor, the amount of organic material (as measured by the soluble BOD5 concentration) present in the reactor increases. Since an aerobic phase has not yet been initiated in this cycle, biological degradation of the organic material in the influent wastewater is limited. The concentration of Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) in the reactor also increases. The TKN consists of organic nitrogen (Org-N) and ammonia nitrogen (NH3-N). By the process of hydrolysis (with or without oxygen present), the majority of the organic nitrogen is converted to ammonia nitrogen. The ammonia nitrogen must then be oxidized by the nitrification process. In the presence of oxygen, the nitrification process converts the ammonia nitrogen to nitrate nitrogen (NO3-N). However, since an aerobic phase has not yet been initiated, active nitrification is not occurring. Due to the absence of D.O. in the reactor, denitrification is capable of occurring during the Mix Fill phase. As a result, the residual level of nitrate nitrogen that previously existed in the supernatant layer is depleted to a near-zero concentration level. The denitrification process converts the nitrate nitrogen to nitrogen gas (N2), and the nitrogen gas is subsequently released to the atmosphere. The Mix Fill phase, in combination with the "non-aerated" periods during the React Fill and React phases, can be effective in producing an extremely low NO3-N concentration in the system effluent. However, since the nitrogen that enters the reactor is generally not in the form of NO3-N, the amount of denitrification that occurs during the Mix Fill phase is limited to the residual NO3-N from the previous cycle. Before the nitrogen in the influent can be denitrified, it must first be nitrified during the aerated periods of the React Fill and React phases. Therefore, a relatively small fraction of the total nitrogen removal requirement is accomplished during the Mix Fill phase. At the start of the Mix Fill phase, the effective mixing of the biomass with the influent wastewater in an anoxic environment results in a substantial release of phosphorus from the cell mass to the liquid medium. This phosphorus is now distributed throughout the entire reactor volume. A typical monitoring program would indicate a steady increase in the concentration of phosphorus during the Mix Fill phase. The rate of this increase is significantly greater than what could be attributed to the contribution of phosphorus present in the raw wastewater. The use of anoxic conditioning of the sludge mass can be highly effective with respect to improved settling characteristics and controlling the predominance of filamentous organisms in the treatment system. The Mix Fill phase of operation readily creates an anoxic condition throughout the entire reactor. A treatment cycle structure which incorporates this repetitive phase of operation can be effective in avoiding or controlling the predominance of filamentous populations in the reactor. AquaSBR® Operational Description Page 4 of 16 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. In summary, the Mix Fill phase of operation is characterized by a completely mixed anoxic environment in the reactor. The reactor contains a uniform blend of raw influent wastewater, previously settled biomass, and supernatant from the previous cycle. The environment is classified as anoxic with D.O. concentrations at or near zero. Effluent quality parameters will provide the system operator with a basis for determining the necessity of adjusting the specific duration of this phase of operation. In essence, this phase is utilized for denitrification, biological phosphorus release, and anoxic conditioning of the sludge mass. AquaSBR® Operational Description Page 5 of 16 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. React Fill Phase During the React Fill phase of operation, wastewater continues to enter the reactor, and the air supply system begins delivering oxygen to the reactor. The AquaDDM mixer continues to operate, and the completely mixed environment is maintained. The introduction of oxygen converts the reactor from an anoxic environment to an aerobic environment. Since the AquaSBR was designed to achieve nitrification and denitrification, the aeration system is cycled on and off during the React Fill phase. This alternately creates aerobic and anoxic conditions. Refer to “AquaSBR Description of Operation” for the specific aeration cycle times. Nitrification occurs during the aerated periods of operation, and denitrification occurs during the non-aerated periods of operation. Although BOD5 reduction normally occurs under aerobic and anoxic conditions, the rate of BOD5 reduction is much greater during the aerated periods of operation. A schematic of the React Fill phase of operation is shown in Figure 2. React Fill Phase (Figure 2) Process Considerations Mechanical Considerations Alternating Aerobic/Anoxic Conditions Mixer Operating Complete Mix Conditions Influent Valve Open/Transfer Pump Operating BOD5 Reduction Aeration System On/Off Nitrification/Denitrification Sludge Pump Off Phosphorus Uptake Decant Weir Closed AquaSBR® Operational Description Page 6 of 16 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. The wastewater that has entered (and continues to enter) the reactor represents a certain potential oxygen demand. The oxygen demand is due to the aerobic metabolism of the organic constituents (i.e. BOD5 reduction) and the nitrification of NH3-N. The aeration system has been sized to meet this oxygen demand. The dissolved oxygen (D.O.) concentration profile in the reactor will normally reveal a pattern of increasing D.O. concentration during the aerated periods, followed by decreasing D.O. concentration (to near-zero) during the non-aerated periods. In other words, the D.O. concentration will reach a peak value at the end of each aeration period. The repetitive on/off cycling of the air supply will also produce a pattern of increasing peak D.O. concentration with each successive aerated period. This is the result of the system achieving an ever-increasing degree of treatment as this phase progresses. As the degree of treatment increases, a steady decline in the oxygen uptake rate (OUR) of the biomass will result. The exact magnitude of this decline will be affected by the loading to the system and the duration of each of the individual phases of a complete treatment cycle. The concentration of total nitrogen present in the reactor will steadily decline as the React Fill phase is completed. The nitrification and denitrification processes typically reduce total nitrogen concentrations in the reactor as the raw waste flow continues to enter the reactor with additional nitrogen. In other words, the rates of nitrification and denitrification are typically more than sufficient to offset the rate of nitrogen entering the reactor. Nitrification is a two-step process involving two individual groups of microorganisms, namely Nitrosomonas and Nitrobacter. This process does not remove nitrogen from the wastewater. It merely converts it from one form of nitrogen to another form of nitrogen. In the presence of oxygen, ammonia nitrogen (NH3-N) is first converted to nitrite nitrogen (NO2-N) by the Nitrosomonas. The nitrite nitrogen is then converted to nitrate nitrogen (NO3-N) by the Nitrobacter. Since the Nitrobacter are generally much faster "workers" than the Nitrosomonas, the NO2-N concentration in the reactor is usually negligible. Nitrogen is actually removed from the wastewater by the denitrification process. Denitrification is performed by a broad range of microorganisms, collectively known as "heterotrophs", that are present in most wastewater treatment systems. In the absence of oxygen, these heterotrophs convert nitrate nitrogen to nitrogen gas (N2). The nitrogen gas is subsequently released from the reactor into the atmosphere. The amount of soluble organic material (as evidenced by the BOD5 concentration) in the reactor will typically decrease during the React Fill phase. During this phase, biological oxidation occurs simultaneously with the addition of organic material to the reactor. The decline in BOD5 concentration will closely parallel the pattern observed for the total nitrogen concentration. AquaSBR® Operational Description Page 7 of 16 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. During the initial period of the React Fill phase, the onset of aerobic conditions in the reactor allows the microorganisms to "take in" phosphorus. Therefore, the phosphorus that was previously released into solution (during the Mix Fill phase) is now taken back into the cell mass. The phosphorus present in the influent is also taken in by the biomass. Since the microorganisms were previously "depleted" of phosphorus, they have a tendency to take in more phosphorus than the amount that is necessary to meet their nutritional requirements. The term used to describe this phenomenon is "enhanced biological phosphorus removal". The anoxic periods during the React Fill and React phases are not long enough to allow a re-release of phosphorus from the biomass into the liquid medium. Therefore, the effluent from the reactor will contain a low concentration of total phosphorus. Effluent quality parameters will provide the operator with a basis for determining the necessity of adjusting the duration of the React Fill phase and/or the aeration on/off cycle structure. In summary, the React Fill phase features a reactor that is always in a completely mixed condition that alternates between an aerobic and anoxic environment. AquaSBR® Operational Description Page 8 of 16 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. React Phase During the React phase of operation, wastewater is not entering the reactor. The AquaDDM mixer continues to operate and completely mix the reactor, and the aeration system continues to be cycled on and off. This alternately creates aerobic and anoxic conditions. A schematic of this phase is shown in Figure 3. React Phase (Figure 3) Process Considerations Mechanical Considerations Alternating Aerobic/Anoxic Conditions Mixer Operating Complete Mix Conditions Influent Valve Closed/Transfer Pump Off “Polishing Off” BOD5 and Total N Aeration System On/Off Sludge Pump Off Decant Weir Closed The importance of this phase should be recognized by the operator with respect to the "opportunity" that this phase provides to "reduce the concentration levels of all wastewater parameters without the influence of additional wastewater entering the reactor." In effect, the React phase provides a period of time in which wastewater contaminants are "polished off" to the desired or required concentration levels. AquaSBR® Operational Description Page 9 of 16 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. A profile of the soluble BOD5 concentration in a reactor, as aeration phases occur, indicates a general decline in the amount of organic material present. The initiation of aeration at the start of the React Fill phase results in a gradual decline in BOD5 concentration. By comparison, the rate of decline in the React phase (with the absence of any additional influent wastewater entering the reactor) is dramatically increased. In summary, the React phase features a reactor that is always in a completely mixed condition which alternates between an aerobic and an anoxic environment. The absence of flow and organic loading provides a unique opportunity to "polish off" wastewater contaminants. This results in a reduction of organic material (BOD5) and total nitrogen present in the reactor to very low effluent concentrations. Since the majority of the biological phosphorus removal normally will have already taken place during the React Fill phase, the React phase does not have a major effect on the effluent total phosphorus concentration. AquaSBR® Operational Description Page 10 of 16 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Settle Phase During the Settle phase, wastewater is not entering the reactor. Also, the AquaDDM mixer and the aeration system are both turned "off". The absence of flow, mixing, and aeration activity produces an ideal quiescent environment in the reactor for solids-liquid separation. Figure 4 shows the related process and mechanical considerations for this phase of operation. Settle Phase (Figure 4) Process Considerations Mechanical Considerations Quiescent Conditions Mixer Off Static Clarifier Influent Valve Closed/Transfer Pump Off Settling Biomass Aeration System Off Sludge Pump Off Decant Weir Closed At this point in time, the preceding phases have accomplished all of the process objectives related to the reduction of organic compounds (BOD5), total nitrogen and total phosphorus. The reactor acts as a "static clarifier" as opposed to a "flow- through clarifier". Since there is no flow entering or exiting the reactor, the settling of solids is simply not affected by system hydraulics. AquaSBR® Operational Description Page 11 of 16 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Furthermore, sludge is removed from the reactor by a stationary sludge pump after the completion of the Settle phase. Therefore, settling is not affected by any type of stirring action caused by a mechanical sludge collector. Such an ideal quiescent settling environment is unique to SBR systems. AquaSBR® Operational Description Page 12 of 16 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Decant Phase Following the treatment of a batch of wastewater and the subsequent solids-liquid separation achieved during the Settle phase, it is then necessary to remove approximately the same volume of liquid that entered the reactor during the Mix Fill and React Fill phases of operation. The AquaSBR accomplishes the removal of treated effluent with one or more floating decanters, which remain in the reactor at all times. The decanters are installed in a manner that permits them to rise and descend with the reactor water level during the Fill and Draw modes of operation. Each decanter unit features an outlet weir and discharge system that incorporates a positive seal prohibiting the entry of mixed liquor suspended solids during the mixed and aerated phases of operation. At the completion of the Settle phase, an electrical signal from the system control panel initiates the opening of the decant weir and the effluent discharge valve. The configuration of a weir suspended below a floating structure provides an effluent withdrawal point that is located just below the surface of the reactor. The positioning of this withdrawal point provides effluent from the uppermost region of the stratified reactor without allowing any surface scum or foam to be drawn into the effluent. The vertical distance from the top of the settled sludge layer to the effluent withdrawal point is also maximized. As the Decant phase progresses, the decanter units maintain this optimum position of effluent withdrawal by simply floating on the surface and descending with the reactor water level. The Decant phase of operation is terminated at the predetermined minimum reactor water level that is controlled by a level sensor system. An electrical signal, prompted by the attainment of the minimum reactor water level, reverses the position of the decanter components by closing the effluent valve and sealing the decant weir against the bottom of the float structure. A schematic of the AquaSBR during this phase is shown in Figure 5. AquaSBR® Operational Description Page 13 of 16 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Decant/Idle/Sludge Waste Phase (Figure 5) Process Considerations Mechanical Considerations Quiescent Conditions Mixer Off Removing "Clear" Supernatant Influent Valve Closed/Transfer Pump Off Continue Settling Aeration System Off Removing Excess Biomass Sludge Pump On Decant Weir Open Once the reactor has been decanted to the design minimum side water depth (SWD), the Decant phase is automatically terminated. At this point, the decant valve and weir are automatically closed. If the minimum SWD is attained before the end of the programmed duration of this phase, the remaining time is utilized as the Idle phase. Recognize that the time dedicated to the Decant phase represents an extension of the total time during which solids-liquid separation occurs in each reactor. After the completion of the Settle phase, the mixer and aeration system are still inoperative and the quiescent conditions are maintained in the reactor as the Decant phase is initiated. The settled sludge mass is typically well below the reactor surface water level as the Decant phase starts, and sedimentation continues throughout the Decant phase. AquaSBR® Operational Description Page 14 of 16 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Idle Phase The Idle phase in an AquaSBR is a variable time period. The exact duration of the Idle phase is dependent upon specific hydraulic aspects of the treatment system. The AquaSBR system is designed on the basis of two distinct volume increments in each reactor. These two volume increments are defined as the "react volume" and the "maximum decant volume". The react volume is the volume present in a reactor at the predetermined minimum reactor side water depth (SWD). The maximum decant volume is the volume represented by the difference between the minimum and maximum side water depths. The maximum decant volume is established in the design as the reactor volume required to receive the maximum design flow sustained throughout a single treatment cycle. The decanter is appropriately sized (in terms of the decant weir diameter and the outlet piping and valving) to discharge the maximum decant volume over the entire duration of the Decant phase. At system flow rates significantly less than the design maximum value, each reactor will receive less than the maximum decant volume. However, the effluent will still be decanted at approximately the design discharge flow rate. The volume received in one cycle (at less than the maximum design flow rate) will therefore be discharged over a time period that is less than the programmed duration of the Decant phase. The minimum water level sensor will terminate the decant cycle at the pre-set minimum SWD, regardless of the volume received per treatment cycle during the Fill phases of operation. At this point, the timer within the AquaSBR control system will continue to operate for the entire programmed duration of the Decant phase. The Idle phase is then the resultant time increment between the time of decant termination by the level sensor and the termination of the programmed duration of the Decant phase. As the description implies, the reactor simply remains in an idle mode with all mechanical systems being inoperative. With respect to process considerations, the reactor is in a stratified condition and wastewater is not entering the reactor. Process and mechanical considerations of the AquaSBR during this phase of operation are shown in Figure 6. AquaSBR® Operational Description Page 15 of 16 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Idle Phase (Figure 6) Process Consideration Mechanical Considerations Quiescent Conditions Mixer Off Influent Valve Closed/Transfer Pump Off Aeration System Off Sludge Pump Off Decant Weir Closed In summary, a description of the Idle phase is dependent upon related factors that affect this phase of operation. It is a necessary phase of operation when a treatment system is required to treat variable hydraulic loading rates on a pre-set time cycle basis of operation. AquaSBR® Operational Description Page 16 of 16 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Waste Sludge Phase AquaSBR systems, like other activated sludge process variations, are dependent upon the development of a mixed culture of bacteria and other microbial life forms to accomplish treatment objectives. As a result of the biological degradation of organic matter and the accumulation of inert material present in most wastewaters, it is necessary to discharge certain quantities of solids from the reactors in order to maintain an appropriate concentration of mixed liquor suspended solids (MLSS) in the reactor, and to control the sludge age. This phase of operation within the treat- ment cycle is designed as a time increment that occurs simultaneously with the Decant/Idle phase. The programmable logic controller (PLC) is programmed to initiate the Waste Sludge phase during the final minutes of the Decant/Idle phase. At this time, the reactor is in a stratified condition, and one or more solids handling pumps are removing settled sludge from the bottom of the reactor. Since waste sludge solids concentration levels are typically in the range of 0.75% to 1.25%, the sludge remains in a fluid condition throughout a typical waste sludge pumping cycle. Waste Sludge Phase (Figure 7) Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. AquaSBR® Sequencing Batch Reactor Advantages The AquaSBR System: Sequencing Batch Reactor systems represent a variation of the activated sludge process. Like any other activated sludge process, the AquaSBR® Sequencing Batch Reactor system works by developing a mixed culture of bacteria, which is effective in removing BOD, COD and nutrients found in wastewater. The AquaSBR can treat a wide range of domestic and industrial wastewaters, at flows ranging from a few hundred cubic meters to thousands of cubic meters per day. Because the AquaSBR operates in a true batch treatment mode, optimum effluent quality is obtained during each cycle. Only a fraction of the total reactor volume, typically 1/6th, is introduced into the reactor each cycle. This raw flow combines with the acclimated biomass, which remains in the reactor at all times. The ratio of raw flow to biomass is a key factor in obtaining desired effluent quality results in a sequencing batch reactor system. Since only a small amount of sludge is wasted each cycle, the quality of the biomass is always maintained. A true batch reactor system, like the AquaSBR, does not allow influent wastewater to enter the sequencing batch reactor during final react, settle and decant phases, thereby assuring an excellent quality of final effluent. The AquaSBR System Advantages: The AquaSBR is operated in a true batch reactor treatment mode, which does not allow wastewater to enter the reactor during the React, Settle and Decant phases. The system: • Tolerates variable hydraulic loads – mixed liquor solids cannot be washed out by hydraulic surges since effluent withdrawal is typically accomplished in a separate phase following the termination of flow to each reactor. • Tolerates variable organic loads – each influent liquid batch is diluted with the reactor contents from the previous cycle. • Controls filamentous growth – filamentous organisms are controlled by creating an anoxic condition during the initial fill phase. AquaSBR® Sequencing Batch Reactor Advantages Page 2 of 9 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. • Provides ideal quiescent settling – since there is no flow during settling, and no mechanical sludge collection device stirring the basin, ideal quiescent settling conditions exist. AquaSBR® Sequencing Batch Reactor Advantages Page 3 of 9 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. The AquaSBR Process Features: Peak Design Flow The AquaSBR maintains predetermined cycle times, even at peak daily flow conditions. Cycle integrity is maintained at all flows up to and equal to maximum design flows. There is no cycle advancement up to the maximum design flow which eliminates the possibility of filling and decanting at the same time. Cycle advancement reduces the treatment time and the ability to meet the effluent objectives and filling and decanting is similar to clarifier washout where solids in the basin are carried out through the discharge along with raw sewage as it enters the basin. Separation of Aeration & Mixing Aeration – Aeration will be provided by a Diffused aeration system or Aqua-Jet aerators. Mixing – The separation of aeration from mixing is essential to the success of a sequencing batch reactor system especially for nutrient removal applications. The floating direct drive AquaDDM mixer provides a powerful downflow discharge for maximum solids suspension and aeration enhancement throughout the basin. Mixing efficiency can be double that of jet mixers or submerged horizontal mixers. The use of the AquaDDM mixer enables the AquaSBR to be operated for nutrient removal and to control filamentous organisms by providing a mixed, non-aerated anoxic environment during selected phases of operation. Aeration cycling during the reaction period without the loss of a completely mixed basin alternates the basin environment between aerobic and anoxic conditions essential for nutrient removal. The entire basin is used as an anoxic reactor maximizing the efficiency of the system. Separate zones sectioned off using baffles or walls or separate basins are not required. In addition, the need for recycle pumping (RAS) and the difficulties associated with controlling RAS pumps and rates are eliminated. Retrievable & Accessible Components The AquaSBR is designed to minimize operation and maintenance. The majority of the components in the AquaSBR design are accessible from the side of the tank. If total accessibility without tank dewatering is required, this can be obtained by using a retrievable diffuser option, which is an available option. AquaSBR® Sequencing Batch Reactor Advantages Page 4 of 9 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Aqua-Aerobic Decanter System This positively sealed effluent decanter system incorporates several mechanical design features and a mode of operation that results in optimum performance. This design assures that sub-surface withdrawal of supernatant will always be extracted from the reactor at an adequate depth, and within the diameter of the floating structure, to avoid drawing surface material into the effluent flow. At no time does the decanter have to pass through the reactor water surface where scum and floating material can accumulate. The need to eliminate the layer of scum sometimes found on the surface of activated sludge systems is not crucial to a clear discharge from the Aqua-Aerobic decanter. The float of the decanter prevents any floating material from entering the central chamber of the unit, so there is no impact of any floating material. In addition, the design decanter entrance velocities prohibit the entrainment of surface liquid. Therefore, the need for additional equipment to remove scum is not required. Aqua-Aerobic Manufactured All critical components of the AquaSBR are designed and manufactured by Aqua- Aerobic Systems, Inc., a leader in the wastewater treatment industry for more than 35 years. Consistent Effluent Quality The use of microprocessors allow the operator to adjust time and/or aeration and mixing based on organic loads and flow conditions to achieve required results. PLC-Based Control System The AquaSBR control system is a timer-based system with level overrides. This system provides control, sequence monitoring, and annunciation capabilities, and is designed to focus on an operating strategy to optimize the biological treatment process, while minimizing required operator attention. Operation & Process Description The AquaSBR acts as an equalization basin, aeration basin, and clarifier within a single reactor. The termination of flow during the treatment process provides perfectly quiescent settling conditions in the reactor, and permits even very fine particles to settle. Each reactor maintains its own treatment regime and all phases of treatment occur in each reactor for the full cycle time at flow up to the maximum design flow. AquaSBR® Sequencing Batch Reactor Advantages Page 5 of 9 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Fill Phases 1. Mixed Fill – Influent enters the AquaSBR reactor. Complete mix of the reactor contents is achieved without the use of aeration. This phase assists in control of filamentous organisms and biomass conditioning. The entire basin is used and no RAS required. 2. React Fill – Influent flow continues under mixed and aerated conditions. Aeration may be intermittent to promote aerobic or anoxic conditions. Nitrification and denitrification can be achieved. The separation of aeration and mixing allows energy control and anoxic conditions without the loss of a completely mixed system. Non-Fill Phases 1. React – Influent flow is terminated, while mixing and aeration continue. Intermittent operation of the aeration system may continue to complete the nitrification/denitrification process, or to conserve energy. 2. Settle – Mixing and aeration cease. Solids/Liquid separation takes place under perfectly quiescent conditions. 3. Decant/Sludge Waste – The mixer and aeration system remain off and, at this time, the decantable volume is removed by means of subsurface withdrawal. The reactor is immediately ready to receive the next batch of raw influent. A small amount of sludge is wasted each cycle. AquaSBR® Sequencing Batch Reactor Advantages Page 6 of 9 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Process and Mechanical Advantages The AquaSBR System supplied by Aqua-Aerobic Systems exhibits significant process and mechanical advantages offering mechanical reliability and overall flexibility for the AquaSBR System. The major areas where the AquaSBR System is superior are described below. Decanter and Decant System Design The AquaSBR employs a floating decanter which is provided with a circular stainless steel weir to minimize overflow velocities. The major advantages of the decanter and decant system are as follows: A. The reduced flow velocities result in reduced carryover of suspended solids to downstream units when compared to fixed decanter system or an adjustable decant pipe. In addition, the positive seal between the weir and float assembly assures no leakage during non-decant periods. B. Carryover of floatable materials during the decant cycle is virtually eliminated due to the submerged weir and the float assembly which maximizes the separation between the water surface and the discharge entrance point. Utilization of a fixed decanter or decanter which is lowered into the basin at the start of the decant cycle can result in the carryover of floatables to downstream units. Other SBR systems may provide for a skimming tank upstream of the SBR basin to entrap floatables, or decant the initial flow back to the plant headworks, thereby increasing the solids and organic loading and complicating the control system. C. The AquaSBR System is provided with an electrically operated control valve on the decant line to throttle the initial decant flow to acceptable levels, thereby eliminating the possibility of high flow velocities disturbing the settled sludge blanket. This valve also serves as a backup to the positive seal on the decanter in the unlikely event of a decanter malfunction. D. The decanter is provided with a single motor actuator with only one moving part. This is the most mechanically reliable decanter currently manufactured. Freezing problems are eliminated, as the entire weir assembly is submerged, whereas the use of a removable decanter during extended periods of cold weather can result in icing and freezing problems. Complicated control equipment such as inverters are not required. Aqua MixAir® Aeration System The AquaSBR System is provided with a downdraft mixer to allow separation of the power required for mixing and oxygen transfer. The major advantages of the Aqua MixAir® Aeration System are as follows: AquaSBR® Sequencing Batch Reactor Advantages Page 7 of 9 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. A. The AquaSBR basin is operated in a completely mixed mode, thereby providing increased process reliability and flexibility when compared to plug flow systems. Complete mix systems provide stable operation over a wide range of organic and hydraulic loadings due to the ability of the influent load to be dispersed uniformly throughout the tank. B. Utilization of the mixer provides for higher basin MLSS concentrations to be maintained, thereby resulting in reduced waste sludge quantities due to the lower food-to-microorganism ratio maintained. The higher solids levels also provide for a greater quantity of biomass which is available to absorb higher organic loadings. Operation of the AquaSBR System at these higher MLSS concentrations offers increased design flexibility and conservatism. C. A significant savings in power costs may be expected due to the ability of the Aqua MixAir Aeration System to maintain solids in suspension during periods of low organic loading, as the air blowers may be throttled to levels normally below those required to maintain solids in suspension. D. Air flow rates may be varied to match oxygen demand, thereby eliminating the potential for over-aeration of the mixed liquor, which can result in problems with sludge settleability and the carryover of suspended solids to downstream units. In addition to this important process advantage, the MixAir system will reduce annual power costs as discussed above. The MixAir concept is particularly advantageous for projects where low flows are anticipated in the early years of operation, where significant over-aeration could occur with conventional aeration systems. E. The most important factor involved with the consistently successful operation of the SBR process is the ability to mix the basin efficiently, thereby assuring uniform organic and dissolved oxygen concentrations are maintained throughout the basin. The AquaDDM mixer supplied with the AquaSBR System provides for entrained flow rates up to 35 times greater than direct pumping rates, thereby ensuring a completely mixed basin at all times. Systems relying on diffused aeration or jet aeration systems for mixing are far less efficient in terms of mixing capabilities, flexibility and power requirements. F. During periods when the AquaDDM mixer is in operation, floatable materials and scum are directed into the flow path and re-entrained into the mixed liquor. G. Depending upon the type and arrangement of the aeration piping and diffusers, oxygen transfer rates may be enhanced up to 25 percent over comparable diffused air systems when the AquaDDM mixer is employed, resulting in a further reduction of annual power costs. AquaSBR® Sequencing Batch Reactor Advantages Page 8 of 9 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. H. Anoxic conditions which develop during the Mixed Fill cycle using the AquaDDM mixer without aeration have been demonstrated to markedly reduce the potential for the proliferation of filamentous organisms which adversely affect sludge settling characteristics. Other SBR Systems either provide for Mixed Fill cycles with reduced airflow rates which still adds oxygen to the system, separate anoxic “zones” with inadequate mixing and recycle or inefficient jet mixing systems. These approaches will not provide the same reliability and flexibility in controlling filamentous bacteria. I. During operation in the nitrification/denitrification mode where the aeration blowers may be cycled to maintain optimum process conditions, the AquaDDM mixer has been demonstrated to reduce by up to 75 percent the time required to bring the basin dissolved oxygen concentration back to operating levels when compared to an aeration system not using the AquaDDM mixer. Similar performance has also been experienced at the end of the Mixed Fill Cycle or after a long idle period. This rapid oxygen level recovery period assures optimum treatment by allowing essentially the entire React Fill and React cycles to be provided with adequate dissolved oxygen levels. Low -Load System Design Where effluent limits dictate, the AquaSBR System may be designed for a low food- to-microorganism ratio and high mixed liquor concentration to achieve biological phosphorus and nitrogen removal. Specific advantages of the low-load design include: A. Increased process reliability and flexibility due to high MLSS concentrations, as previously discussed. B. The AquaDDM mixer provides the capability to manipulate the reactor environment during appropriate phases of a treatment cycle to achieve biological removal of phosphorus and nitrogen. C. The inherent design of the AquaSBR low-load system provides for some degree of denitrification during the Mixed Fill cycle when anoxic conditions are developed. During the React Fill and React periods, the use of the MixAir system allow environment manipulation and flexibility for the formation nitrates through nitrification and the removal of nitrates through denitrification. D. No license fees or royalties of any kind are charged by Aqua-Aerobic Systems for the use of Aqua-Aerobic Systems’ low-load biological phosphorus and nitrogen removal system. AquaSBR® Sequencing Batch Reactor Advantages Page 9 of 9 October 17, 2014 Copyright 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. E. The AquaSBR System design provides for adequate basin volume to store the maximum design flow rate during the time that the other basin is completing the React, Settle, and Decant phases of operation. This design basis assures that treatment cycle times are not shortened unless the maximum design flow to the system is exceeded. This assures the absolute highest quality effluent is produced over a wide range of flow and loading conditions. In contrast, other SBR system suppliers may provide a reduced basin volume, with cycle times shortened when peak flow rates exceed average levels. F. The AquaSBR System is controlled by an operator-friendly microprocessor control system, in which the process variables may be easily changed to match flow or loading conditions. Time control of the operating cycle duration is provided to maximize operating efficiency, with float switches provided in the AquaSBR basin to override the time controls in the event peak flow rates are exceed for extended periods of time. Reference SBR Installations for Moab, UT 10/17/2014 104693DDAWSON FOREST WRF EXPANSION, GA 706-216-2497Phone: Dolly Pendley, SuperintendentContact: /Waste Characteristics:Municipal Domestic Nitrification / Denitrification / PhosphorusTreatment Objective: 12/02/2008StartUp Date: 1.1Avg. Daily Flow(MGD): 1.83Max. Design Flow(MGD): 106430FALMOUTH WASTEWATER FACILITY, MA 508/540-9437Phone: Charles PiresContact: /Waste Characteristics:Municipal Domestic Nitrification / DenitrificationTreatment Objective: 06/06/2005StartUp Date: 1.2Avg. Daily Flow(MGD): 2.2Max. Design Flow(MGD): 103820ANASHVILLE WWTP, GA 229/356-1197Phone: Brandon RiceContact: /Waste Characteristics:Municipal Domestic Denitrification / PhosphorusTreatment Objective: 01/17/2013StartUp Date: 1Avg. Daily Flow(MGD): 1Max. Design Flow(MGD): 105008APARHAM LANDING WWTP UPGRADE, VA 804-843-4882Phone: Buddy AlterContact: /Waste Characteristics:Municipal Domestic Denitrification / Nitrification / TSSTreatment Objective: 01/20/2011StartUp Date: 2Avg. Daily Flow(MGD): 6Max. Design Flow(MGD): Aeration & Mixing | Biological Processes | Filtration | Membranes | Process Control & Monitoring | Aftermarket Parts & Services 6306 N. Alpine Rd. Loves Park, IL 61111 -7655 p 815.654.2501 f 815.654.2508 www.aqua-aerobic.com Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc.©CopyrightConfidential 2014 Page 2 of 2 10/17/2014 101798BWESTFIELD EXPANSION, IN 317/896-9189Phone: RANDY HIGGINBOTHAMContact: /Waste Characteristics:Municipal Domestic Nitrification / DeNitrification / PhosphorusTreatment Objective: 10/28/2005StartUp Date: 3Avg. Daily Flow(MGD): 9Max. Design Flow(MGD): Aeration & Mixing | Biological Processes | Filtration | Membranes | Process Control & Monitoring | Aftermarket Parts & Services 6306 N. Alpine Rd. Loves Park, IL 61111 -7655 p 815.654.2501 f 815.654.2508 www.aqua-aerobic.com Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc.©CopyrightConfidential 2014 AquaSBR Monthly Performance Data for 2013 Dawson Forest WRF Expansion, GA 104693D Dawsonville, GA, USA December2013 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 0.437 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 0.280 BOD 2279.0 TSS 4175.0 TKN 1.148.3 NH3-N --36.7 Total-P --8.4 November2013 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 0.362 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 0.253 BOD 1217.0 TSS 1228.0 TKN 2.760.1 NH3-N 0.1623.9 Total-P ---- October2013 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 0.359 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 0.246 BOD 1279.0 TSS 2264.0 TKN 1.541.5 NH3-N 0.2129.8 Total-P --6.5 September2013 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 0.338 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 0.248 BOD 2278.0 TSS 1208.0 TKN 2.033.8 NH3-N --20.3 Total-P ---- August2013 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 0.615 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 0.301 BOD 2187.0 TSS 274.0 TKN 2.239.6 NH3-N 0.2023.6 Total-P --6.8 July2013 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 0.359 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 0.288 BOD 2217.0 TSS 399.0 TKN 2.938.5 NH3-N 0.3521.5 Total-P --6.4 Page 1 of 3 June2013 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 0.543 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 0.233 BOD 3230.0 TSS 1156.0 TKN 1.838.3 NH3-N 0.3620.2 Total-P --10.5 May2013 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 0.531 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 0.264 BOD 2324.0 TSS 2292.0 TKN --49.2 NH3-N --29.0 Total-P --8.4 April2013 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 0.326 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 0.246 BOD 2235.0 TSS 257.0 TKN 3.637.9 Total-P ---- March2013 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 0.346 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 0.235 BOD 5272.0 TSS 3129.0 TKN 1.532.7 NH3-N 0.4526.1 Total-P 7.71 -- February2013 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 0.353 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 0.241 BOD 4262.0 TSS 4120.0 TKN 2.247.9 NH3-N 0.1223.1 Total-P -- January2013 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 0.350 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 0.240 BOD 4273.0 TSS 5181.0 TKN 1.839.6 NH3-N 0.2022.4 Total-P --9.6 Page 2 of 3 Dawson Forest WRF Expansion, GA 104693D Dawsonville, GA, USA AquaSBR Monthly Performance Data Averages Summary AquaSBR Design Parameters Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD):1.831.10 50350BOD5 50350TSS --48TKN 10--Total-N 110Total-P Page 3 of 3 AquaSBR Monthly Performance Data for 2014 PARHAM LANDING WWTP UPGRADE, VA 105008A West Point, VA, USA-MUN September2014 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 0.390 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 0.327 BOD --125.0 TSS --108.0 NH3-N 0.0148.0 TKN --56.3 Total-P 0.207.4 NO3-N 5.3-- August2014 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 0.482 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 0.344 BOD --110.0 CBOD 1-- TSS 2117.0 NH3-N --44.0 TKN 1.453.9 Total-P 0.257.4 Total-N 4.7-- July2014 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 0.429 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 0.344 BOD --109.0 CBOD 1-- TSS 1194.0 TKN 1.351.6 NH3-N --44.4 Total-P 0.357.3 NO3-N 3.6-- Total-N 5-- June2014 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 0.684 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 0.340 BOD --129.0 TSS 4129.0 TKN 2.255.1 Total-P 0.287.4 NO3-N 3.6-- Total-N 5.5-- May2014 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l BOD --160.0 TSS 3191.0 TKN 2.157.4 Total-P 0.377.8 NO3-N 3.8-- April2014 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 0.447 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 0.326 Page 1 of 3 BOD --185.0 CBOD 3-- TSS 3214.0 TKN 2.055.9 Total-P 0.187.7 NO3-N 2.4-- Total-N 4.3-- March2014 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l BOD --190.0 CBOD 1-- TSS 3184.0 TKN 1.855.4 Total-P 0.197.5 NO3-N 1.3-- Total-N 3.7-- February2014 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 0.405 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 0.310 BOD --182.0 CBOD ---- TSS 2197.0 TKN 1.155.9 Total-P 0.187.4 Total-N 3.2-- January2014 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 0.316 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 0.235 BOD --172.0 CBOD 1-- TSS 12215.0 TKN 1.651.5 Total-P 0.167.1 Total-N 2.0-- NO3-N 1.3-- Page 2 of 3 PARHAM LANDING WWTP UPGRADE, VA 105008A West Point, VA, USA-MUN AquaSBR Monthly Performance Data Averages Summary AquaSBR Design Parameters Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD):6.002.00 10300BOD5 5350TSS --60TKN 6--Total-N 0.810Total-P Page 3 of 3 AquaSBR Monthly Performance Data for 2011 Westfield Expansion, IN 101798B Westfield, IN, USA December2011 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 3.481 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 2.272 BOD 2155.0 TSS 3147.0 NH3-N 0.0214.1 Total-P 0.183.2 November2011 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 3.182 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 1.803 BOD 2172.0 TSS 4164.0 NH3-N 0.0318.0 Total-P 0.253.8 October2011 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 2.779 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 1.509 BOD 2190.0 TSS 4179.0 NH3-N 0.0321.4 Total-P 0.264.3 September2011 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 2.382 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 1.411 BOD 2189.0 TSS 4190.0 NH3-N 0.1122.9 Total-P 0.385.3 August2011 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 1.544 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 1.384 BOD 3185.0 TSS 6189.0 NH3-N 0.0622.6 Total-P 0.414.8 July2011 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 1.690 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 1.458 BOD 2164.0 TSS 5175.0 NH3-N 0.0618.9 Total-P 0.2843.8 June2011 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 2.895 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 1.791 BOD 2162.0 TSS 4161.0 NH3-N 0.0716.0 Total-P 0.233.6 Page 1 of 3 May2011 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 3.161 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 2.021 BOD 2150.0 TSS 4143.0 NH3-N 0.3413.1 Total-P 0.223.4 April2011 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 3.641 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 1.995 BOD 2139.0 TSS 5140.0 NH3-N 0.0314.5 Total-P 0.303.4 March2011 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 3.844 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 1.886 BOD 2144.0 TSS 5140.0 NH3-N 0.0313.6 Total-P 0.253.5 February2011 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 3.781 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 1.722 BOD 2178.0 TSS 5166.0 NH3-N 0.0319.2 Total-P 0.354.3 January2011 QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD): 2.217 Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l 1.460 BOD 2173.0 TSS 4181.0 NH3-N 0.0322.9 Total-P 0.365.0 Page 2 of 3 Westfield Expansion, IN 101798B Westfield, IN, USA AquaSBR Monthly Performance Data Averages Summary AquaSBR Design Parameters Loading Influent mg/l Effluent mg/l QAvg (MGD):QPeak (MGD):9.003.00 15240BOD5 18240TSS --45TKN 1.5--NH3-N 110Total-P Page 3 of 3 Aqua SBR SEQUENCING BATCH REACTOR ® The information contained herein relative to data, dimensions and recommendations as to size, power and assembly are for purpose of estimation only. These values should not be assumed to be universally applicable to specific design problems. Particular designs, installations and plants may call for specific requirements. Consult Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. for exact recommendations or specific needs. Patents Apply. Copyright © 2011 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. 6306 N. Alpine Rd Loves Park, IL 61111-7655 p 815.654.2501 f 815.654.2508 www.aqua-aerobic.com solutions@aqua-aerobic.com Providing TOTAL Water Management Solutions Aeration & Mixing Biological Processes Membranes Filtration Controls & Monitoring Systems Aftermarket Products and Services • 1.65 MGD Avg. Daily Flow • Replaced flow-through activated sludge system for enhanced biological nutrient removal (EBNR) to meet Chesapeake Bay Initiative. Biological Nutrient Removal • 0.3 MGD Avg. Daily Flow • Utilizes the ballast decanter option with process control via the IntelliPro system. Nitrification • .075 MGD Avg. Daily Flow • Treating high strength dairy waste since 1991. Industrial Pretreatment • 2.7 MGD Avg. Daily Flow • Dissolved oxygen control optimizes power consumption • Process control achieves 98% removal of typical municipal wastewater’s total influent phosphorus Phosphorus Removal Visit our website at www.aqua-aerobic.com to learn more about the AquaSBR® Sequencing Batch Reactor and our complete line of products and services: AquaSBR® Typical Applications • 12 MGD Avg. Daily Flow • 3-basin retrofit uses existing lagoons to meet today’s nitrogen requirements Retrofit • 2.0 MGD Avg. Daily Flow • 3-basin system followed by (2) AquaDisk® cloth media filters supplies reuse water to the nearby U.S. Army base for irrigation and cooling water Reuse Bulletin #980B 9/11 IntelliPro® Process Monitoring and Control System AquaSBR® Phases of Operation System Advantages For over 30 years, Aqua-Aerobic Systems has led the industry in sequencing batch reactor technology with performance proven and cost effective treatment systems capable of effectively removing nutrients and reducing phosphorus with the flexibility of process control that adapts to changing demands. The AquaSBR® sequencing batch reactor provides true batch technology with all phases of treatment accomplished in a single reactor. All components are easily accessible and the advanced decant system ensures optimum quality effluent withdrawal. Treatment can be optimized with the IntelliPro® process monitoring and control system to further reduce operation and maintenance,energy costs and improve performance. The AquaSBR sequencing batch reactor system features time-managed operation and control of aerobic, anoxic and anaerobic processes within each reactor including equalization and clarification. The AquaSBR system utilizes five basic phases of operation to meet advanced wastewater treatment objectives. The duration of any particular phase may be based upon specific waste characteristics and/or effluent objectives. • Independent aeration and mixing with the Aqua MixAir® system provides process advantages and lower energy consumption • A true-batch system utilizes Mix-Fill, React-Fill, React, Settle and Decant phases within a single reactor • The Mix-Fill phase is essential for effective phosphorus removal • All components of the AquaSBR system are retrievable and easily accessible • No secondary clarifiers and return activated sludge (RAS) lines • Capable of enhanced biological nutrient removal: - Total nitrogen < 3 mg/l - Total phosphorus < 0.3 mg/l • Hydraulic fluctuations are easily managed through the flexibility of a time managed process operating strategy • Low cost of ownership System Features and Advantages Settle • Influent flow does not enter the reactor • Mixing and aeration are terminated • Ideal solids/liquid separation is achieved due to perfectly quiescent conditions • Adjustable time values allow settling time to match prevailing process conditions 4React • Influent flow is terminated creating true batch conditions • Mixing and aeration continue in the absence of influent flow • Biological/chemical oxygen demand (BOD/COD) and ammonia nitrogen (NH3) reduction continue under aerated conditions • Oxygen can be delivered on a “as needed” basis via dissolved oxygen probes while maintaining completely mixed conditions • Provides final treatment prior to settling to meet targeted effluent objectives 3 The AquaSBR sequencing batch reactor utilizes the Aqua MixAir® system by providing separate mixing with the AquaDDM® direct- drive mixer and an aeration source such as the Aqua-Jet® surface aerator or Aqua-Aerobic diffused aeration. This system has the capability to cyclically operate the aeration and mixing to promote anoxic/aerobic and anaerobic environments with low energy consumption. In addition, the Aqua MixAir system can achieve and recover alkalinity through denitrification, prevent nitrogen gas disruption in the settle phase, promote biological phosphorus removal, and control certain forms of filamentous bacteria. Aqua MixAir ® System The Aqua-Aerobic floating decanter follows the liquid level, maximizing the distance between the effluent withdrawal and sludge blanket. It is an integral component to the AquaSBR system and provides reliable, dual barrier subsurface withdrawal with low entrance velocities to ensure surface materials will not be drawn into the treated effluent. The electric actuated or ballast decanter option is easily accessible from the side of the basin and requires minimal maintenance. Advanced Decanter 5 Decant/Sludge Waste • Influent flow does not enter the reactor • Mixing and aeration remain off • Decantable volume is removed by subsurface withdrawal • Floating decanter follows the liquid level, maximizing distance between the withdrawal point and the sludge blanket • Small amount of sludge is wasted near the end of each cycle The IntelliPro system is a personal computer (PC) based program that interfaces with the AquaSBR system’s programmable logic controller (PLC) via a network connection to assist operators in optimizing the treatment process of the plant and further reducing operating costs. • Real-time, online monitoring and control • “Active Control Mode” which automatically receives, interprets and proactively adjusts in-basin instruments and process variables including biological nutrient removal, chemical addition and energy • Reduces the operator’s sampling time • Real-time and historical graphical trending of process parameters • BioAlert™ process notification provides corrective action to eliminate operational interruptions and upsets • Assists in the optimization of enhanced nutrient removal • Online operation and maintenance support • Remote troubleshooting provides on-demand troubleshooting assistance AquaSBR SEQUENCING BATCH REACTOR ® • Influent flow enters the reactor • Mixing is initiated with the AquaDDM mixer to achieve complete mix of the reactor contents in the absence of aeration • Anoxic conditions are created which facilitate removal of any residual nitrites/nitrates (NOX) via the process of denitrification • In systems requiring phosphorus removal, the Mix-Fill phase is extended to create anaerobic conditions where phosphorus accumulating organisms (PAO) release phosphorus then ready for subsequent luxury uptake during aeration times • Anoxic conditions assist in the control of some types of filamentous organisms Mix-Fill1 React-Fill • Influent flow continues under mixed and aerated conditions • Intermittent aeration may promote aerobic or anoxic conditions • Biological/chemical oxygen demand (BOD/COD) and ammonia nitrogen (NH3) are reduced under aerated conditions • Luxury uptake of phosphorus is produced under aerated conditions • NOX is reduced under anoxic conditions • Separation of aeration and mixing allows the aeration source to be turned down during low flow conditions to conserve energy while the system’s flexibility allows nitrification/denitrification to be easily managed 2 IntelliPro® Process Monitoring and Control System AquaSBR® Phases of Operation System Advantages For over 30 years, Aqua-Aerobic Systems has led the industry in sequencing batch reactor technology with performance proven and cost effective treatment systems capable of effectively removing nutrients and reducing phosphorus with the flexibility of process control that adapts to changing demands. The AquaSBR® sequencing batch reactor provides true batch technology with all phases of treatment accomplished in a single reactor. All components are easily accessible and the advanced decant system ensures optimum quality effluent withdrawal. Treatment can be optimized with the IntelliPro® process monitoring and control system to further reduce operation and maintenance,energy costs and improve performance. The AquaSBR sequencing batch reactor system features time-managed operation and control of aerobic, anoxic and anaerobic processes within each reactor including equalization and clarification. The AquaSBR system utilizes five basic phases of operation to meet advanced wastewater treatment objectives. The duration of any particular phase may be based upon specific waste characteristics and/or effluent objectives. • Independent aeration and mixing with the Aqua MixAir® system provides process advantages and lower energy consumption • A true-batch system utilizes Mix-Fill, React-Fill, React, Settle and Decant phases within a single reactor • The Mix-Fill phase is essential for effective phosphorus removal • All components of the AquaSBR system are retrievable and easily accessible • No secondary clarifiers and return activated sludge (RAS) lines • Capable of enhanced biological nutrient removal: - Total nitrogen < 3 mg/l - Total phosphorus < 0.3 mg/l • Hydraulic fluctuations are easily managed through the flexibility of a time managed process operating strategy • Low cost of ownership System Features and Advantages Settle • Influent flow does not enter the reactor • Mixing and aeration are terminated • Ideal solids/liquid separation is achieved due to perfectly quiescent conditions • Adjustable time values allow settling time to match prevailing process conditions 4React • Influent flow is terminated creating true batch conditions • Mixing and aeration continue in the absence of influent flow • Biological/chemical oxygen demand (BOD/COD) and ammonia nitrogen (NH3) reduction continue under aerated conditions • Oxygen can be delivered on a “as needed” basis via dissolved oxygen probes while maintaining completely mixed conditions • Provides final treatment prior to settling to meet targeted effluent objectives 3 The AquaSBR sequencing batch reactor utilizes the Aqua MixAir® system by providing separate mixing with the AquaDDM® direct- drive mixer and an aeration source such as the Aqua-Jet® surface aerator or Aqua-Aerobic diffused aeration. This system has the capability to cyclically operate the aeration and mixing to promote anoxic/aerobic and anaerobic environments with low energy consumption. In addition, the Aqua MixAir system can achieve and recover alkalinity through denitrification, prevent nitrogen gas disruption in the settle phase, promote biological phosphorus removal, and control certain forms of filamentous bacteria. Aqua MixAir ® System The Aqua-Aerobic floating decanter follows the liquid level, maximizing the distance between the effluent withdrawal and sludge blanket. It is an integral component to the AquaSBR system and provides reliable, dual barrier subsurface withdrawal with low entrance velocities to ensure surface materials will not be drawn into the treated effluent. The electric actuated or ballast decanter option is easily accessible from the side of the basin and requires minimal maintenance. Advanced Decanter 5 Decant/Sludge Waste • Influent flow does not enter the reactor • Mixing and aeration remain off • Decantable volume is removed by subsurface withdrawal • Floating decanter follows the liquid level, maximizing distance between the withdrawal point and the sludge blanket • Small amount of sludge is wasted near the end of each cycle The IntelliPro system is a personal computer (PC) based program that interfaces with the AquaSBR system’s programmable logic controller (PLC) via a network connection to assist operators in optimizing the treatment process of the plant and further reducing operating costs. • Real-time, online monitoring and control • “Active Control Mode” which automatically receives, interprets and proactively adjusts in-basin instruments and process variables including biological nutrient removal, chemical addition and energy • Reduces the operator’s sampling time • Real-time and historical graphical trending of process parameters • BioAlert™ process notification provides corrective action to eliminate operational interruptions and upsets • Assists in the optimization of enhanced nutrient removal • Online operation and maintenance support • Remote troubleshooting provides on-demand troubleshooting assistance AquaSBR SEQUENCING BATCH REACTOR ® • Influent flow enters the reactor • Mixing is initiated with the AquaDDM mixer to achieve complete mix of the reactor contents in the absence of aeration • Anoxic conditions are created which facilitate removal of any residual nitrites/nitrates (NOX) via the process of denitrification • In systems requiring phosphorus removal, the Mix-Fill phase is extended to create anaerobic conditions where phosphorus accumulating organisms (PAO) release phosphorus then ready for subsequent luxury uptake during aeration times • Anoxic conditions assist in the control of some types of filamentous organisms Mix-Fill1 React-Fill • Influent flow continues under mixed and aerated conditions • Intermittent aeration may promote aerobic or anoxic conditions • Biological/chemical oxygen demand (BOD/COD) and ammonia nitrogen (NH3) are reduced under aerated conditions • Luxury uptake of phosphorus is produced under aerated conditions • NOX is reduced under anoxic conditions • Separation of aeration and mixing allows the aeration source to be turned down during low flow conditions to conserve energy while the system’s flexibility allows nitrification/denitrification to be easily managed 2 Aqua SBR SEQUENCING BATCH REACTOR ® The information contained herein relative to data, dimensions and recommendations as to size, power and assembly are for purpose of estimation only. These values should not be assumed to be universally applicable to specific design problems. Particular designs, installations and plants may call for specific requirements. Consult Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. for exact recommendations or specific needs. Patents Apply. Copyright © 2011 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. 6306 N. Alpine Rd Loves Park, IL 61111-7655 p 815.654.2501 f 815.654.2508 www.aqua-aerobic.com solutions@aqua-aerobic.com Providing TOTAL Water Management Solutions Aeration & Mixing Biological Processes Membranes Filtration Controls & Monitoring Systems Aftermarket Products and Services • 1.65 MGD Avg. Daily Flow • Replaced flow-through activated sludge system for enhanced biological nutrient removal (EBNR) to meet Chesapeake Bay Initiative. Biological Nutrient Removal • 0.3 MGD Avg. Daily Flow • Utilizes the ballast decanter option with process control via the IntelliPro system. Nitrification • .075 MGD Avg. Daily Flow • Treating high strength dairy waste since 1991. Industrial Pretreatment • 2.7 MGD Avg. Daily Flow • Dissolved oxygen control optimizes power consumption • Process control achieves 98% removal of typical municipal wastewater’s total influent phosphorus Phosphorus Removal Visit our website at www.aqua-aerobic.com to learn more about the AquaSBR® Sequencing Batch Reactor and our complete line of products and services: AquaSBR® Typical Applications • 12 MGD Avg. Daily Flow • 3-basin retrofit uses existing lagoons to meet today’s nitrogen requirements Retrofit • 2.0 MGD Avg. Daily Flow • 3-basin system followed by (2) AquaDisk® cloth media filters supplies reuse water to the nearby U.S. Army base for irrigation and cooling water Reuse Bulletin #980B 9/11 Aqua SBR SEQUENCING BATCH REACTOR ® The information contained herein relative to data, dimensions and recommendations as to size, power and assembly are for purpose of estimation only. These values should not be assumed to be universally applicable to specific design problems. Particular designs, installations and plants may call for specific requirements. Consult Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. for exact recommendations or specific needs. Patents Apply. Copyright © 2013 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. 6306 N. Alpine Rd Loves Park, IL 61111-7655 p 815.654.2501 f 815.654.2508 www.aqua-aerobic.com solutions@aqua-aerobic.com Providing TOTAL Water Management Solutions Aeration & Mixing Biological Processes Membranes Filtration Controls & Monitoring Systems Aftermarket Products and Services • 1.65 MGD Avg. Daily Flow • Replaced flow-through activated sludge system for enhanced biological nutrient removal (EBNR) to meet Chesapeake Bay Initiative. Biological Nutrient Removal • 0.3 MGD Avg. Daily Flow • Utilizes the ballast decanter option with process control via the IntelliPro system. Nitrification • .075 MGD Avg. Daily Flow • Treating high strength dairy waste since 1991. Industrial Pretreatment • 2.7 MGD Avg. Daily Flow • Dissolved oxygen control optimizes power consumption • Process control achieves 98% removal of typical municipal wastewater’s total influent phosphorus Phosphorus Removal Visit our website at www.aqua-aerobic.com to learn more about the AquaSBR® Sequencing Batch Reactor and our complete line of products and services: AquaSBR® Typical Applications • .075 MGD Avg. Daily Flow • Treating high strength dairy waste since 1991. Industrial Pretreatment • 12 MGD Avg. Daily Flow • 3-basin retrofit uses existing lagoons to meet today’s nitrogen requirements Retrofit • 2.0 MGD Avg. Daily Flow • 3-basin system followed by (2) AquaDisk® cloth media filters supplies reuse water to the nearby U.S. Army base for irrigation and cooling water Reuse Bulletin #980B 9/13 AquaSBR® Video Aqua Service PROGRAMS, PARTS AND COST SAVING SOLUTIONS Aqua Service PROGRAMS, PARTS AND COST SAVING SOLUTIONS From process start-up to aftermarket products and services, Aqua-Aerobic® Customer Services provide you with the experience and expertise required to ensure your plant is operating at optimum efficiency. Whether you need technical support at 2:00 a.m., specialized operator training or critical parts shipped overnight, Aqua-Aerobic Systems has the team of dedicated customer service personnel and a national network of experienced field technicians that are available to service your needs - 24/7. Valued customers have come to know that when you purchase from Aqua-Aerobic Systems, you are gaining a partner for the life of your plant. Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. 6306 N. Alpine Rd. Loves Park, IL 61111 P 877.271.9694 F 815.654.2508 www.aqua-aerobic.com solutions@aqua-aerobic.com flexible rental & lease programs • Affordable alternative to purchasing new equipment • Short or long term options • New & reconditioned units • Programs tailored to meet your needs PREVENTATIVE Maintenance programs • Designed to extend equipment life • Reduces or eliminates downtime • Lowers overall operating costs Convenient Online Store • AquaOnDemand.com • Open 24/7 • Thousands of products and services • Easy ordering with flexible payment options ONGOING Training and Education • Mechanical, process or maintenance related • Factory or on-site training available • Earn PDH credits • Learn from the experts Cost-Effective Rehab & Upgrades • Economical option versus replacing with new system • Professional analysis by our qualified technicians • Recommended solutions that fit your budget Original Replacement Parts • SpareCare® original OEM parts • Fast shipment from stocked inventory • On-site installation assistance Bulletin #450B 8/14© 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Company profile and Capabilities Loves Park, IL 61111 • 815.654.2501 • www.aqua-aerobic.com 2 ABOUT OUR COMPANY Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. is a leader in adaptive water management solutions for municipal and industrial markets worldwide, since 1969. Our expertise in aeration and mixing, biological processes, cloth media filtration, membranes, and control and monitoring systems allows us to provide you with adaptive water management solutions at the lowest life cycle cost. Our proven technologies meet the most stringent wastewater effluent requirements including enhanced biological nutrient removal, phosphorus removal and water reuse, as well as TTHM removal and ultrafiltation in potable water applications. Our technologies are designed to easily accommodate changing effluent demands. MISSION Make a Good Company a Great One! STRATEGIC INTENT To build Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. into a global technology leader that provides water treatment solutions for aeration/mixing, biological processes, filtration and aftermarket sales and services. To grow our company through technological leadership and partnerships with our customers. To uphold the values that have been the key to the success of Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Robert J. Wimmer President & CEO Peter G. Baumann, P.E. Vice President & General Manager, Process Group Christopher V. Korab, SPHR Vice President, Human Resources Steven A. Schupbach Vice President, Rotating Products John D. Brubaker Chairman of the Board William G. Decker Vice President & General Manager, Equipment and Services Group GENERAL INFORMATION Loves Park, IL 61111 • 815.654.2501 • www.aqua-aerobic.com 3 ENGINEERING EXPERTISE Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. has a full staff of process and mechanical engineers, several of which hold advanced degrees in civil, chemical, mechanical and electrical engineering. Our engineers evaluate over 1,000 designs a year. Total Employees 123 (office and manufacturing) Administration 13 Technical Managers & Officers Domestic Sales 4 Regional Sales Managers International Sales 2 International Business Managers Manufacturing 1 Manager 8 Shop employees R & D 4 Degreed Engineers and support personnel Project Management 1 Director 2 In-house representatives Equipment & Services Group 3 Managers 4 In-house representatives 10 Outside field representatives FACILITY 125,000 square feet office and manufacturing (25% office space and 75% manufacturing space) TEST FACILITY 250,000 gallon (950 m3) test tank 55,000 gallon (209 m3) test tank LOCATION • 70 mi. (112 km) northwest of O’Hare Airport - Chicago, IL • 120 mi. (192 km) southwest of Milwaukee, WI REPRESENTATION 150 Sales Representatives in the US, Canada, Mexico and throughout the world. Most are graduate engineers and have design capabilities. MARKETS 85% United States, Canada, Virgin Islands 15% International INSTALLATIONS More than 10,000 installations worldwide FINANCIAL INFORMATION Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. is a well financed, privately held company with sales approaching $100 Million. Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. also has extensive bonding capabilities. Primary Banking BMO Harris Bank, Rockford, Illinois Auditors RSM McGladrey, Rockford, Illinois GENERAL INFORMATION Loves Park, IL 61111 • 815.654.2501 • www.aqua-aerobic.com 4 In 1919, Rockford, Illinois was a rapidly growing riverfront community. Race Street, in the center of town, was home to Solem Machine Company, a respected manufacturer of woodworking equipment. As the city grew and thrived, so did the company. In 1958, larger facilities were needed and the company moved to 6306 N. Alpine Road. In 1964 a group of investors, including Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. President, John D. Brubaker (retired), purchased this well established manufacturing firm. With an eye toward the future, these investors considered the changing market needs and began expanding the product line. Soon after, the company was positioned to meet the demands of a new and growing environmental industry. In 1969, Solem Machine Company purchased Aqua-Aerobic Systems and began manufacturing its own line of surface aerators, the Aqua-Jet®. The Aqua-Jet® aerator quickly revolutionized the aerator industry so the company phased out its other product lines and wastewater treatment became its exclusive focus. In 1976, that commitment resulted in Solem Machine Company’s decision to legally adopt the name Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. In 1989, an additional 35,000 square feet of office and manufacturing space was constructed to accommodate the company’s rapid growth. Due to increased requests for Aqua’s technical seminars and an increase in local business due to growth of the Chicago suburbs, Aqua-Aerobic once again expanded its facilities. In April 2005, another 25,000 square feet was added to the existing building for new, state- of-the-art seminar facilities, more meeting areas, a formal lunchroom, and new offices. The exterior of the new building is environmentally friendly, utilizing glass to promote natural heat and lighting. The existing building was renovated and included conversion of 4,800 square feet of office space into manufacturing space. Existing office areas were also remodeled to coincide with the interior of the new building. Construction was complete in spring 2006 and included space for company growth. The new high-tech facilities allow Aqua-Aerobic to accommodate larger seminar audiences and to provide remote webcasts. Today, Aqua-Aerobic Systems employs approximately 123 persons in manufacturing, engineering, sales/marketing and administration. The company’s product line includes: surface aerators, diffused aera- tion systems, surface spray coolers, direct-drive mixers, batch reactor systems, cloth media filters, sand media filters, membrane systems, control panels, and process management control systems. The company’s dedication to research and development ensure the availability of products to meet unique applications and changing requirements. Aqua-Aerobic has gained recognition for quality products. Our commitment to environmental preservation and product integrity ensures continued success well into the 21st century. COMPANY HISTORY Loves Park, IL 61111 • 815.654.2501 • www.aqua-aerobic.com 5 PATENTS Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. holds 45 patents for processes and equipment used in wastewater treatment systems. PRODUCT LINE Aqua-Jet® Surface Mechanical Aerator Aqua-Jet II® Contained Flow Aerator Aqua CB-24® Coarse-bubble Diffuser Aqua EnduraDisc® Fine-bubble Disc Diffuser Aqua EnduraTube® Fine-bubble Tube Diffuser ThermoFlo® Surface Spray Cooler Aqua MixAir® Aeration System AquaDDM® Direct-drive Mixer OxyMix® Pure Oxygen Mixer AquaSBR® Sequencing Batch Reactor Aqua MSBR® Modified Sequencing Batch Reactor AquaPASS® Phased Activated Sludge System Aqua BioMax™ Dual Treatment System AquaCAM-D® Combination Aerator/Mixer/Decanter AquaDisk® Cloth Media Filter Aqua MiniDisk® Cloth Media Filter AquaDrum® Cloth Media Filter AquaDiamond® Cloth Media Filter Aqua MegaDisk™ Cloth Media Filter AquaABF® Automatic Backwash Filter AquaMB Process® Multiple-Barrier Membrane System Aqua-Aerobic® MBR Membrane Bioreactor System Aqua UltraFiltration™ Membrane System IntelliPro® Monitoring and Control System TYPICAL INDUSTRIES SERVED • Pulp & Paper • Food/Dairy • Beverage • Chemical • Petroleum/Petrochemical • Textile • Energy/Utility • Pharmaceutical Aqua-Aerobic® Aqua-Aerobic® MBR Aqua-Jet® Aqua-Jet II® AQUA•OLOGY® Aqua BioMax™ Aqua CB-24® Aqua EnduraDisc® Aqua EnduraTube® Aqua Financing Solutions® Aqua MiniDisk® Aqua MixAir® Aqua MSBR® AquaOnDemand® Aqua UltraFiltration™ AquaABF® AquaCAM-D® AquaDDM® AquaDiamond® AquaDisk® AquaDrum® Aqua MegaDisk™ AquaEnsure® AquaMB Process® Aqua MultiBore™ AquaPASS® AquaSBR® Endura® Series IntelliPro® OptiFiber® OptiFiber PES-13® OptiFiber PA2-13® OptiFiber ACR-13® OptiFiber PES-14® OxyMix® Partnering for Solutions® SpareCare® ThermoFlo® Trust the Tag® Turbilite® TRADEMARKS TRADEMARKS & PRODUCT LINE Loves Park, IL 61111 • 815.654.2501 • www.aqua-aerobic.com 6 Aqua-Aerobic Systems takes pride in its donations to over 90 organizations. A large portion of its contributions go to United Way, Rockford College, and Rock Valley College Foundation. MEMBERSHIPS American Society for Quality American Water Works Association (AWWA) Business for the Bay Environmental Export Council Illinois Chamber of Commerce Illinois Manufacturers’ Association International Association on Water Quality (IAWQ) National Association of Manufacturers Technical Association of Pulp & Paper Industry (TAPPI) Water Environment Federation (WEF) Water & Wastewater Equipment Manufacturers Association (WWEMA) WateReuse Association RECOGNITIONS Manufacturer of the Year Award from Rockford Chamber of Commerce Special Congressional Recognition WWEMA Diamond Award Outstanding Corporation Award from the City of Rockford Innovative Technology Award from WEF - 2008, 2011 Export Achievement Certificate from the U.S. Dept. of Commerce Community Impact by a Business from Rockford Mayor’s Arts Awards TRAINING AND EDUCATION Structured training seminars are conducted by Aqua-Aerobic personnel monthly, May through September. More than 30 Consulting Engineers, Plant Operators, and Municipal Officials typically attend these training seminars each month to learn about Aqua-Aerobic equipment and systems. Aqua-Aerobic Systems’ engineering staff attends company sponsored seminars and workshops relating to the wastewater industry. COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT 6306 N. Alpine Rd. Loves Park, IL 61111-7655 p 815.654.2501 f 815.654.2508 www.aqua-aerobic.com solutions@aqua-aerobic.com © 2014 Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc. Bulletin #110 8/14 MOAB WWTP FACILITIES MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT Bowen Collins IL.& Associates, Inc. CONSULTING ENGINEERS TECHNICAL III'IEMCRANDVM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: JOB NO.: Skyler Davies, P.E. Project Manager, Engineering Division Division of Water Quality Jeff Beckman, P. E., Project Manager July 26, 2016 Facilities Master Plan Amendment 130-15-04 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this Technical Memorandum (TM) is to amend the Moab Wastewater Treatment Plant Facilities Master Plan dated February 2015. The Facilities Master Plan was reviewed by Moab City staff and adopted in February 2015. Printed and electronic copies of the Facilities Master Plan were provided to the State of Utah Division of Water Quality (DWQ) in July 2015. The Moab Wastewater Treatment Plant Preliminary Engineering Report dated November 2015 further defined the project requirements and provided additional detail. This memorandum specifically addresses comments in regard to the Facilities Master Plan provided by DWQ in a letter dated June 2, 2016. The following paragraphs restate the comments and then provide information in response to each comment. Some of the information provided in this TM is summarized from the Facilities Master Plan and Preliminary Engineering report, while other information is supplemental in response to the comments. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION Infiltration and Inflow (I/I) DWQ Comment: Include a statement as to why it is believed that I/I is not a concern for the system. Response: The City of Moab recently compared winter culinary water use records to the influent sewer flows to the Moab WWTP. The comparison indicated that the winter water use closely matched sewer flows into the treatment plant, and thus it was determined that there is minimal infiltration or inflow (I/I) in the sewer collection system. In addition, discussions with Moab City sewer collection staff also confirmed that I/I is not a concern and does not occur widely or significantly throughout their system. Future Conditions DWQ Comment: Include a copy of the draft waste -load analysis report in the facilities plan. Response: Attachment A includes a copy of the Wasteload Analysis. FACILITIES MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT DWQ Comment: Include a copy of or a statement regarding the status of the GWSSA and Moab inter-local agreement. Response: The Moab WWTP treats domestic wastewater from the City of Moab and Grand Water & Sewer Service Agency (GWSSA). The City of Moab owns and operates the WWTP, and GWSSA contracts to send its collected wastewater to the WWTP for treatment and disposal. The City of Moab and GWSSA are in the process of updating their contractual agreement for treatment and disposal of the GWSSA wastewater. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) has been developed that outlines the main objectives and principles of the agreement, and both agencies have approved the MOU. A draft agreement has been developed based upon the MOU and is being reviewed by legal counsel. It is expected that the agreement will be finalized in the next few weeks. Evaluation of Principal Alternatives DWQ Comment: Provide the Operation and Maintenance/life cycle cost comparison of primary alternatives; including the discount rate used in the analysis. Response: The Facilities Master Plan evaluated various alternatives for best meeting the City of Moab’s current and future wastewater treatment needs. The Facility Master Plan narrowed the alternatives to Oxidation Ditch System and a Sequencing Batch Reactor (SBR) System. The following provides a life cycle cost comparison for the two alternatives. It is noted that the SBR System was selected as the preferred treatment alternative. Life Cycle Cost Comparison Item Ox-Ditch System SBR System Initial Capital Cost $ 9,174,000 $ 8,320,000 Common Annual O&M $ 500,000 $ 500,000 Treatment Power Cost $ 100,100 $ 85,400 20-Year Net Present Cost $19.2 million $18.1 million SBR NPV Cost Savings $ 1.1 million savings Based upon 2% inflation rate and 4% interest rate. DWQ Comment: Provide a cost effectiveness analysis which meets the requirements of 40 CFR 354.2030 (b.)(3.) Response: The intent of 40 CFR 354.2030 (b.)(3.) is to ensure that the project maximizes use of efficiency, reuse and recapture project elements, and to make sure that the project efficiently meets future capacity needs. The following paragraphs address specific requirements of the 40 CFR 354.2030. 1. The Facilities Master Plan identified future growth in the Moab area. The growth projections were estimated using historical growth rates along with known significant proposed developments such as USU Moab Campus and Northern San Juan County, and the Governor’s Office of Planning and Budget guidance information. 2. Upgrading the operation, maintenance and efficiency of the existing WWTP was determined to be not a viable solution. The existing facility is over 50 years old, is in degraded condition, uses a fixed film trickling filter process that is not capable of meeting stringent effluent discharge standards, and is running at or above its capacity to provide reliable and effective treatment. Staff is currently operating this facility to the best of their ability within the capabilities of the existing equipment and processes. Extensive and costly rehabilitation of BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 2 FACILITIES MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT the existing plant would be required to attempt to provide the increased capacity and performance which a new activated sludge treatment facility will inherently accomplish. The new activated sludge plant will operate reliably for the next 50 years or more with normal maintenance. It is unlikely that the effective service life of the existing facilities would run beyond 10 to 20 years, and then another large and costly project would be required to meet ongoing treatment needs. 3. The sewer collection system that feeds the Moab WWTP does not experience significant levels of infiltration and/or inflow. The City requires use of low flow plumbing devices in all new and updated residential and commercial construction. There are no significant industrial users or dischargers to the sewer collection system. No further flow reduction requirements are anticipated. 4. The proposed treatment works are described in Attachment B. 5. The initial capacity of the proposed Moab treatment facility will provide wastewater treatment for all dischargers for a design period of 20 years based on an overall annual projected growth rate of 1.1%. The plant receives substantial septage loading from haulers serving nearby national parks and other campground systems. Capacity to meet increased septage loading requirements over time is also provided. The ultimate (50-year) capacity of the plant is based on a 50% increase to the 20-year design and can be achieved through simple addition of pumping units and construction of another bioreactor. No significant existing or future industrial users or increases in non-residential or non-commercial flow are expected. 6. The cost-effectiveness of the proposed treatment facility is shown below. Use of Sequencing Batch Reactors is innovative in that it provides both lower initial and operating costs compared to other options with similar treatment capacities. The projected treatment performance of SBRs is equal or superior to other activated sludge systems of similar size and nature. Although the new plant will use more electrical power than the existing one, additional power consumption will be limited as discussed below. This approach provides the best practicable waste treatment technology for both secondary treatment and more stringent water quality standard for the City of Moab. 7. Treated effluent from the plant will continue to be discharged to the Colorado River. There are no identified effluent reuse options such as crop irrigation or secondary water in the City. No infrastructure exists for storing, conveying or applying effluent in any manner. Limited quantities of treated effluent will be used at the plant site for pump seals, wash down, landscape irrigation and other non-potable applications. 8. Dewatered biosolids will continue to be disposed of at one or both of two nearby municipal solid waste landfills. These landfills currently accept unclassified and dewatered biosolids that meet the EPA Paint Filter Test requirements, and this practice will continue in the future. No other viable disposal options for the unclassified biosolids from the Moab treatment facility were identified. 9. No revenue generating systems or opportunities for the new treatment facility were identified. 10. No energy recovery opportunities were identified. However as discussed below, care has been exercised to assure energy efficiency in selection of the main treatment process and all related major mechanical and electrical equipment items. 11. Capital and operating costs are described in the table below. The City of Moab is finalizing a Sewer Rate Study. The Sewer Rate Study will help ensure that the City can properly fund the BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 3 FACILITIES MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT increased capital costs, loan service costs, as well as maintenance and operation costs associated with the recommended improvements. In preparation of the increased costs, the City has implemented a 20% sewer rate increase in 2015 and 2106. Preliminary results of the Sewer Rate Study a have indicated that an additional 20% increase will provide the necessary revenue to properly fund the improvements and the Moab sewer collection system. It should be noted that with these rate increases the projected sewer rates remain below 1.4% of the Median Adjusted Growth Income. Selected Plan DWQ Comment: Provide a copy of the ADR (Anti-Degradation Report) that accounts for the selected alternative. Response: The Anti-Degradation Report was submitted to State of Utah Division of Water Quality on July 20, 2016. DWQ Comment: Identify the proposed plan in the report (i.e. type of plant selected and where it is going to discharge to). Response: Several biological treatment processes were evaluated during the Facility Master Plan and Preliminary Design Phase. The City of Moab selected the Sequencing Batch Reactor Process (SBR) as the preferred treatment process. The new Moab WRF will utilize the existing effluent outfall pipeline and discharge at the existing permitted location to the Colorado River. Attachment B includes a detailed summary of the proposed treatment processes. DWQ Comment: Address the following concerns in regards to the plant: a. The cost of constructing the project. b. The cost of operating and maintaining the project over the life of the project. c. The cost of replacing the project. Response: The following tables summarizes the estimated construction costs. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Item Description Cost General Site Civil Yard Piping, Influent PS, Effluent PS, Fill Material, Etc. $ 1,770,000 Administration Bldg. UV Disinfection, UW PS, Office Area, Lab Area, etc. $ 920,000 Process Building Screening, Grit Removal, Electrical Room, Dewatering $ 1,980,000 SBR SBR Tanks & Equipment, Intermediate PS $ 2,540,000 Equalization Basins Effluent EQ Tank, Solids Holding Basin with Aeration $ 650,000 Septage Receiving Septage Receiving Station and Equipment $ 460,000 Subtotal $ 8,320,000 Contingency 20% $ 1,644,000 Estimated Construction Costs $ 9,984,000 BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 4 FACILITIES MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT The annual operating and maintaince cost for the new Moab WRF is estimated at $585,000 per year. This estimate is based upon current operational costs of the existing WWTP, increased energy and chemical costs, and an additional plant operator. Net Present Worth Project Cost Estimate Item Cost Total Capital Cost (with Contingency) $ 9,984,000 Annual O&M $ 585,000 20-Year Net Present Cost $19.8 million Based on 2% inflation rate and 4% interest rate. DWQ Comment: Provide a detailed description of the selected system. Include at a minimum the following preliminary design data. a. A description of the major features. b. Unit Process and preliminary design. c. A schematic flow diagram for treatment plants and plant and pumping stating siting. d. New sewer length and sizes, if any. Response: See Attachment B for description of the project. DWQ Comment: Identify features that conserve, recover or reduce energy consumption that have been considered. Response: All of the major equipment and facilities used in the project have been selected and designed in order to achieve optimum value to the City through evaluation of both initial and operating costs. A majority of the operating costs reflect electrical energy requirements for key equipment, and consideration of higher efficiency systems and components is accounted for in determining the best choices for these items. Higher efficiency motors, pumps, blowers, aerators, mixers, lighting, and other mechanical and electrical equipment and systems are included. Variable speed and/or programmable electronic control systems are frequently employed to ensure optimum operating conditions. In general, more efficient systems and components are preferred and typically selected provided that the initial and life cycle costs remain competitive. This is standard design and engineering practice which relies on proven technologies that provide reliable long-term performance. Overall cost-effectiveness and budget compliance goals are met by means of this approach. The existing older treatment plant uses a trickling filter type fixed-film process which has a lower energy requirement; however, the existing facilities are not capable of reliably and continuously removing additional organic pollutants and/or nutrients to the required low levels. The new facility uses an activated sludge suspended growth process which provides this capability with specific configuration and control features. The activated sludge system requires aeration and mixing for the biological process performance and uses additional energy as compared to the trickling filter process. In order to minimize the energy requirements, a Sequencing Batch Reactor (SBR) type activated sludge process is used that is closely monitored and controlled with programmable electronic systems. These controls will ensure that only the necessary amounts of mixing and aeration energy needed to sustain the process are provided. The SBR system uses less energy than other comparable activated sludge processes designed to meet the same capacity and treatment requirements. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 5 FACILITIES MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT Energy efficient building systems will be used at the new facility, similar to other City projects, and will meet or exceed then current energy code requirements. This includes building materials, insulation, heating and air conditioning systems, lighting, power equipment and other miscellaneous uses. LED lighting, ventilation or evaporative cooling where air conditioning is not required, and similar measures will be considered and employed where appropriate and cost-effective. The existing old treatment plant uses potable drinking water from the City system for lawn irrigation, wash down, chlorine gas disinfection, solids dewatering and other requirements, and is the largest single user of culinary water in the City. These costly and wasteful practices will be eliminated once the new facility is operational as treated effluent will be used instead for all plant functions that do not require drinking water quality. Thereafter, culinary water will be used only for sanitary purposes at the treatment plant, thus preserving this valuable resource for similar uses in the City. Landscaping at the new facility will be limited, but it is important to note that even the low water use plantings and other green areas will not require City water for irrigation. The above and other identified viable described energy and resource conservation measures will be further developed in the detailed design effort, and implemented where practicable. The new Moab wastewater treatment facility will provide rugged and reliable operation, but will also incorporate and reflect state of the art equipment and systems to ensure that the City and community are well served by this important environmentally driven project. Water quality standards in the Colorado River will be met and important habitat and species protections will be achieved. The new facility will help ensure this level of performance and protection for many years into the future. DWQ Comment: Identify cost of septage facilities for green project reserve funds? (Are there other green project reserve eligible parts?). Response: The cost of the Septage Receiving Facility is estimated at $600,000 including contingency, engineering and construction. It should also be noted that nearly every process within the WRF is sized to accommodate the additional load from the septage. For example, the SBR basins were increased in size to accommodate the additional BOD from the septage. Additionally, the Solids Handling process were sized to accommodate the additional solids from the septage. It is estimated that these increased sizing or capacities added approximately an additional $500,000 to the overall project, in addition to the Septage Receiving Station. DWQ Comment: Include anticipated schedule of completion of design and construction in the report. Response: See below. Anticipated Schedule for Completion of Design and Construction Task Date State Review August - September 2016 Bid Period October 2016 Bid Review, Approval, NTP November 2016 Construction December 2016 – June 2018 DWQ Comment: Identify means to secure the land in the report. Response: The City of Moab has secured and is currently in ownership of the parcel of land for the new WRF. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 6 ATTACHMENT A WASTELOAD ANALYSIS Page 1 of 4 Utah Division of Water Quality ADDENDUM Statement of Basis Wasteload Analysis for Treatment Plant Upgrade - PRELIMINARY Date: July 28, 2015 Facility: Moab POTW UPDES No. UT0020419 Receiving water: Colorado River (1C, 2A, 3B, 4) This addendum summarizes the wasteload analysis that was performed to determine water quality based effluent limits (WQBEL) for this discharge. Wasteload analyses are performed to determine point source effluent limitations necessary to maintain designated beneficial uses by evaluating projected effects of discharge concentrations on in-stream water quality. The wasteload analysis also takes into account downstream designated uses (UAC R317-2-8). Projected concentrations are compared to numeric water quality standards to determine acceptability. The numeric criteria in this wasteload analysis may be modified by narrative criteria and other conditions determined by staff of the Division of Water Quality. Discharge Outfall 001: Located at latitude 38°34'40" and longitude 109°34'47". The discharge is through a 2,000-lineal-foot, 18-inch diameter reinforced concrete pipeline to the Colorado River. The design flow for the treatment plant is 1.75 MGD maximum monthly average and 3.38 MGD maximum daily discharge, as provided by the permittee. The design discharge was used for this wasteload analysis. Data obtained from 2004-2014 for sampling site 4956550 Moab WWTP was used to characterize the temperature, pH and hardness of the effluent. Receiving Water The receiving water for the discharge is the Colorado River, which per UAC R317-2-13.1 has designated uses of 1C, 2A, 3B, and 4. • Class 1C - Protected for domestic purposes with prior treatment by treatment processes as required by the Utah Division of Drinking Water. • Class 2A - Protected for frequent primary contact recreation where there is a high likelihood of ingestion of water or a high degree of bodily contact with the water. Examples include, but are not limited to, swimming, rafting, kayaking, diving, and water skiing. • Class 3B - Protected for warm water species of game fish and other warm water aquatic life, including the necessary aquatic organisms in their food chain. Utah Division of Water Quality Wasteload Analysis Moab POTW, Moab, UT UPDES No. UT0020419 Page 2 of 4 • Class 4 - Protected for agricultural uses including irrigation of crops and stock watering. The critical flow for the wasteload analysis was considered the lowest stream flow for seven consecutive days with a ten year return frequency (7Q10). Flow records from USGS stream gage # 09180500 - COLORADO RIVER NEAR CISCO, UT, for the period 1913 – 2010 was obtained. The 7Q10 was calculated using the EPA computer software DFLOW V3.1b. 7Q10 Flow (Annual) = 1,220 cfs Data obtained from 2004-2014 for sampling site 4957000 Colorado River at US191 Crossing Near Moab was used to characterize background water quality conditions. Mixing Zone The allowable mixing zone is 15 minutes of travel time for acute conditions, not to exceed 50% of stream width, and 2,500 feet for chronic conditions, per UAC R317-2-5. Water quality standards must be met at the end of the mixing zone. Individual mixing zones may be further limited or disallowed in consideration of the following factors in the area affected by the discharge: Zone of passage for migrating fish or other species (including access to tributaries). Mill Creek confluence with the Colorado River is approximately 1,400 feet downstream of the Moab POTW outfall pipe. Therefore, in consideration of potential fish migration concerns between Mill Creek and Colorado River, the acute mixing zone is limited to 1,400 feet (calculated to be 10.2 minutes travel time). Dilution Factor The EPA Region 8 stream mixing zone analysis (STREAMIX1, 1994), was used to determine the plume width and mixed flow rate for both acute and chronic conditions. A rectangular channel with a width of 300 feet, channel slope of 0.001 feet/feet, and roughness coefficient of 0.030 was assumed for channel geometry. Mannings equation was used to solve for the flow depth (1.8 feet) and velocity for the 7Q10 flow. Table 1: Summary of plume characteristics at mixing zone boundary. Criteria Distance to End of Mixing Zone (feet) Plume Width Flow Dilution Factor feet % of River cfs Acute 1,400 35.4 11.6 142 62:1 Chronic 2,500 49.1 16.2 198 86:1 Parameters of Concern The potential parameters of concern for the discharge/receiving water identified were total dissolved solids (TDS), total suspended solids (TSS), and ammonia, as determined in consultation with the UPDES Permit Writer. Utah Division of Water Quality Wasteload Analysis Moab POTW, Moab, UT UPDES No. UT0020419 Page 3 of 4 TMDL The Colorado River from Green River confluence to Moab was listed as impaired for selenium according to the 2010 303(d) list. The receiving water does not have an approved TMDL for any parameters. WET Limits The percent of effluent in the receiving water in a fully mixed condition, and acute and chronic dilution in a not fully mixed condition are calculated in the WLA in order to generate WET limits. The LC50 (lethal concentration, 50%) percent effluent for acute toxicity and the IC25 (inhibition concentration, 25%) percent effluent for chronic toxicity, as determined by the WET test, needs to be below the WET limits, as determined by the WLA. The WET limit for LC50 is typically 100% effluent and does not need to be determined by the WLA. Table 2: WET Limits for IC25 Season Percent Effluent Annual 1.4% Effluent Limits Effluent limits for pollutants were determined using a mass balance mixing analysis (UDWQ 2012). The mass balance analysis is summarized in Appendix A. The water quality standard for chronic ammonia toxicity is dependent on temperature and pH, and the water quality standard for acute ammonia toxicity is dependent on pH. The analysis to determine the ammonia criteria is summarized in Appendix B. Due to the high dilution factor, secondary standards for BOD5 were considered sufficiently protective to meet instream criteria for DO. Table 3: Water Quality Based Effluent Limits Summary Effluent Constituent Acute Chronic Standard Limit Averaging Period Standard Limit Averaging Period Flow (MGD) 3.38 1 day 1.75 30 days Ammonia (mg/L) 1 hour 30 days Summer (Jul-Sep) 2.9 210 1.1 75 Fall (Oct-Dec) 1.3 94 1.2 83 Winter (Jan-Mar) 3.0 218 1.7 122 Spring (Apr-Jun) 2.5 180 1.7 121 BOD5 (mg/L) N/A 35 7 days N/A 25 30 days Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) 3.0 5.0 Minimum 5.0 5.0 30 days Utah Division of Water Quality Wasteload Analysis Moab POTW, Moab, UT UPDES No. UT0020419 Page 4 of 4 Antidegradation Level I Review The objective of the Level I ADR is to ensure the protection of existing uses, defined as the beneficial uses attained in the receiving water on or after November 28, 1975. No evidence is known that the existing uses deviate from the designated beneficial uses for the receiving water. Therefore, the beneficial uses will be protected if the discharge remains below the WQBELs presented in this wasteload. The pollutant concentration and load from the facility is being increased under the proposed treatment plant upgrade; therefore, a Level II Antidegradation Review (ADR) is required for this discharge. Prepared by: Nicholas von Stackelberg, P.E. Standards and Technical Services Section Documents: WLA Document: moab_potw_upgrade_wla_2015.docx Analysis: moab_potw_upgrade_wla_2015.xlsx References: Utah Wasteload Analysis Procedures Version 1.0. 2012. Utah Division of Water Quality. WASTELOAD ANALYSIS [WLA]Date: 7/28/2015 Appendix A: Mass Balance Mixing Analysis for Conservative Constituents Discharging Facility: Moab WWTP UPDES No: UT-0020419 Permit Flow [MGD]: 3.38 Annual Max. Daily 1.75 Annual Max. Monthly Receiving Water: Colorado River Stream Classification: 1C, 2B, 3B, 4 Stream Flows [cfs]: 1220 Summer Critical Low Flow 197 Chronic 142 Acute Fully Mixed:NO Acute River Width: 11.6% Plume Model Used Chronic River Width: 16.2% Plume Model Used Modeling Information A simple mixing analysis was used to determine the effluent limits. All model numerical inputs, intermediate calculations, outputs and graphs are available for discussion, inspection and copy at the Division of Water Quality. Effluent Limitations Current State water quality standards are required to be met under a variety of conditions including in-stream flows targeted to the 7-day, 10-year low flow (R317-2-9). Other conditions used in the modeling effort reflect the environmental conditions expected at low stream flows. Effluent Limitations for Protection of Drinking Water (Class 1C Waters) No dilution in unnamed irrigation ditch. Dissolved Metals (ug/L) Standard Background Limit Arsenic 10.0 1.30 246 Barium 1000 140.60 24,275 Beryllium 4.0 2.68 39.7 Cadmium 10.0 0.10 278 Chromium 50.0 2.00 1,350 Lead 15.0 0.20 416 Mercury 2.0 0.2 51 Selenium 50.0 2.20 1,345 Silver 50.0 0.5 1,391 Inorganics (mg/L) Standard Background Limit Bromate 0.01 0.007 0.10 Chlorite 1.0 0.67 9.9 Fluoride 1.4 0.94 13.9 Nitrate 10.0 0.51 267 Maximum Concentration Maximum Concentration Appendix A-1 Radiological (pCi/L) Standard Background Limit Gross Alpha 15.0 10.1 149 Gross Beta 4.0 2.7 39.7 Strontium 90 8.0 5.4 79 Tritium 20000 13400 198749 Uranium 30.0 20.1 298 Bacteriological Standard E. coli (30 Day Geometric Mean) 206 (#/100 mL) E. coli (Maximum) 668 (#/100 mL) Effluent Limitations for Protection of Recreation (Class 2B Waters) Physical Parameter Maximum Concentration pH Minimum 6.5 pH Maximum 9.0 Turbidity Increase (NTU) 10.0 Bacteriological Standard E. coli (30 Day Geometric Mean) 206 (#/100 mL) E. coli (Maximum) 668 (#/100 mL) Effluent Limitations for Protection of Aquatic Wildlife (Assumed Class 3B Waters) Temperature (deg C) Maximum Instantaneous 27.0 Change 4.0 pH Concentration Minimum 6.5 Maximum 9.0 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L) Standard Limit Instantaneous Minimum 5.0 5.0 7-day Average Minimum 6.0 6.0 30-day Average Minimum 5.5 5.5 BOD5 (mg/L) Standard Limit 7-day Average N/A 35.0 30-day Average N/A 25.0 Ammonia-Total (mg/L) Chronic (30-day ave) Acute (1-hour ave) Season Standard Background Limit Standard Background Limit Summer 1.1 0.07 75.2 2.9 0.07 210.2 Fall 1.2 0.07 83.2 1.3 0.07 94.3 Winter 1.7 0.07 121.8 3.0 0.07 218.5 Spring 1.7 0.07 121.4 2.5 0.07 180.2 Inorganics Chronic Standard (4 Day Average) Acute Standard (1 Hour Average) Parameter Standard Standard Phenol (mg/L)0.010 Hydrogen Sulfide (Undissociated) [mg/L]0.002 Maximum Concentration Appendix A-2 Metals-Total Recoverable Chronic (4-day ave) Acute (1-hour ave) Parameter Standard1 Background Limit Standard1 Background Limit Aluminum (µg/L)N/A3 19.0 N/A 750 19.0 20,548 Arsenic (µg/L) 150 1.3 10,994 340 1.3 9,513 Cadmium (µg/L) 0.6 0.10 34.8 6.5 0.10 180 Chromium III (µg/L) 11.0 2.0 667 16.0 2.0 395 Chromium VI (µg/L) 199 2.0 14,602 1534 2.0 43,014 Copper (µg/L) 25.2 2.7 1,663 42.0 2.7 1,106 Cyanide (µg/L)2 5.2 3.5 130 22.0 3.5 523 Iron (µg/L)1000 27.0 27,352 Lead (µg/L) 9.1 0.2 659 234 0.2 6,564 Mercury (µg/L)2 0.012 0.008 0.301 2.4 0.008 67.2 Nickel (µg/L) 145 5.0 10,327 1302 5.0 36,432 Selenium (µg/L)4 4.6 2.2 4.6 18.4 2.2 18.4 Silver (µg/L)25.7 0.5 709 Tributylin (µg/L)2 0.072 0.048 1.8 0.46 0.048 11.61 Zinc (µg/L) 329 17.0 23,086 326 17.0 8,705 1: Based upon a hardness of 335 mg/l as CaCO3 2: Background concentration assumed 67% of chronic standard 4: Due to impairment, limit is same as standard. Organics [Pesticides] Chronic (4-day ave) Acute (1-hour ave) Parameter Standard Limit Standard Limit Aldrin (µg/L)1.5 1.5 Chlordane (µg/L) 0.0043 0.0043 1.2 1.2 DDT, DDE (µg/L) 0.001 0.001 0.55 0.55 Diazinon (µg/L) 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 Dieldrin (µg/L) 0.0056 0.0056 0.24 0.24 Endosulfan, a & b (µg/L) 0.056 0.056 0.11 0.11 Endrin (µg/L) 0.036 0.036 0.086 0.086 Heptachlor & H. epoxide (µg/L) 0.0038 0.0038 0.26 0.26 Lindane (µg/L) 0.08 0.08 1.0 1.0 Methoxychlor (µg/L)0.03 0.03 Mirex (µg/L)0.001 0.001 Nonylphenol (µg/L) 6.6 6.6 28.0 28.0 Parathion (µg/L) 0.0130 0.0130 0.066 0.066 PCB's (µg/L) 0.014 0.014 Pentachlorophenol (µg/L) 15.0 15.0 19.0 19.0 Toxephene (µg/L) 0.0002 0.0002 0.73 0.73 Radiological Maximum Concentration Parameter Standard Gross Alpha (pCi/L) 15 3: Where the pH is equal to or greater than 7.0 and the hardness is equal to or greater than 50 ppm as CaC03 in the receiving water after mixing, the 87 ug/L chronic criterion (expressed as total recoverable) will not apply, and aluminum will be regulated based on compliance with the 750 ug/L acute aluminum criterion (expressed as total recoverable). Appendix A-3 Effluent Limitation for Protection of Agriculture (Class 4 Waters) Maximum Concentration Parameter Standard Background Limit Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L) 1200 634 16,529 Boron (µg/L) 750 81.5 302,004 Arsenic, Dissolved (µg/L) 100 1.3 44,578 Cadmium, Dissolved (µg/L) 10 0.1 4,471 Chromium, Dissolved (µg/L) 100 2.0 44,263 Copper, Dissolved (µg/L) 200 2.7 89,112 Lead, Dissolved (µg/L) 100 0.2 45,074 Selenium, Dissolved (µg/L) 50 2.2 21,591 Gross Alpha (pCi/L) 15 10.1 2,246 Appendix A-4 Appenix B: Freshwater total ammonia criteria based on Title R317-2-14 Utah Administrative CodeAcute ConditionsSummer Fall Winter SpringpH:8.6 9.0 8.5 8.6Beneficial use classification:3B 3B 3B 3BTotal ammonia nitrogen criteria (mg N/L): Acute:2.912 1.345 3.025 2.507INPUTOUTPUTAppendix B-1 Appendix B: Freshwater total ammonia criteria based on Title R317-2-14 Utah Administrative CodeChronic ConditionsSummer Fall Winter SpringTemperature (deg C):22.9 9.1 4.5 14.2pH:8.2 8.4 8.2 8.2Are fish early life stages present?Yes Yes Yes YesTotal ammonia nitrogen criteria (mg N/L): Chronic - Fish Early Life Stages Present:1.086 1.195 1.717 1.711 Chronic - Fish Early Life Stages Absent:1.086 1.694 2.788 1.751INPUTOUTPUTAppendix B-2 ATTACHMENT B SELECTED PROCESS DESCRIPTION MOAB WWTP PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT Note: This Chapter is taken from the Moab WRF Preliminary Engineering Report and includes minor modifications necessary for use in this attachment. CHAPTER 5 TREATMENT PROCESSES 5.1 INTRODUCTION The following processes, systems and equipment have been identified for inclusion in the new Moab Wastewater Treatment Plant. Their selection is due in part to three separate field trips and investigations performed by City staff and BC&A personnel to visit several operating facilities. As part of the preliminary design basis, City staff and BC&A evaluated various alternatives for each treatment system. The following summarizes the preferred and recommended alternative for each treatment process. It is noted that preliminary and detailed proposals were solicited, received and evaluated for selection of the Sequencing Batch Reactors, and visits to these related facilities were included in the above investigations. Equipment manufacturer representatives were contacted for technical and cost information and to provide documentation for selected items. The upcoming detailed final design effort will be based on these selections and will be able to proceed efficiently and effectively as a result. Selections will be re-evaluated during the process, and some changes, additions and deletions may occur as the design in tightened up and finalized. Other lesser project elements not mentioned or discussed in detail below will be evaluated and selected during the detailed design. 5.2 INFLUENT PUMPING STATION Purpose Automatically lift raw wastewater from influent sewer system to treatment plant. Operating/Process Requirements Non-clogging, reliable, redundant, flow matching, peak flow capacity. Preliminary Design Summary The following summarizes the key design elements for the influent pump station: • Peak hour flow initial capacity – 3.4 MGD • Peak hour flow future capacity – 5.1 MGD • Archimedean screw pumps: Two initial units (1 operating + 1 standby); three future units (2 operating + 1 standby) • 36” diameter, steel construction, 3 external flights, 24” dia. torque tube, 30° incline • Constant speed 15 HP, 460 VAC, 3P, 60 HZ 1800 RPM electric motor with V-belt drive • Gear reducer with 48 RPM output shaft and pump speed • Covers screws for safety and odor and noise reduction BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 5-1 MOAB WWTP PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT • Automatic grease lube system for lower submerged bearing • Manufacturers – Lakeside, EPIC, or equal Narrative The influent pumping station lifts raw wastewater from the City sewer system interceptor to the new treatment facility. It must be reliable and free from clogging or other condition that would impact performance or operability. The capacity of the facility must match design peak hour flows and provide redundant equipment in case of malfunction. The initial design capacity is 3.4 MGD and the ultimate capacity is 5.1 MGD. Archimedes screw pumps will be used for this application. They do not require screening for protection, automatically vary pumping capacity to match incoming flows while operating at a constant speed, and maintain a consistent high hydraulic efficiency. Two screw pumps will be installed initially for redundancy with a capacity of 3.4 MGD each, and a third similar pump will be installed in the future to meet ultimate flow requirements. Each pump will be equipped with a 15-hp electric motor that will operate its individual screw via a high quality gear reducer mechanism. Automatic grease lubrication will be provided for the lower submerged bearings. Covers over the screws will be provided for increased safety, noise reduction and odor containment. A reinforced cast-in-place structure will be constructed to house the screw pump system. The influent elevation will be such that sewer flows from Stewart Lane can flow by gravity to the inlet of the pump station to be lifted into the plant. It is estimated that the influent pump station will lift the sewer approximatively 20-ft. 5.3 HEADWORKS The headworks provides preliminary treatment for the influent wastewater. The headworks facilities measures influent flow, screens larger debris to protect downstream equipment, and removes grit and heavier particles. Additionally, the Moab WWTP will include a septage receiving station. The following discusses each part of the proposed headworks. 5.3.1 Flow Measurement Purpose Measure and record incoming wastewater flows. Operating/Process Requirements Simple, reliable, accurate flow measurement; range from low instantaneous flow to 5.1 MGD peak flow. Preliminary Design Summary The following summarizes the key design elements for the influent flow measurement: • Parshall Flume with 12-inch throat width • Capacity 0.07-7.42 MGD @ 0.10-2.0 ft. depth • Ultrasonic level sensor/transmitter • Manufacturers – Plastifab, or equal • BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 5-2 MOAB WWTP PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT Narrative Flow measurement for the raw wastewater will be provided by an open channel 12” throat width Parshall flume with ultrasonic level control. Monitoring of plant flows is required for operations and control purposes and for regulatory reporting and permitting. 5.3.2 Septage Receiving Station Purpose Receive, control, treat, hold and deliver septage to the treatment plant and protect plant equipment systems and process. Operating/Process Requirements Rugged, reliable design and construction; receive and control septage deliveries; wash, dewater and bag septage debris for landfill disposal and meet EPA paint filter test requirements and reduce odors and vectors; at least 400 GPM to match delivery vehicle capacity. Preliminary Design Summary • 650 GPM capacity • 0.25” screen perforations w/ 67% capture rate • Stainless steel construction • Integral flow metering and control station with access security, recording, billing interface • Integral septage debris washing, compaction and bagging • 1.5 HP screen and washer/compactor motors, 460 VAC, 3P, 60 HZ with mechanical speed reducers • Concrete receiving tank – 3,000 gal.; holding tank – 17,000 gal. • 20 HP, 1500 gpm chopper style mixing pump • 5 HP, 100 gpm chopper style transfer pump • 45 gpm @ 70 psig wash water supply • Manufacturers – Receiving station: Enviro-Care; Chopper mixer/pump: Vaughn Narrative The Moab wastewater treatment plant receives septage delivered by haulers from nearby national and state parks, campgrounds, household septic tanks and portable restrooms. The septage contains debris, rocks, rags, plastics, hygiene products and organic waste materials, etc. that can disrupt the treatment process and create operation and maintenance difficulties. A septage receiving station is required to remove much of these problematic materials before discharging to the facility and to control deliveries to assure compatibility with plant capacity and operations. This function will be provided by an Enviro-Care Flo-Beast manufactured heavy duty stainless steel unit with a capacity of 650 GPM, 0.25” rotating screen perforations and 67% capture rate, and integral washer, conveyor and bagger for septage debris. The debris will be hauled for landfill disposal. The machine is also equipped with a control station with access security, flow metering, monitoring, recording and billing functions for septage haulers. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 5-3 MOAB WWTP PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT Septage liquid from the Flo-Beast will be discharged to a 3000 gallon concrete receiving tank where it can be held temporarily pending testing (pH, temperature, etc.) to confirm acceptability. From there the septage will be released and flow by gravity to a 17,000 gallon concrete holding tank. A Vaughn chopper type mixer and pump unit will help keep materials suspended in the holding basin and will also meter the liquid into the treatment plant on a controlled basis for processing. 5.3.3 Screening Purpose Automatically remove screenings from raw wastewater flow to protect downstream equipment, reduce clogging and minimize other damaging effects to plant processes. Operating/Process Requirements Mechanically remove rags, plastics and other debris down to 6 mm size; wash, compact and bag screenings to meet EPA paint filter test for landfill disposal and reduce odor and vectors; provide maximum flow and related screenings handling capacity. Manually raked static bypass screen. Preliminary Design Summary The following summarizes the key design elements for the screens: • 5.1 MGD flow capacity, rotary, self-cleaning screen • Inclined drum type screen • 70 CF/HR screenings handling capacity • Rugged stainless steel construction • 3 mm openings with self-cleaning system • Integral washer, compactor, conveyor, bagger for screenings • Manually raked static bypass screen • 2 HP, 460 VAC, 3P, 60 HZ screen and washer/compactor/conveyor motor • 40 GPM @ 70 PSIG wash water supply • Manufacturer – Huber or Lakeside Narrative Rags, plastics, sticks, rocks, household items and various other debris are present in raw wastewater that is discharged to the treatment plant. It is important to intercept and remove much of this material before entering the facility to protect from plugging, blockage, debris accumulation of other potential damaging effects. This will be accomplished using a self-cleaning, stainless steel, rotating drum screen with 3 mm openings and 5.1 MGD capacity. Conveying, washing, compaction and bagging of screenings will be provided by a unit integral to the screen system. The removed screenings will be hauled for landfill disposal. Huber or Lakeside screening equipment will be used. A manually raked bypass screen will be provided. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 5-4 MOAB WWTP PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT 5.3.4 Grit Removal Purpose Mechanically, automatically remove grit from raw wastewater flow to protect downstream plant process from abrasion and other damage, clogging, etc. Operating/Process Requirements Peak hourly flow capacity; remove 95% of particles 105 micron or smaller; classify and wash grit for landfill disposal. Preliminary Design Summary The following summarizes the key design elements for the grit removal facility: • 5.1 MGD capacity • 360° vortex type grit chamber • Integral grit pump with 250GPM capacity • Grit washing/classifying system with 41 CF/HR capacity • 1 HP, 460 VAC, 3P, 60 HZ vortex paddle motor • 10 HP, 460 VAC, 3P, 60 HZ grit pump motor • 3 HP, 460 VAC, 3P, 60 HZ turbo washer motor • 1 HP, 460 VAC, 3P, 60 HZ classifier motor • 20 GPM @ 60 PSIG turbo washer wash water supply • Manufacturer – Smith and Loveless, Model 7.0 Narrative Grit particles enter the raw wastewater from various sources including manholes, sewer pipe joints, service line and connections, etc. It consists largely of relatively fine, hard and dense sand and other similar particles and is generally inorganic in nature. Some organic elements such as eggshells, coffee grounds, etc. may also be included. It is import remove as much of the grit as possible from the wastewater in order to protect equipment and other plant components and facilities from abrasion, clogging or other potential deleterious effects of this material. For the Moab plant, this will be accomplished by a vortex-type grit chamber, with integral grit pump and washer and classifier equipment. Removals of up to 95% of particles of 105 micron diameter and larger will be accomplished. The capacity of the system will be 5.1 MGD. Removed grit will be collected and hauled for landfill disposal. A Smith and Loveless Pista 360 System will related pump and grit handling equipment will be used. 5.4 INTERMEDIATE SUBMERSIBLE SBR PUMPING STATION Purpose Automatically lift wastewater from the Headworks and deliver to the SBR basins. Operating/Process Requirements Non-clogging, reliable, redundant, flow matching, peak flow capacity. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 5-5 MOAB WWTP PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT Preliminary Design Summary The following summarizes the key design elements for the intermediate submersible pump station: • Peak hour flow initial capacity 3.4 MGD • Peak hour flow future capacity 5.1 MGD • Submersible, non-clog centrifugal pumps: Two initial units (1 operating + 1 standby), three future units (2 operating + 1 standby) • Variable speed 30 HP, 460 VAC, 3P, 60 HZ 1800 RPM electric motors • Manufacturers – Flygt or ABS Narrative The Intermediate SBR Pumping Station will lift wastewater from the Headworks to the Sequencing Batch Reactor basins. Submersible non-clog centrifugal pumps (Flygt or ABS) will be used for this purpose following the screening and grit removal operations. Initial capacity will be 3.4 MGD with 5.1 ultimate capacity. Two pumps will be installed for redundancy with a capacity of 3.4 MGD each, with a third similar pump provided to meet ultimate flows in the future. The pumps will be installed in a concrete wet well and mounted on guide rails for easy removal for inspection and service. A piping and valve manifold will be provided in an adjacent concrete vault, with automatic electrical actuators to divert flows to the individual SBR basins, with two SBR basins served initially and an additional third basin in the future. Flows will be sent to only one SBR basin at time and staged as needed according to the reactor sequencing. The estimated horsepower requirement for each submersible pump is 30-HP. They will be VFD controlled to vary the motor speed and pumping rate in order to match the incoming flows. 5.5 SEQUENCING BATCH REACTOR Purpose Provide biological treatment of wastewater to remove organic constituents and nutrients to acceptable levels for discharge to the Colorado River. Operating/Process Requirements Provide capacities for treatment of peak flows and peak organic and nutrient loads, operational simplicity, process stability and reliability, ease of maintenance and cost effective aeration, mixing and general performance. • Initial Peak month day flow – 1.75 MGD • Initial design loads – 5,473 PPD BOD5, 4,889 PPD TSS, 715 PPD NH3, 876 PPD TKN, 126 PPD TP • Effluent goals – 10 MG/L BOD5 and TSS, 10 MG/L TIN, 1 MG/L TP Preliminary Design Summary The following summarizes the key design elements for the Sequencing Batch Reactor: • Sequencing batch reactor activated sludge process – AquaSBR true batch process BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 5-6 MOAB WWTP PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT • Two 1.34 MG, 113 ft. Dia., 18 ft. SWD concrete basins • 1.4 days HRT, 19.2 days SRT, 4,500 MG/L MLSS • 10,130 PPD O2 required; 4.319 SCFM air per basin • 3,700 GPM decant rate with two floating decanters and electrically actuated weir – Aqua-Aerobic • 25,000 GPD biosolids wasting – Flygt 3 HP submersible non-clog pumps (2+1 shelf spare) • Tube type membrane fine bubble diffuser systems, panel-mounted, removable – Aqua-Aerobic • Two 40 HP floating mixers – Aqua-Aerobic (25 HP/MG mixing requirement) • Four 125 HP positive displacement blowers (3 + 1 spare) • Mixer, pumps, decanter, blowers 460 VAC, 3P, 60 HZ operated Narrative The Sequencing Batch Reactor is the principal biological treatment system for the new Moab plant. It uses a variation of the activated sludge process to remove organic constituents (BOD5, TSS, etc.) in the wastewater and also reduce nutrient concentrations for total phosphorous, ammonia and total nitrogen to acceptable levels before discharge to the Colorado River. SBRs operate in a sequence of cycles including filling, aeration, settling, decanting and solids wasting instead of a more conventional continuous flow scheme. Two or more basins are employed so that incoming flows are continuously introduced to the process when other basins are in different modes. The Intermediate SBR Pumping Station will deliver flows to the appropriate basins via motor actuated valves. Aqua-Aerobic SBR technology has been selected for this system. The initial peak month capacity is 1.75 MGD using two basins, and a third basin will be added in the future to achieve 2.6 MGD peak month capacity. Two round cast-in-place 113 ft. diameter and 18 ft. SWD concrete basins will be constructed, with a third identical basin installed in the future as described. The effective hydraulic volume of each basin/reactor will be 1.34 MG. A fine bubble diffused aeration system will provide oxygen and some mixing for the reactors. Tube type membrane aeration diffusers will be configured in panels oriented around the perimeter of the reactors and are removable without dewatering or entering the basin for inspection and service. Four 125-HP positive displacement blowers (3 operating + 1 standby) will provide air to supply the required oxygen. A floating 40 HP Aqua-Aerobic mechanical mixer in each basin will provide the majority of the required mixing energy. A floating Aqua-Aerobic decanter equipped with a motor-actuated weir mechanism will provide decanting of clarified treated wastewater effluent from each basin and which will flow to the Equalization Basin discussed below. Submersible Flygt non-clog pumps will pump the settled and thickened biosolids from the basins to the Aerated Solids Holding Basin, also discussed below. The manufacturer will provide a computer control system to operate the SBRs and related equipment. 5.6 EQUALIZATION BASIN Purpose Receive high rate intermittent decant flows from SBR system and equalize them by discharging to the UV system at a lower and more constant rate. This will reduce the capacity and simplify the operating requirement for the UV system. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 5-7 MOAB WWTP PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT Operating/Process Requirements Receive and temporarily store decant flows by gravity from the SBRs and release by gravity at a controlled rate via magnetic flow measurement and motor operated valve. Preliminary Design Summary The following summarizes the key design elements for the Equalization Basin: • 180,000 gal. concrete basin • 55 ft. x 55 ft. x 8.0 ft. SWD • Magnetic flow meter and motor-actuated valve in adjacent outlet control vault Narrative The Equalization Basin will be located hydraulically between the SBR basins and the UV disinfection facility. It will receive high rate decant flows (3,700 GPM) by gravity discharged approximately every 2.5 hours from the SBRs, and discharge at a controlled and relatively constant flowrate to the UV system. This will enable the UV system to not be oversized for the larger decant flowrate (expensive) and also not be required to stop and start continually throughout the day which increases cyclical electrical wear and failure of UV lamps, ballasts and other components. Discharge from the EQ basin will be controlled via an outlet flow meter and electric motorized valve and will occur by gravity flow. Estimated volume for this cast-in-place concrete basin is approximately 180,000 gallons. 5.7 FUTURE TERTIARY FILTRATION Purpose Provide improved effluent quality if needed for future discharge standards or other uses. Current water effluent standards do not require tertiary filters; however, it is good practice to provide physical space and hydraulic head allowing for the addition of filters if ever needed or desired. Tertiary filters would also allow for reuse of treated effluent for irrigation purposes. Operating/Process Requirements Reduce concentrations of constituents to acceptable levels. Preliminary Design Summary The following summarizes the key design elements for the future tertiary filters: • 5.1 MGD capacity • Cloth media disk filters • 5 GPM/SF filtration rate (maximum) • 5 HP, 460 VAC, 3P, 60 HZ filter disk drive motor • 15 HP, 460 VAC, 3P, 60 HZ backwash pump motors • Manufacturer – Aqua-Aerobic, or equal BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 5-8 MOAB WWTP PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT Narrative Filters are not required or included with the initial treatment plant project, but hydraulic and physical space is provided in the event that future conditions may require effluent filtration. Cloth media disk filters are anticipated and which will be installed in a cast-in-place concrete basin and possibly enclosed in a building or provided with a canopy. Ultimate filtration peak capacity will be 5.1 MGD. Backwash will be returned to the SBRs for additional treatment. 5.8 ULTRA-VIOLET DISINFECTION AND UTILITY WATER PUMPING STATION 5.8.1 UV Disinfection Purpose Disinfect treated wastewater effluent prior to discharge to the Colorado River to protect human health. Operating/Process Requirements Meet E-coli 126/100 ml concentration standard reliably and economically for anticipated range of flows. Preliminary Design Summary The following summarizes the key design elements for the ultraviolet light disinfection: • Peak flow capacity – 3.5 MGD (expandable to 5.1 mgd) • Anticipated dosage – 30 MJ/CM2 • Low pressure, high output amalgam UV lamp technology • 36 lamps @ 250 watts/lamp (64 lamps future) • 6 lamp modules (8 future) • 9 KW, 460 VAC, 3P, 60 HZ electrical power requirement • Mechanical/chemical quartz sleeve cleaning system • Manufacturer – Trojan UV 3000 Plus Narrative The treated wastewater effluent must be disinfected prior to discharge to the Colorado River in order to reduce the active bacteriological pathogen content to safe levels for protection of human health. This is currently accomplished at the existing plant by addition of chlorine, a bactericide. The new plant will use ultra-violet light for this purpose by irradiating the effluent with a sufficient UV dose to disrupt the DNA of the micro-organisms and prevent them from reproducing. This disruption occurs at a UV wavelength of 254 nM which is produced by a number of UV lamp types. A dosage of 30 MJ/CM2 is anticipated to be sufficient for this purpose using low pressure, high output amalgam lamps. Trojan UV 3000 Plus UV equipment will be used for this application. The initial capacity will provide disinfection capacity for 3.5 MGD. The design will allow for additional UV lamps to be added allowing for an ultimate capacity of 5.1 MGD. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 5-9 MOAB WWTP PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT 5.8.2 Utility Water Pump Station Purpose Provide pressurized treated effluent for in-plant uses that do not require treated effluent such as irrigation and septage/screenings/grit washing, solids dewatering, washdown, etc. Operating/Process Requirements Efficient, reliable, high pressure, simple system. Preliminary Design Summary The following summarizes the key design elements for the utility water pump station: • Total capacity – 150 GPM • Two multi-stage, stainless steel, centrifugal submersible pumps @ 150 GPM/each: • Constant speed 10 HP, 460 VAC, 3P, 60 HZ 3600 RPM electric motors • Hydro-pneumatic pressure tank and control system Narrative The Utility Water Pumping Station will provide a treated effluent water supply for use on the plant site including landscape irrigation, hose/washdown activities, septage washing, screenings washing, grit washing, solids dewatering and other functions where potable water is not required. A total capacity of 150 GPM at 80 psig will be provided for the utility water system. Submersible, multi-stage, stainless steel, 10-hp constant speed effluent pumps will be used for this purpose, and a hydro-pneumatic tank and control system provided for operations. The pump capacity will be 150 GPM each. 5.9 EFFLUENT PUMPING STATION 5.9.1 Effluent Pumping Station Purpose Automatically lift wastewater effluent from the UV facility to the outfall when there are high flows in the Colorado River. During high flow events, the elevation of the Colorado River can rise above the outfall of the WWTP, reducing the gravity flow capacity of the outfall line. During these events, the effluent will need to be pumped into the outfall providing sufficient head for the effluent to flow to the Colorado River. The current WWTP includes an emergency effluent pump station with the similar purpose. The existing pump is seldom used; however, Moab WWTP staff indicates that there have been times that the pump station has been required. Operating/Process Requirements Efficient, reliable, redundant, flow matching, peak flow capacity. Preliminary Design Summary The following summarizes the key design elements for the effluent pump station: • Peak hour flow initial capacity – 3.4 MGD • Peak hour flow future capacity – 5.1 MGD BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 5-10 MOAB WWTP PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT • Centrifugal or turbine pumps: Two initial units (1 operating + 1 standby), three future units (2 operating + 1 standby) • Variable speed 10 HP, 460 VAC, 3P, 60 HZ 1800 RPM electric motor Narrative The Effluent Pumping Station will lift the treated effluent from the UV disinfection facility into the outfall line for discharge to the Colorado River when there are high flows in the river. Centrifugal or turbine pumps will be used for this purpose with an initial capacity of 3.4 MGD and 5.1 ultimate capacity. Two pumps will be installed for redundancy with a capacity of 3.4 MGD each, with a third similar pump provided to meet ultimate flows in the future. The estimated horsepower requirement for each submersible pump is 10-HP each. They will be VFD controlled to vary the motor speed and pumping rate in order to match the incoming flows. 5.10 AERATED SOLIDS HOLDING BASIN Purpose Receive waste biosolids from the SBRs and hold temporarily for subsequent dewatering and disposal. Operating/Process Requirements Receive 50,000 GPD of 1% dry biosolids concentration waste activated sludge; thicken to 2% dry biosolids concentration by decanting (decant returned to SBR for further treatment); provide aeration for freshening, odor control and limited mixing, and mechanical mixer for improved mixing and energy conservation. Preliminary Design Summary The following summarizes the key design elements for the aerated sludge holding basins: • 270,000 gal. concrete basin • 55 ft. x 55 ft. x 12 ft. SWD • Coarse bubble stainless steel aeration diffusers (20 SCFM/1000 CF mixing) • Two positive displacement blowers @ 950 SCFM capacity/each, 50 HP/each, 460 VAC, 3P, 60 HZ • One 10 HP, 460 VAC, 3P, 60 HZ floating mechanical mixer (25 HP/MG mixing) Narrative The Aerated Sludge Holding Basin will receive waste biosolids pumped from the SBR basins approximately 10 times each day as the SBRs progress through their treatment cycles. The estimated volume of biosolids is approximately 50,000 GPD at about 1% dry solids concentration. Biosolids in the basin will be thickened by periodic decanting to approximately 2% dry solids concentration, with the supernatant returned to the SBRs for further treatment. The 270,000 gal. capacity will provide 7 days storage in accord with UDEQ standards. Waste biosolids will be held in the basin until removed by pumping to the dewatering facility where they will be dewatered and then disposed of. Thickened biosolids dewater more effectively and economically than the un-thickened waste solids and the capacity and operating requirements for the dewatering facility will be reduced accordingly. A floating Aqua-Aerobics decanter with electrically actuated outlet control valve will be provided. BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 5-11 MOAB WWTP PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT Biosolids in the basin will be mixed both mechanically and by aeration, which will also serve to keep them freshened and reduce odors. Mechanical mixing will help reduce overall mixing energy requirements, and the aeration system will be cycled on and off as needed. A 10 HP floating Aqua-Aerobics mixer and stainless steel coarse bubble diffused aeration system with 50 HP positive displacement blowers included. SOLIDS DEWATERING FACILITY Purpose Dewater waste biosolids for landfill disposal. Operation/Process Requirements Dewater 1-2% dry solids by weight concentration biosolids to 14-16% dry solids concentration and meet EPA paint filter test for landfill disposal. Capacity equivalent to 4,100 PPD dry solids (25,000 GPD 2% dry solids). There are many viable options for mechanical dewatering of wastewater solids, with the most common being belt filter presses, centrifuges and screw presses. The City is currently utilizing a 0.75 meter belter filter press at the existing WWTP. City personnel has selected centrifuge as the preferred technology for dewatering solids at the proposed WWTP. Centrifuges are a high speed process that uses the force from rapid rotation of a cylindrical bowl to separate wastewater solids from liquid. Preliminary Design Summary The following summarizes the key design elements for the solids dewatering facility: • Solids Processing Capacity – 150 gpm • Mechanical Dewatering – Centrifuge (1 + 1 future) • Centrifuge Back Motor Drive – 75 Hp • Centrifuge Main Motor Drive – 75 Hp • Centrifuge Manufacturer – Alfa Laval, Huber, Andritz. • Progressive Cavity Solids Feed Pump – Seepex, Moyno, or equal. • Solids Feed Pump – 150 gpm at 7.5 Hp Narrative The Solids Dewatering Facility will dewater approximately 4,100 PPD of biosolids at 2% dry solids concentration, equaling approximately 25,000 GPD. The dewatering system may be operated daily or less often, provided that 7 days of waste solids production is processed during a week’s time, which corresponds to the holding capacity of the basin. The dewatering operation is typically run as a daily batch, with the number of days and length of the batching time corresponding to the volume of solids to be processed. Biosolids will be dewatered to 14-16% dry solids concentration and then hauled for landfill disposal. Liquid removed from the biosolids will be returned to the SBRs for further treatment. The solids dewatering equipment will consist of one centrifuge, with space to add another in the future. Each centrifuge will have the ability to process 150 gpm at 2% solids. Centrifuges are a high speed process that uses the force from rapid rotation of a cylindrical bowl to separate wastewater solids from liquid. Solids from the centrifuge will be conveyed to a truck or loading bin located BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 5-12 MOAB WWTP PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT outside the dewatering building. The separated liquid is returned back to the influent pump station to be processed through the WWTP. Cationic liquid polymer will be added to the biosolids to condition and destabilize/coagulate them prior to dewatering. Typically this is accomplished at a polymer dosage rate of approximately15-25 pounds of polymer per dry ton of biosolids, depending on the polymer, the nature of the biosolids and the dewatering equipment being used. The liquid polymer will be diluted, mixed, activated and metered to the biosolids flow by a manufactured unit designed to provide all of those functions. The “Polyblend” system by USGI will be used for this purpose. 5.11 ADMINISTRATION BUILDING Purpose The Administration Building will provide space for key administrative, operational, maintenance, laboratory and other functions for the new Moab treatment plant. It will be the only non-process driven building on site, although it will include the UV and Utility Water Pump facilities. The masonry building will include the following facilities and will provide approximately 3,100 sf total area. Preliminary Design Summary The following summarizes the key design elements for the Administration Building: • Entry foyer and hallway • Operations and control room and chief operator’s office • Small process control lab with limited office space • Small lunch/meeting room • Media room/space with printer/fax/copier, computer server and paper, files and office supplies storage • Building electrical and mechanical spaces as needed • Restroom and limited shower facilities • Janitor closet • Shop area with single vehicle parking/service stall, parts/tools/supplies storage, welder and compressor equipment and general work area 5.12 STANDBY POWER SYSTEM Purpose The standby power system will provide electrical power for critical elements of the Moab wastewater treatment plant during temporary power outages that may occur from time to time. The standby system will enable the plant to continue operating until utility power is restored. Operating/Process Requirements The standby power system will be energized automatically when a loss of utility electrical power occurs and will operate until the plant is switched back over to utility power by operations personnel. The standby system will provide sufficient electrical power to operate all critical equipment and BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 5-13 MOAB WWTP PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT systems at the plant to assure continuous uninterrupted operation. This will include lighting, security, controls, pumping, blowers and aeration, disinfection, life safety equipment and all crucial plant processes and systems. Preliminary Design Summary • Standby diesel-powered engine generator system • Capacity to be determined • 460 VAC, 3P, 60 HZ power supply • 24-hour integral fuel tank • Outdoor rated noise reducing enclosure and muffler system • Automatic transfer switch (ATS) • Located near the main plant power center 5.13 PROCESS BUILDING The Process Building is a masonry structure that contains the following facilities described above. These facilities are consolidated for cost-reduction and to simplify operational requirements. Headworks Room • Influent mechanical screen with manual bypass bar rack and integral washer, compactor, bagger and common disposal dumpster • Vortex grit chamber with grit pump, grit washer, grit classifier and common disposal dumpster • Ventilation system for odor control Blower Room • SBR positive displacement blowers • Aerated Holding Basin positive displacement blowers Dewatering Room • Centrifuge(s) • Sludge feed pumps • Polymer mix/feed system • Dewatered solids conveying equipment • Chemical storage and metering system for alum addition as needed for phosphorous control • Ventilation system for odor control Electrical Room • Plant main electrical gear and controls BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 5-14 MOAB WWTP PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT Standby Power Generation System • This outdoor mounted diesel engine-generator unit will be located adjacent to the Electrical Room BOWEN COLLINS & ASSOCIATES CITY OF MOAB 5-15 SEPTAGE I— i i ---r r- 0 imirdv• 1 INFLUENT RAWINFLUENT SCREW WASTEWATER PUMP STATI O N SEPTAGE RECEIVING STATION SEE NOTE 1 1 SEPTAGE SCREENINGS TO LANDFILL DISPOSAL MECHANICAL SCREEN WITH BAR RACK _/ PARSHALL FLUME CONVEYOR o frry DEWATERED SLUDGE TO LANDFFILL OR DISPOSAL } n VORTEX GRIT REMOVAL 0 CENTRATE C4 INTERMEDIATE CONTROL PUMP VALVE STATION BOX DECANT SEQUENCING BATCH REACTORS SEE NOTE 2 ATED SLUDGE ASTE ACTI SOLIDS DEWATERING n_o �} I THICKENED SLUDGE METERING PUMPS AERATED SOLIDS HOLDING BASIN SEE NOTE 3 FLOW METER W/FLOW CONTROL VALVE EFFLUENT EQUALIZATION BASIN M C4 NOTES: 1. SEPTAGE RECEIVING FACILITY INCLUDES FLOW METERING, SCREENING, DEWATERING/COMPACTATION, RECEIVING AND HOLDING BASIN, CHOPPER PUMP AND MIXER AND DATA MONITORING, RECORDING AND TELEMETERING FOR RECORDS AND BILLING. 2. SEQUENCING BATCH REACTORS PROVIDE FILL, REACT (ANAEROBIC, AEROBIC, ANOXIC), SETTLE AND DECANT STAGES. EACH BASIN INCLUDES AERATION MIXING, DECANTING, SLUDGE WASTING EQUIPMENT. 3. AERATED SOLIDS HOLDING BASINS INCLUDE COARSE BUBBLE DIFFUSERS FOR AERATION AND MECHANICAL MIXING AND DECANTING EQUIPMENT. UTILITY WATER 1 FUTURE FILTERS UV DISINFECTION EMERGENCY EFFLUENT PUMP STATION RE—AREATION BASIN GRAVIT1)11P FLOW EMERGENCY PUMPED FLOW R��ER o G0\-°"° Bowen Collins k111L& Associates, Inc. .. CONSULTING ENGINEERS MOAB WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT Figure 6-1 SCHEMATIC PROCESS DIAGRAM P:\Moab City\WWTP\130-15-02 Moab WWTP Preliminary Engineenng Report \5.0 Drowings\Sht\Figure-6—01.dwg Oct15,2015 — 4:36pm Southern Utah Area Office: 20 North Main Suite 107 St. George, Utah 84770 Phone: (435) 656-3299 Fax: (435) 656-2190 www.bowencollins.com Salt Lake Area Office: 154 East 14000 South Draper, Utah 84020 Phone: (801) 495-2224 Fax: (801) 495-2225 Boise Area Office: 776 East Riverside Drive Suite 250 Eagle, Idaho 83616 Phone: (208) 939-9561 Fax: (208) 939-9571