HomeMy WebLinkAbout07.a.1) (Handout) Update on nutrient studiesNutrient Facility Plan
Site Characterization
Proposed Nutrient Watershed Permit
Dana Lawson, Senior Engineer
June 6, 2013
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
Background: 2012 Permit
Suisun Bay Nutrient Studies
• In progress
Treatment Plant Studies
,,'Work Plan Jul 2012
• Facilities Plan & Site
Characterization Report Feb 2014
• Reassessment of ammonia limits Apr 2015
— 5,500 kg /day, 65 mg /L (monthly average)
7-0. /)
ma',Va4r)
1
Work Plan Components
Elements:
1. Existing plant optimization for
ammonia removal to meet
potential interim limits.
2. Nutrient removal facilities plan
to meet potential long -term
limits.
3. Site characterization for
contaminated soil in
surcharge area.
Facility Plan
Site Characterization
Work Plan
June 2012
Element 1: Plant Optimization
1. Biowin — Develop model for treatment
processes.
✓ Complete
2. Optimization - Investigate candidate
operational and facilities modifications to
optimize ammonia removal.
• In progress, final report from Carollo by August.
3. Pilot or Full Scale Tests (optional)
• Will be identified but not undertaken before
report to Regional Board in Feb 2014.
1� �4
i
2
Element 1: Plant Optimization
cont'd
4. Primary Sedimentation Baffle Study -
Analyze effectiveness of baff les to reduce
cBOD demand.
• In progress
- Waiting for maintenance evaluation. .
• Preliminary Results
- -7% more concentrated sludge in baffled tank
- -4% lower BOD load to aeration process
- - $135k/yr in energy /aeration costs
- Recent bid was $370k for remaining 3 sets of
baffles... simple payback less than 5 years
4
Element 1: Plant Optimization
cont'd
5. Cyanide Study — Determine site - specific
nitrification rate & cyanide inhibition.
• In progress
- Field work completed May 27
- Waiting for lab results
- HDR will analyze data
3
Element 2: Facility Plan
Evaluate conventional & emerging
technologies to remove ammonia and
total nitrogen for potential final effluent
limits based on Sac Regional &
Stockton NPDES permits.
Ilk
Element 2: Facility Plan
cont'd
1. Total Nitrification Study
✓ 2010 report recommended extended aeration.
2. Visioning Plan - Evaluate cutting -edge nitrogen removal
technologies (including site visits)
• In progress
- Received site visit report from HDR.
- Majority of research completed.
3. Pilot Studies (optional)
• Will be identified but not undertaken before report to Regional
Board in Feb 2014. . A
0
Element 3: Site Characterization
Evaluate soil in surcharge area for
placement of additional facilities,
including remediation costs and options
r ✓ Work Plan submitted to
A� ` DTSC
_.
d . °• 0 Waiting for approval
Field Work mid -June to July
• Draft Report by Sept
_ l yij�y /¢ •C
Project Schedule
Element 1
Plant Optimization
Jul/ Aug 2013
Element 2
Facility Plan
Oct/Nov 2013
Element 3
Site
Characterization
Nov 2013
Summary Report to the
Regional Board
February 28, 2014
0
Nutrient Watershed
Permit Approach
• RWQCB developed SF Bay Nutrient Strategy in
December 2012.
• Strategy relies on scientific studies to determine
nutrient impacts & prudent management options.
• Bay studies would take 5 to 10+ years.
• BACWA to help fund & steer studies.
• CCCSD would participate through BACWA.
• CCCSD studies would be incorporated.
t
Potential Watershed Permit
• Target issuance is April 2014.
• Elements under consideration:
— Participation in studies, monitoring, etc. to further the
science
— RWQCB to require performance based, numeric effluent
limits (e.g. total nitrogen limits with possible threshold to
exclude some requirements for Q >10 MGD)
— Division between south and north bays (i.e. Suisun)
— Evaluate how to improve existing process for nutrient
removal w/ minimal upgrades
— Evaluate cost of upgrades considering footprint available
for ranges of treatment (e.g. nit/denit, P- removal, etc.)
1.1
Potential Watershed Permit
• Target issuance is April 2014.
• Elements under consideration:
Participation in studies, monitoring, etc. to further the
science
— RWQCB to require performance based, numeric effluent
limits e.g. total nitrogen limits with possible threshold to
exclude some requirements for Q >10 MGD)
— Division between south and north bays (i.e. Suisun)
— Evaluate how to improve existing process for nutrient
removal w/ minimal upgrades
— Evaluate cost of upgrades considering footprint available
for ranges of treatment (e.g. nit/denit, P- removal, etc:)
Potential Watershed Permit
Target issuance is April 2014.
Elements under consideration:
'Participation in studies, monitoring, etc. to further the
science
— RWQCB to require performance based, numeric effluent
limits (e.g. total nitrogen limits with possible threshold to
exclude some requirements for Q >10 MGD)
— Division between south and north bays (i.e. Suisun)
'Evaluate how to improve existing process for nutrient -----------
removal w/ minimal upgrades Element 1
— Evaluate cost of upgrades considering footprint available
for ranges of treatment (e.g. nit/denit, P- removal, etc.)
a m� �%
Potential Watershed Permit
Target issuance is April 2014.
Elements under consideration:
AParticipation in studies, monitoring, etc. to further the
science
— RWQCB to require performance based, numeric effluent
limits (e.g. total nitrogen limits with possible threshold to
exclude some requirements for Q >10 MGD)
— Division between south and north bays (i.e. Suisun)
Evaluate how to improve existing process for nutrient --- - - - - --
removal w/ minimal upgrades Element 1 '
•--------------- - - - - -=
'Evaluate cost of upgrades considering footprint available
N, for ranges of treatment (e.g. nit/den it, P- removal, etc.)
---------------------
Element 2
Potential Watershed Permit
• Target issuance is April 2014
• Elements under consideration:
'Participation in studies, monitoring, etc. to further the
science
RWQCB to require performance based, numeric effluent
1: limits (e.g. total nitrogen limits with possible threshold to
exclude some requirements for Q >10 MGD)
— Division between south and north bays (i.e. Suisun)
,Evaluate how to improve existing process for nutrient -----------
removal w/ minimal upgrades Element 1
•--------------- - - - - --
''Evaluate cost of upgrades considering footprint available
for ranges of treatment (e.g. nit/denit, P- removal, etc.)
---------- - - - - -- - --
Element 2
M.
It, I