Florida Water Resources Journal Feb 2014 by Florida Water Resources Journal

Editor’s Office and Advertiser Information:

Florida Water Resources Journal 1402 Emerald Lakes Drive Clermont, FL 34711 Phone: 352-241-6006 • Fax: 352-241-6007 Email: Editorial, editor@fwrj.com Display and Classified Advertising, ads@fwrj.com

Business Office: P.O. Box 745, Windermere, FL 34786-0745 Web: http://www.fwrj.com General Manager:

Michael Delaney

Editor:

Rick Harmon

Graphic Design Manager:

Patrick Delaney

Mailing Coordinator:

Buena Vista Publishing

Published by BUENA VISTA PUBLISHING for Florida Water Resources Journal, Inc.

NEWS AND FEATURES 4 22 22 26 32 51 59

President: Patrick Lehman, P.E. (FSAWWA) Peace River/Manasota Regional Water Supply Authority Vice President: Howard Wegis, P.E. (FWEA) Lee County Utilities Treasurer: Rim Bishop (FWPCOA) Seacoast Utility Authority

TECHNICAL ARTICLES 16

The Post Office will not forward your magazine. Do not count on getting the Journal unless you notify us directly of address changes by the 15th of the month preceding the month of issue. Please do not telephone address changes. Email changes to changes@fwrj.com, fax to 352-241-6007, or mail to Florida Water Resources Journal, 1402 Emerald Lakes Drive, Clermont, FL 34711

Membership Questions FSAWWA: Casey Cumiskey – 407-957-8447 or fsawwa.casey@gmail.com FWEA: Karen Wallace, Executive Manager – 407-574-3318 FWPCOA: Darin Bishop – 561-840-0340

Training Questions FSAWWA: Donna Metherall – 407-957-8443 or fsawwa.donna@gmail.com FWPCOA: Shirley Reaves – 321-383-9690

For Other Information DEP Operator Certification: Ron McCulley – 850-245-7500 FSAWWA: Peggy Guingona – 407-957-8448 Florida Water Resources Conference: 888-328-8448 FWPCOA Operators Helping Operators: John Lang – 772-559-0722, e-mail – oho@fwpcoa.org FWEA: Karen Wallace, Executive Manager – 407-574-3318

Websites Florida Water Resources Journal: www.fwrj.com FWPCOA: www.fwpcoa.org FSAWWA: www.fsawwa.org FWEA: www.fwea.org and www.fweauc.org Florida Water Resources Conference: www.fwrc.org Throughout this issue trademark names are used. Rather than place a trademark symbol in every occurrence of a trademarked name, we state we are using the names only in an editorial fashion, and to the benefit of the trademark owner, with no intention of infringement of the trademark. None of the material in this publication necessarily reflects the opinions of the sponsoring organizations. All correspondence received is the property of the Florida Water Resources Journal and is subject to editing. Names are withheld in published letters only for extraordinary reasons. Authors agree to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Florida Water Resources Journal Inc. (FWRJ), its officers, affiliates, directors, advisors, members, representatives, and agents from any and all losses, expenses, third-party claims, liability, damages and costs (including, but not limited to, attorneys’ fees) arising from authors’ infringement of any intellectual property, copyright or trademark, or other right of any person, as applicable under the laws of the State of Florida.

An Innovative and Cost-Effective Solution for Updating Reclaimed Filter Needs—Daniel G. Burden, Clayton McCormack, and Katie Fought

Secretary: Holly Hanson (At Large) ILEX Services Inc., Orlando

Moving?

Minimum Flows and Levels: A Mounting Issue for Water Users—Eric T. Olsen 2013 FSAWWA Fall Conference Recap General Information, Contests Annual Section Awards Water For People Fundraiser, Programs 2013 FSAWWA Awards FSAWWA Drop Savers Contest

Providing Minimum Flows to the Lower Hillsborough River and Sulphur Springs Run While Minimizing Impacts to Tampa’s Potable Water Supply—Brian D. Pickard, David W. Schoster, Mike Pekkala, Kenneth J. Broome, and Bryan T. Veith

Have We Been Here Before?: Hindcasting Lake Levels for Minimum Flows and Levels Evaluations Using a Rainfall Decay Model—Faith Gordu, Brett Goodman, Tony Cunningham, and Adam B. Munson

The Environmental and Economic Benefits of Blending Nanofiltration Concentrate Water With Reclaimed Water as a Method of Disposal—Steve Urich and Brent Weidenhamer

EDUCATION AND TRAINING 9 15 29 43 48 67 68

Florida Water Resources Conference CEU Challenge FWPCOA Training Calendar FSAWWA Training ISA Water/Wastewater and Automatic Controls Symposium FWPCOA State Short School TREEO Center Training

COLUMNS 21 47 48 56 58 66 68

Certification Boulevard—Roy Pelletier FSAWWA Speaking Out—Carl R. Larrabee Jr. Guest Column: Words on Water—Robert Beltran FWEA Focus—Greg Chomic Spotlight on Safety—Doug Prentiss Sr. FWRJ Reader Profile—Melissa Velez C Factor—Jeff Poteet

DEPARTMENTS 69 72 74

Service Directories Classifieds Display Advertiser Index

Volume 66

ON THE COVER: Using alternative sources of supply allows more water to remain in its natural state, such as in the Everglades, home to this watchful alligator. (photo: Randy Brown)

February 2014

Number 2

Florida Water Resources Journal, USPS 069-770, ISSN 0896-1794, is published monthly by Florida Water Resources Journal, Inc., 1402 Emerald Lakes Drive, Clermont, FL 34711, on behalf of the Florida Water & Pollution Control Operator’s Association, Inc.; Florida Section, American Water Works Association; and the Florida Water Environment Association. Members of all three associations receive the publication as a service of their association; $6 of membership dues support the Journal. Subscriptions are otherwise available within the U.S. for $24 per year. Periodicals postage paid at Clermont, FL and additional offices.

POSTMASTER: send address changes to Florida Water Resources Journal, 1402 Emerald Lakes Drive, Clermont, FL 34711

Florida Water Resources Journal • February 2014

Minimum Flows and Levels: A Mounting Issue for Water Users Eric T. Olsen One of the statutory directives of the water management districts in Florida is to establish minimum flows and levels (MFLs) for surface waters and aquifers.1 For surface waters, the statutes define the minimum flow as the limit at which further withdrawals would be significantly harmful to the water resources or ecology of the area.2 For both surface waters and aquifers, the statutes define the minimum level as the limit at which further withdrawals would be significantly harmful to the water resources of the area.3 If a water management district believes a water body or aquifer has the potential to be affected by withdrawals located outside the boundaries of that district, it can request that the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) adopt the MFL by rule, in which case that MFL will apply to all the water management districts. 4 A significance of MFLs is that they are evaluated in reviewing applications for consumptive use permits. The consumptive use permitting rules for all of the water management districts provide that a permit cannot be obtained for a consumptive use of water that violates a MFL unless the permit is obtained as part of a recovery or prevention strategy for that MFL.5 The MFLs are also considered in water supply planning that is conducted by the water management districts.6 Thus, establishment of a MFL can sometimes be a limitation on new or existing uses of water, or can require the expenditure of additional funds for alternative water supplies or impact offsetting measures needed to comply with a MFL or an MFL recovery or prevention strategy.

Annual Priority Lists MFLs are established following MFL priority lists that the water management districts develop annually.7 The priority list sets forth the schedule for adopting MFLs over the next three years. The list is based on importance of a water body to the state or region, existing or potential significant harm to the water resource or ecology of the state or region, and the location of first- and second-magnitude springs on state or federal land. The water management districts send this MFL priority list to FDEP for review and approval.

Determining Significant Harm and Considerations When Establishing Minimum Flows and Levels The statutes provide that the MFL is the point where further withdrawals would be significantly harmful to the water resource or ecology of the area.8 However, the statutes do not define the term “significantly harmful.” When setting a MFL, the statutes require the districts to consider changes and structural alterations to watersheds, surface waters, and aquifers, as well as the constraints such changes or alterations have placed on the hydrology of the affected watershed, surface water, or aquifer.9 In making these considerations, the districts cannot allow significant harm from water withdrawals to occur.10 The statutes additionally direct that MFLs be calculated using the best available information, and where appropriate, may be calculated to reflect seasonal variations.The water management districts also have the discretion to consider and protect nonconsumptive uses. The water management districts must periodically reevaluate MFLs and revise them as needed. The FDEP has also given guidance to the water management districts in establishing MFLs through the Water Resource Implementation Rule, which sets forth the goals, objectives, and guidance for the development and review of rules relating to water resources based on statutory policy and directives.11 This guidance does not include a definition of significant harm, but does provide that the districts must consider “natural seasonal fluctuations in water flows or levels, nonconsumptive uses, and environmental values associated with coastal, estuarine, riverine, spring, aquatic, and wetlands ecology, including: (a) recreation in and on the water; (b) fish and wildlife habitats and the passage of fish; (c) estuarine resources; (d) transfer of detrital material; (e) maintenance of freshwater storage and supply; (f) aesthetic and scenic attributes; (g) filtration and absorption of nutrients and other pollutants; (h) sediment loads; (i) water quality; and (j) navigation.”12

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

This guidance also directs the water management districts to express MFLs as multiple flows or levels defining a minimum hydrologic regime to the extent practical and necessary to establish the limit beyond which further withdrawals would be significantly harmful to the water resources or the ecology of the area.13 However, MFLs need not be expressed as multiple flows or levels if other resource-protection tools are developed and adopted in coordination with the MFL, such as water reservations implemented to protect fish and wildlife or public health and safety, and these other tools provide equivalent or greater protection of the hydrologic regime of the water body.14 The FDEP has adopted the Water Resource Implementation Rule as Chapter 62-40 of the Florida Administrative Code.15 To ensure the technical accuracy of a MFL before it is adopted, the water management districts can voluntarily decide to subject the technical aspects of the MFL to independent scientific peer review16, which means review of the MFL’s technical aspects by independently recognized experts in the fields of hydrology, hydrogeology, limnology, biology, and other scientific disciplines. Persons who would be substantially affected by the proposed MFL can also request this independent scientific peer review. For most MFLs that have been adopted to date, the water management districts have chosen to undertake voluntary peer review, rather than review initiated by a substantially affected person’s request. If independent scientific peer review is requested, the peer review panel must be selected within 60 days, and the panel must submit its report back to the relevant water management district within 120 days after selection. The water management districts must give significant weight to the peer review panel’s findings, and if there is a legal challenge to the MFL, the peer review panel’s report is admissible into evidence.

Examples of Minimum Flows and Levels As the foregoing statute and rule language indicates, setting a MFL involves both technical aspects and policy decisions. One way to see how this is implemented is to examine examples of how the water management districts have established MFLs. Continued on page 6

Continued from page 4 For various reasons, the water management districts have not all followed the same approach to establishing MFLs. For example, the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) has defined the term “significant harm” by rule as “a temporary loss in water resource functions that result from a change in groundwater or surface water hydrology, that takes more than two years to recover, but is considered less severe that serious harm.”17 This SFWMD rule also provides that the specific water resource functions constituting significant harm are to be set forth in the technical documents relating to the MFL for individual water bodies. So, for example, for Lake Istokogpa, the MFL rule from SFWMD provides that significant harm occurs when the surface water level falls below 36.5 ft National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD) for 20 weeks (140 days) or longer within a calendar year, or more frequently than every four years.18 This prolonged low level impacts the littoral zone wetlands, wildlife, recreation, and navigation opportunities, and the local economy, according to the SFWMD technical document for this MFL. In comparison, the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) has not defined the term “significant harm” by rule. However, according to a technical document describing the process SJRWMD employs in setting MFLs, it considers significant harm to occur to a surface water body when there are unacceptable long-term ecosystem structure changes (e.g., a down-slope shift in a wetland community’s position), or where there is a long-term unacceptable decline of important ecosystem functions (e.g., not maintaining sufficient warm-water habitat in a spring run for manatees during winter), and these changes are caused by anthropogenic withdrawals.19 In some cases, SJRWMD also uses multiple flows and levels with associated durations and return intervals for some of its MFL water bodies; for example, the MFLs for the Wekiva River are shown in Table 1. Compliance with this MFL means demonstrating that a proposed withdrawal will not lower the various levels or reduce the various flows to the point at which the identified duration is shorter or the return interval occurs less frequently. As another example, the Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) has chosen different means of defining significant

harm depending upon the aquifer or water body for which an MFL is established. Consider, for example, the MFLs for various lakes set forth in rule 40D-8.624, Florida Administrative Code. In summary, this rule divides these lakes into categories 1, 2, and 3. Category 1 lakes are those with fringing cypress wetlands greater than 0.5 acres in size where structural alterations have not prevented the historic P50 water level from equaling or rising above an elevation that is 1.8 ft below the normal pool of the cypress swamp. Category 2 lakes are similar, except that they have been structurally altered so that the historic P50 elevation21 is unable to rise above 1.8 ft below the normal pool elevation, but the fringing cypress wetlands remain viable despite the structural alteration. For category 1 and 2 lakes, the MFL is set by developing a desired median lake stage that may be expected to preserve ecological integrity of the lake-fringing cypress wetlands. For category 1 lakes, significant harm occurs when the water elevation drops more than 1.8 ft below the normal pool elevation; for category 2 lakes, significant harm occurs when the water elevation drops below the historic P50 elevation. Category 3 lakes are those without fringing cypress wetlands or with cypress wetlands less than 0.5 acres in size. For category 3 lakes, SWFWMD considers the following six standards in determining the point at which significant harm occurs: dock-use, aesthetics, species richness, basin connectivity, recreation/water skiing, and lake mixing. According to the SWFWMD technical document for these MFLs, the dock-use standard is intended to ensure sufficient water depth at the end of existing docks to permit mooring of boats and prevent adverse impacts to bottom-dwelling plants and animals caused by boat operation. The aesthetics standard is intended to limit potential change in aesthetic values associated with the median lake stage from diminishing beyond the values associated with normal low-lake level. The species richness standard is intended to prevent a decline in the number of bird species occurring or utilizing a lake. The basin connectivity standard is intended to protect surface water connections between lake basins or among sub-basins within lake basins to allow for movement of aquatic biota, such as fish, and support recreational lake use. The lake mixing standard is intended to prevent significant changes in the

Table 1.

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

wind-driven mixing of the lake water column and sediment resuspension. Finally, the recreation/skiing standard is the lowest elevation containing an area suitable for water skiing, which is defined as a five-ft-deep ski corridor delineated either as a circular area with a radius of 418 ft or a rectangular or polygonal ski area 200 ft in width and 2,000 ft in length. After considering these standards, the category 3 lake minimum level is the elevation corresponding to the most conservative (meaning highest) standard, except when that result is an elevation above the historic P50, in which case, the minimum level is the historic P50 elevation.

Recovery and Prevention Strategies If a water body is below its established MFL, the water management district must expeditiously develop and implement a strategy to recover the water body to the MFL as soon as practicable.22 If a water body is projected to fall below its established MFL within the next 20 years, the water management district must expeditiously develop and implement a strategy to prevent the water body from falling below its established MFL. The MFL recovery or prevention strategy must include a phasing or timetable to allow for the provision of sufficient water supplies for existing and projected water users, including alternative water supplies and new conservation or efficiency measures that are concurrent, and to the extent practicable, to offset any reductions in permitted withdrawals. If a MFL is not being met at the time it is adopted, the recovery or prevention strategy must be adopted contemporaneously with the MFL unless the MFL is a revision to an existing MFL and the revised MFL is less constraining than the original.23 The MFL recovery and prevention strategy is also included in the regional water supply plans adopted by the water management districts.24 Several water management districts have adopted MFL recovery and prevention strategies into their consumptive use permitting programs, such as those adopted for the Southern Water Use Caution Area within the SWFWMD and those adopted for the Everglades, Lake Okeechobee, and the Caloosahatchee River in the SFWMD.25 The adopted recovery and prevention strategies are too complex and lengthy for a detailed discussion here, but they involve limitations on new groundwater or surface water withdrawals, offsetting impacts to the MFLs, means for reducing cumulative groundwater pumping over time, and transition to new water sources. Complying with a recovery or prevention strategy can be a significant expense for water users and adds complexity to the consumptive use permitting process. Continued on page 8

References

Continued from page 6

Fla. Stat. §373.042. Id. 9 Fla. Stat. §373.0421(1)(a). 10 Id. 11 Fla. Stat. §§373.019(25), 373.036(1)(d). 12 Fla. Admin. Code R. 62-40.473(1) (2013). 13 Fla. Admin. Code R. 62-40.473(2) (2013). 14 Id. 15 Fla. Admin. Code R. 62-40.473 (2013). 16 Fla. Stat. §373.042(5). 17 Fla. Admin. Code R. 40E-8.021(31). 18 Fla. Admin. Code R. 40E-8.351. 19 Neubaurer et al., Minimum Flows and Levels Method of the St. Johns River Water Management District, Florida, USA, 42 ENVTL. MNGMT. 1101 (2008). 20 Fla. Admin. Code R. 40C-8.031. 21 The historic P50 elevation is defined as the elevation that the lake surface is expected to equal or exceed 50 percent of the time on a long-term basis. 22 Fla. Stat. §373.0421(2). 23 Fla. Admin. Code R. 62-40.473(5)(a). 24 Fla. Stat. §373.709. 25 For SFWMD, see rule 40E-8.421, Florida Administrative Code. 8

Conclusion Establishing and implementing MFLs present technical, policy, and regulatory challenges. Determining when significant harm can occur involves both technical and policy considerations. If a MFL is not being met or projected not to be met, the water management districts must develop recovery and prevention strategies that find a feasible means for recovering the MFL or preventing the MFL violation, while containing a timetable to phase into new water supplies. All or portions of those recovery and prevention strategies can be adopted into the water management district’s consumptive use permitting program, adding complexity and difficulty to obtaining permits. As the water management districts adopt more MFLs, the associated regulatory issues are affecting more water users throughout more areas of the state. All water users located within an area potentially affected by a MFL being established by a water management district should pay close attention to the MFL development to ensure that the MFL is technically sound, and that the MFL and any associated recovery or prevention strategy meets statutory requirements.

Fla. Stat. §373.042(1). The statutes also exempt certain water bodies from needing MFLs. These exemptions include surface water bodies less than 25 acres in size unless such water body, individually or cumulatively with other water bodies, has significant economic, environmental, or hydrological value. These exemptions also include surface water bodies constructed before permitting, or with a permit, or as part of a mine reclamation plan unless that water body is of significant hydrologic value or is an essential water resource element. Also exempt are water bodies that no longer serve historic hydrologic functions and for which restoration to historic condition is not possible. However, none of these exclusions are applicable inside the Everglades Protection Area. Fla. Stat. §373.0421. 2 Fla. Stat. §373.042(1)(a). 3 Fla. Stat. §373.042(1)(b). The statutes do not explain why “ecology of the area” is a consideration for minimum flows but not for minimum levels. 4 Fla. Stat. §373.042. 5 See e.g. Fla. Admin. Code RR. 40C2.041(4)(l), 40E-2.301(1)(i) (2013). 6 Fla. Stat. §373.709.

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Eric T. Olsen is an attorney with Hopping Green & Sams P.A. in Tallahassee.

Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ February 2014

February 2014 â&#x20AC;˘ Florida Water Resources Journal

Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ February 2014

February 2014 â&#x20AC;˘ Florida Water Resources Journal

Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ February 2014

February 2014 â&#x20AC;˘ Florida Water Resources Journal

Operators: Take the CEU Challenge! Members of the Florida Water & Pollution Control Association (FWPCOA) may earn continuing education units through the CEU Challenge! Answer the questions published on this page, based on the technical articles in this month’s issue. Circle the letter of each correct answer. There is only one correct answer to each question! Answer 80 percent of the questions on any article correctly to earn 0.1 CEU for your license. Retests are available. This month’s editorial theme is Alternative Sources for Water Supply .

Look above each set of questions to see if it is for water operators (DW), distribution system operators (DS), or wastewater operators (WW). Mail the completed page (or a photocopy) to: Florida Environmental Professionals Training, P.O. Box 33119, Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33420-3119. Enclose $15 for each set of questions you choose to answer (make checks payable to FWPCOA). You MUST be an FWPCOA member before you can submit your answers!

___________________________________________ SUBSCRIBER NAME (please print)

Article 1 ________________________________________ LICENSE NUMBER for Which CEUs Should Be Awarded

Article 2 ________________________________________ LICENSE NUMBER for Which CEUs Should Be Awarded

If paying by credit card, fax to (561) 625-4858 providing the following information:

Earn CEUs by answering questions from previous Journal issues!

___________________________________________

Contact FWPCOA at membership@fwpcoa.org or at 561-840-0340. Articles from past issues can be viewed on the Journal website, www.fwrj.com.

___________________________________________

The Environmental and Economic Benefits of Blending Nanofiltration Concentrate Water with Reclaimed Water as a Method of Disposal Steve Urich and Brent Weidenhamer

(Credit Card Number)

(Expiration Date)

An Innovative and Cost-Effective Solution for Updating Reclaimed Filter Needs Daniel G. Burden, Clayton McCormack, and Katie Fought (Article 2: CEU = 0.1 WW}

(Article 1: CEU = 0.1 WW)

1. The SUA decided to change nanofiltration (NF) concentrate butterfly valve materials prior to installation because a. originally selected materials could not be delivered in a timely manner. b. 16-in. stainless steel butterfly valves were not available. c. of concern regarding the actuator mechanism. d. NF concentrate would deteriorate epoxy coating. 2. What is the proposed initial NF concentrate:reclaimed water ratio? a. 1:1 b. 1:3.5 c. 1:5 d. 5:1 3. The alternative disposal for NF concentrate will be a. the PGA Wastewater Treatment Plant deep injection well. b. the Hood Road Water Treatment Plant deep injection well. c. the wastewater collection system. d. evaporation/ercolation ponds. 4. As the NF membranes age, NF concentrate is expected to a. become less concentrated. b. become more concentrated. c. remain the same concentration. d. increase in chloride concentration, decrease in total dissolved solids. 5. Which of the following supplemental reclaimed water systems delivers peak demand water to the wastewater collection system? a. Frenchman’s Reserve b. The Isles c. MacArthur Center d. C-17 Canal

1. The filter media used in the units selected for this retrofit was a. sand. b. charcoal. c. cloth. d. fiberglass. 2. The principal factor in selecting which filter product was used for the retrofit was a. it had to fit within the existing tankage. b. improvement in reclaimed water quality. c. the equipment had to be fully enclosed to minimize visual impact. d. the initial purchase price. 3. Average filtered carbonaneous biochemical oxygen demand (CBOD5) and total suspended solids (TSS) for the period 1998–2012 have both been between ___ mg/l. a. 1-4 b. 2-4 c. 3-5 d. 4-6 4. In the initial phase of this project, the Utility elected to retrofit ______ existing upflow filters. a. two b. three c. four d. five 5. The replacement units were installed a. partially submerged, vertically mounted. b. fully submerged, horizontally mounted. c. partially submerged, vertically mounted. d. fully submerged, vertically mounted.

Florida Water Resources Journal • February 2014

F W R J

An Innovative and Cost-Effective Solution for Updating Reclaimed Filter Needs Daniel G. Burden, Clayton McCormack, and Katie Fought alm Bay is located in east central Florida and situated in the southern portion of Brevard County. The city occupies approximately 97 sq mi, with a current population of over 104,000. The city’s wastewater treatment facilities consist of two individually permitted treatment plants located adjacent to each other on Troutman Boulevard. The City of Palm Bay Utilities Department (Utility) operates a wastewater treatment plant (WWTP), which has a permitted capacity of 4 mil gal per day (mgd) and a water reclamation facility (WRF) that has a permitted capacity of 1.2 mgd. The WWTP, which was acquired from General Development Utilities Inc. in 1992, is a 4-mgd conventional activated sludge treatment plant with effluent disposal via a 5-mgd deep injection well (DIW) . The sidestream processes included aerobic digestion, sludge dewatering, and sludge disposal via land application. The WRF is a 1.2-mgd extended aeration activated sludge facility with effluent filtration, followed by high-level disinfection, on-site effluent, and reclaimed water storage. Secondary effluent from the WWTP is transferred to the WRF tertiary treatment system to produce reclaimed water, which the Utility sells to its reclaimed water customers. Table 1 shows permitted capacity information for the WWTP, the WRF, the reuse system, and the facility’s DIW.

Major Operational Components Wastewater Treatment Plant The WWTP is a conventional activated sludge treatment plant that includes pretreatment (screening and grit removal), aeration, and secondary clarification. This facility includes one aeration basin, which has a total

volume of approximately 1.3 mil gal (MG). Oxygen transfer and mixing for the aeration basin is accomplished with two 100-horsepower surface mechanical aerators. Hydraulic detention in the aeration basin is approximately 8 hours at the design flow rate of 4 mgd. Effluent from the aeration basin overflows into an adjustable effluent weir and flows by gravity into a secondary clarifier. The clarifier is a 100-ft diameter center feed unit, with a sidewater depth of 13.5 ft. The clarifier has a surface area of 9,500 sq ft (ft2) and a design overflow rate (average daily flow) of approximately 420 gal per min per sq ft (gpm/ft2). From the secondary clarifier, effluent flows by gravity to the DIW pump station. Prior to discharge into the pump station, the clarified effluent can receive basic disinfection, although it is not required. A transfer pumping station, installed in 1993, is used to pump effluent across the street to either the DIW or the tertiary treatment process at the WRF for reuse. During periods of peak flow, the station operates under automatic float control and pumps effluent directly to the tertiary filters at the WRF. At nonpeak flow times, the station is manually de-energized and all effluent flow is sent to the DIW. Should the injection well be shut down for any length of time (e.g., during mechanical integrity testing), two effluent holding ponds are located on the main WWTP site and are available for effluent storage (capacity = 5.1 MG). The ponds can be operated in parallel or in series. In addition to raw wastewater from the collection system, the WWTP also treats brine (concentrate) waste from the Utility’s reverse osmosis (RO) water treatment plant, which is located adjacent to the WWTP. Due to the nature of the RO water treatment process, the brine is free of suspended solids and organics

Table 1. Permitted Facility Capacities

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Daniel G. Burden, P.E., Ph.D., is senior associate and Clayton McCormack, P.E., is project manager with Wade Trim Inc. in Palm Bay. Katie Fought, P.E., is engineering and plant operations division manager with City of Palm Bay Utilities Department.

and only contributes a hydraulic load to the WWTP. Water Reclamation Facility The Utility’s water reclamation facility is permitted to treat 1.2 mgd on an annual average daily flow basis. This facility is an extended aeration activated sludge facility that disposes of tertiary effluent to a nonrestricted public access reuse system. Components of the liquid train treatment process include pretreatment (screening), aeration, secondary clarification, filtration, and high-level disinfection. A process flow schematic for the water reclamation facility is presented in Figure 1. Raw wastewater received at the WRF is pumped from lift stations in the collection and transmission system, which are manifolded into the plant pretreatment structure. Screening facilities at the WRF consist of one channel grinder and one manually cleaned bar rack. The screened wastewater passes into a flow splitter box that splits flow between the two treatment plants and directs flows to an online surge tank. From the splitter box, wastewater flows by gravity to the aeration basin. The biological process at the WRF is operated in the extended aeration mode with a design capacity of 1.2 mgd. Mixed liquor from the aeration basin flows by gravity to the 60-ft diameter secondary clarifier, which has a sidewater depth of 10.79 ft. The WRF was originally designed with four DynaSand® upflow sand filters, which were gravity-fed from the plant’s secondary clarifiers, with flow distributed to each filter via a common influent channel. These filters were rated for an average daily flow of 0.67 mgd or 470 gpm (total flow = 2.68 mgd). The interior dimensions of each filter tank are 12.7 ft long by 8.2 ft wide, with an approximate depth of 15 ft.

Filtered effluent flows by gravity to the chlorine contact chamber (CCC), which consists of two parallel basins, each with a volume of approximately 13,600 gal. Based on a required contact time of 15 minutes, the CCC has a total capacity of 2.65 mgd, but is permitted to treat 2.3 mgd. Liquid sodium hypochlorite is injected into the effluent flow upstream of the CCC to provide the necessary disinfection. Valving also allows for injection of sodium hypochlorite upstream of the filter units to prevent algal growth. Chlorinated effluent from the CCC flows over a V-notch weir into the wet well at the transfer pump station. Two effluent transfer pumps, each rated at 1,850 gpm, pump chlorinated effluent to either the 1-MG reclaimed water storage tank or the 1.5-MG effluent tank. Reclaimed water is pumped from the holding tank to the reuse irrigation distribution systems and disposal sites. In December 2010, the Utility inactivated the primary and secondary treatment processes of the WRF in an effort to consolidate its process treatment (due to a lower capacity demand) and to reduce plantwide energy consumption. Since that time, secondary effluent from the WWTP has been transferred directly to the WRF tertiary treatment system to produce reclaimed water. Public Access Reuse System Following filtration and chlorination, plant effluent is pumped to either a 1.5-MG water tank or a 1-MG reclaimed water storage tank. The reclaimed water pump station at the WRF consists of three high-service pumps (two vertical can pumps each with variable frequency drives and one constant speed horizontal splitcase pump) and a 3,000-gal hydropneumatic tank. This pump station has a firm capacity of 3,000 gpm at a design operating pressure range of 74 to 82 pounds per sq in. (psi). Normal operating pressure ranges from 60 to 65 psi. Users of the reclaimed water transmission system are summarized in Table 2.

Figure 1. Process Flow Schematic for the Palm Bay Water Reclamation Facility

Table 2. Palm Bay Utilities Reclaimed Water Users

New Filtration Needs In 2007, the Utility determined that replacement of the existing four upflow sand filters was needed due to maintenance concerns with the existing upflow sand filters and to provide more capacity for its reclaimed water system based on projected future flows. It was determined that a significant cost savings could be realized if the structural basins (or tankage that housed the existing filters) could be utilized in a rehabilitation of the filtration system. With this in mind, it was also determined that three filters would require rehabil-

itation (keeping two filters in service from a reliability standpoint), while the fourth filter bank could be used as an equipment room or pump room. Anticipated future peak flows for the facilities were estimated to be 4.4 mgd. Based on

the regulatory definition of “reliability,” new filters would need to be sized to pass 75 percent of the peak day flow, with the largest unit out of service. Therefore, any filter redesign would need to accommodate one-half of 3.3 Continued on page 18

Florida Water Resources Journal • February 2014

Continued from page 17 mgd (75 percent of 4.4 mgd) or 1.65 mgd to accommodate future growth. Hydraulic Requirement As previously mentioned, a primary goal for the undertaking of this filter retrofit project was to utilize the tankage of the existing upflow sand filters to save capital costs, as well as reduce overall downtime for construction. To accomplish this objective, maintaining the existing hydraulic profile was a primary objective when rehabilitating only a portion of the equipment (in the case of a single filter unit), while keeping the remaining units in service as originally designed. To maintain the operation of the existing upflow sand filters with the proposed new filter equipment, the new equipment was to be constructed within the existing tankage. The overall dimensions of the new filter equipment would also need to allow for piping clearances, maintenance, etc. Ideally, the new filter unit would need to operate in a submerged or partially submerged state to maintain the flow as close to the original hydraulic profile as possible, with minimal disruptions or differences in operation of the existing filter units. Operating the new filter(s) in a submerged state would also eliminate any additional maintenance of an upgraded filter unit with an open-top. Filter Evaluations Three filter manufacturers were evaluated for this upgrade project: Kruger, Nova Water Technologies (Nova), and Aqua-Aerobic Systems (Aqua-Aerobic). At the time of the evalu-

ation, only two manufacturers (Aqua-Aerobic and Kruger) had multiple installations in Florida and across the United States, while the third manufacturer (Nova) had a verifiable track record of installations in Europe, with only one project under construction in the U.S. (Note: Nova has since conducted pilot studies that demonstrate compliance with California Title 22 requirements at hydraulic loading rates ranging from 6 to16 gpm/ft2). The Kruger/Hydrotech Discfilter has been used in upgrading DynaSand® filters in the past; however, the filter had not been used to retrofit one filter while the remaining filters stay in service. Flows through the Kruger filter are done using an “inside-out” stream, which is where flow enters the center of the filter system and flows outwards through the fine mesh screens. Evaluation of the Kruger filter indicated that the stainless steel tankage would not fit into the existing tankage while maintaining the existing hydraulic profile. To accommodate these requirements would require extensive tank structural modifications to raise the floor elevation (of the existing tankage). Similar to the Kruger unit, the Nova unit is a “canned” unit, where the filter disks are inside a stainless steel tank and water flows through the disks and out a side discharge port. The submerged unit submitted by the manufacturer and evaluated as part of this project had a design capacity of 800 gpm. Dimension-wise, the 800 gpm unit’s overall width (8.6 ft) was too wide to fit into the existing sand filter tank structure. To meet flow capacity for the future, a larger Nova unit sized at 1,190 gpm would be required; however, the overall length of this unit

Figure 2. Hydraulic Profile for Filter Configuration at Palm Bay Utilities Water Reclamation Facility

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

was approximately one-half-ft larger than the available tank length. Similar to the Kruger unit, because of the need to maintain the existing hydraulic profile and the required structural modifications needed to allow the filter unit to be used with the existing tankage, this unit was not considered for this application. Aqua-Aerobic manufactures the AquaDisk® tertiary filter unit, which consists of a series of vertically mounted cloth media disks with an automatic backwash system. The AquaDisk® filter system was the only filter unit that could be installed directly into the existing filter concrete basin and operate in a fully submerged environment. With the filters submerged, water flows through the cloth media into a central collection chamber and is conveyed out of the filter system. Installing the disk filters in a submerged state provided a major advantage over the other units since the hydraulic profile of the existing filter bank can be maintained. Furthermore, the structural modifications required for each tank were minimal, since raising the tank floor would lead to more efficient flow-through. Figure 2 illustrates the hydraulic profile for both average daily flow and peak-hour flow rates (shown in parentheses) for three primary sections: the influent channel, the filter basin itself, and the effluent channel (prior to discharge to the chlorine contact basin). Installing the Aqua-Aerobic disk filters in a submerged state was advantageous since it allowed for maintaining the hydraulic profile of the existing filter bank. As a result, no modification of the influent channel would be required, with the exception of installing weir boxes on the inside face of the influent channel. These weir boxes allow for even flow distribution among the filters and avoid any hydraulic overloading on a single filter unit. For this application, the future design could be accomplished using the Aqua-Aerobic disk filters. A six-disk filter unit will have a design capacity of 1.5 mgd, with each filter having a flow rating of 0.25 mgd. Peak-hour flow rating for the six-disk unit is 3 mgd. Total filter area provided with two six-disk units is approximately 646 ft2. Based on the future flows requirements previously identified, three filter basins retrofitted with the AquaDisk® units (six disks each) would provide an average daily flow capacity of 4.5 mgd, with a firm peak hourly flow capacity of 6 mgd. The average hydraulic loading rate of the filters was estimated to equal 3.25 gpm/ft2 on an average daily flow basis (1.5 mgd per filter). The maximum hydraulic loading rate was estimated to equal 6.5 gpm/ft2 on a peak hourly flow rate (3 mgd per filter). In summary, the Aqua-Aerobic equipment was selected to be utilized with the existing filtration units for the following reasons:

1. The equipment could be retrofitted into the existing filter basins with minimal structural or piping modifications. 2. Minimal changes were needed to the upstream flow scheme with the installation of four weir boxes, and no significant costs were involved with modification of the influent channel. 3. The downstream hydraulics of the existing filters would not be impacted. 4. The Aqua-Aerobic filters have more filter surface area per disk; therefore, future design flow needs could be accommodated with this expansion project.

Table 3. Annual Flow (Annual Average Daily Flows) Summary: 2002-2012

Filter Upgrade Project Initially, the Utility opted for retrofitting only two of the four existing upflow sand filters, whereby the third filter unit would be retrofitted at a future date. In the interim, the Utility retained the use of one of the remaining DynaSand® upflow sand filters for redundancy. The DynaSand® filter has a rated capacity of 0.67 mgd at a filtration rate of 4.55 gpm/ft2 and can be removed and replaced with another disc filter unit to meet future flow conditions. Based on this decision, the Utility proceeded with the negotiation of pricing directly with Aqua-Aerobic for two AquaDisk® cloth media filters and completed a prepurchase of the equipment. A purchase order for the equipment was issued in January 2008. A permit application was submitted in October 2007 to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) to replace the existing upflow sand filters with two AquaDisk® cloth media filters. The FDEP issued a notice of intent in December 2007 and a permit for the project was issued in January 2008. Construction of the project was initiated in spring 2009 and completed in October of that year. Construction activities consisted of demolishing the two existing sand filter units, removing the media, and retrofitting the filters with two units of fully submerged, vertically mounted cloth media filter disk filter (AquaDisk®), each having an automatically operated vacuum backwash. Each new unit is capable of operating at an average flow of 1.5 mgd and a peak hourly flow rate of 3 mgd.

Loading Data and Water Quality Analysis A summary of monthly flow data for both the WWTP and the WRF is presented in Table 3 for the period of record from January through December 2012. Monthly average daily flows (MADF), three-month average daily flows (TMADF), and annual average daily flows (AADF) are reported for influent, effluent reuse,

Figure 3. Combined Influent Flows (2002–2012): Annual Average Daily Flows and Monthly Average Daily Flows

and effluent disposal to the DIW. Combined influent flows over the 11-year period ranged from 2.34 to 4.34 mgd on a maximum average daily flow basis, and from 2.41 to 3.86 mgd on a three-month average daily flow basis. Combined influent monthly flow data for the WWTP and the WRF are illustrated in Figure

3. The highest monthly flows at the facilities were experienced in 2007 (3.5 mgd) and have since leveled out at around 3.0 mgd (2010 -2012). On an annual average basis, carbonaneous biochemical oxygen demand (CBOD5) loading at the WRF has ranged from 854 to Continued on page 20

Florida Water Resources Journal • February 2014

Continued from page 19 1,471 lbs/day, with an overall average of approximately 1,270 lbs/day. Total suspended solids (TSS) ranged from approximately 600 to 1,200 lbs/day, averaging 970 lbs/day over the same nine-year period of record (2002-2012). Both CBOD5 and TSS loadings at the WRF during this period were approximately 50 percent of the design loading rates for this treatment facility (2,502 lbs/day). Figure 4 presents effluent CBOD5 and TSS water quality data measured after filtration at the WRF for a 15-year period of record (19982012). As illustrated in the graphic, TSS has remained consistently below 5 mg/L for the observed data period. Average filtered effluent TSS concentrations over the 15-year period of record were less than 2 mg/L. Likewise, filtered effluent water quality for CBOD5 ranged from 1 to 10 mg/L for the majority of the same period

of monitoring. Average filtered effluent CBOD5 at the WRF during this period was 3.1 mg/L.

Capital Costs Capital costs for this project consisted of three primary components: (1) engineering design, permitting, and construction services; (2) direct purchase by the Utility of the filter treatment equipment unit; and (3) contractor costs associated with construction and installation of the filter units. The direct purchase of the AquaDisk® cloth media filters equipment included freight and supervision services during the contractor’s installation of the units. Major components included with this direct purchase were: Two filter units consisting of six disks per unit, with a total filter area of 646 ft. Influent flow assemblies with 304 stainless

steel influent level weir and flow separation baffles. Effluent flow assemblies consisting of 304 stainless steel effluent weir/flow separation baffles. Centertube and drive system assemblies. Backwash system assemblies, backwash pumps, and backwash valves. Ultrasonic transceiver and transducer assemblies. Ethernet compatible control panel package with soft starts for pumps and drive motor.

Contractor costs for the project included all material, labor, and equipment associated with the following key elements for construction of the project: Demolition of the existing filter. Removal of the existing filter sand media. Removal of the existing concrete hoppers. Wall forming and concrete pour required for new filter units. Installation of two six-disc cloth media Aqua-Aerobic filter units. Electrical and programmable logic controller (PLC) programming. Equipment startup and commissioning. Several pieces of heavy equipment were provided for construction of the project, including a vac truck and crane. Additional fabrication work was also commissioned for the walkways needed on each filter basin. Total cost for the filter rehabilitation project was approximately $526,000, which included engineering and permitting for the project. Project costs are summarized in Table 5.

Conclusion

Figure 4. Water Reclamation Facility Effluent: Carbonaneous Biochemical Oxygen Demand and Total Suspended Solids Data (1998–2012) Table 5. Palm Bay Utilities Filter Rehabilitation Project Costs

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

This filter rehabilitation project realized economical savings, while providing the Utility and its reclaimed water customers with overall improved filtration at the water reclamation facility in Palm Bay. The primary cost savings were realized from the utilization of the existing filtration tankage and the ability to maintain the existing hydraulic profile through the treatment plant facility without making any significant structural modifications at the treatment plant facility. The new filter units have also proved to have fewer maintenance issues than were previously experienced by Utility staff with the upflow sand filters. Use of the AquaDisk® filters has resulted in both an economical and environmental savings to the City as a consequence of less water and energy used during backwashing. When future demands for wastewater treatment and resulting reclaimed water increase, the City plans to convert the remaining upflow sand filter for the needed additional capacity.

Certification Boulevard Test Your Knowledge of Water Supply and Other Miscellaneous Topics

Roy Pelletier 1. What is the term used to describe the removal of volatile odor producing compounds through the process of forcing air up against a column of water flowing down? A. Destratification B. Reaeration C. Degasification D. Diversion 2. What is the flow rate in cubic ft per second (cfs) of a 2.25 mgd stream of water? A. 1.55 cfs B. 8.34 cfs C. 3.48 cfs D. 92.84 cfs 3. What is the term used to describe bacteria, viruses, or other organisms capable of causing disease? A. Pathogenic B. Nonpathogenic C. Facultative D. Coliform

4. Given the following data, calculate the approximate hydraulic horsepower (HP) delivered by this pump: • Flow is 675 gal per min (gpm) • TDH is 95 ft A. 13.5 HP B. 16.2 HP C. 25 HP D. 7.5 HP 5. Which minerals in groundwater are the primary causes of hard water? A. Calcium and limestone B. Calcium and magnesium C. Iron and manganese D. Calcium and iron 6. Which repair kit is designed for use with chlorine ton containers? A. "A" kit B. "B" kit C. "C" kit D. None of the above. 7. What is the weight relationship of chlorine liquid as compared to water? A. Water weighs more than liquid chlorine. B. Liquid chlorine weighs 2.5 times more than water. C. Water weighs 1.5 times more than liquid chlorine. D. Liquid chlorine weighs 1.5 times more than water.

LOOKING FOR ANSWERS? Check the Archives

Are you new to the water and wastewater field? Want to boost your knowledge about topics youʼll face each day as a water/waste-water professional? All past editions of Certification Boulevard through the year 2000 are

available on the Florida Water Environment Associationʼs website at www.fwea.org. Click the “Site Map” button on the home page, then scroll down to the Certification Boulevard Archives, located below the Operations Research Committee.

8. What will the pressure gauge read on the suction of a pump if the pump is located at floor elevation of the tank and the tank has 25 ft of static water level? A. About 58 psi. B. About 9.5 psi. C. About 11 psi. D. About 17 psi. 9. Which polymer is used as a coagulant chemical because it has a positive charge that will neutralize the negative charge that is present with solids? A. Cationic B. Anionic C. Nonionic D. Polyionic 10. Which has a lower pH: sodium hydroxide or aluminum sulfate? A. Aluminum sulfate B. Sodium hydroxide C. They are both the same. Answers on page 74

SEND US YOUR QUESTIONS Readers are welcome to submit questions or exercises on water or wastewater treatment plant operations for publication in Certification Boulevard. Send your question (with the answer) or your exercise (with the solution) by email to roy.pelletier@cityoforlando.net, or by mail to: Roy Pelletier Wastewater Project Consultant City of Orlando Public Works Department Environmental Services Wastewater Division 5100 L.B. McLeod Road Orlando, FL 32811 407-716-2971

Florida Water Resources Journal • February 2014

RECAP OF 2013 FSAWWA CONFERENCE

2013 FSAW WA CONFERENCE: ANOTHER SUCCESSFUL EVENT! cluded Jim Chaffee, AWWA president, and Jeff Nash, the Association’s vice president. The keynote speaker was John Young, who recently retired as president of the American Water Works Company and is currently the court-appointed receiver of the Alabama Environmental Services Department in Jefferson County. The Florida Section of the American Water Works Association (AWWA) held its fall conference December 1-5 at the Omni Orlando Resort at ChampionsGate. The yearly event, which attracted more than 1350 people, included water utility executives and managers, engineers, educators, manufacturers, consultants, operators, and others from the water profession. There were plenty of opportunities to meet old colleagues and make new friends at the continental breakfasts, lunches, meet-and-greet receptions, golf tournament, and the Poker Night and Happy Hour. Successful first-time events were the opening general session and a duck race that was held in the hotel's indoor river to raise funds for Water For People.

Opening General Session The first-time opening general session helped to set the tone for the conference and brought everyone together to celebrate the section. The session focused on infrastructure management and the financing of rehabilitation and replacements projects, and speakers in-

Technical Program This year’s program featured workshops on leadership in the water industry, future trends in leadership development, water distribution, and the differences and drivers for alternative delivery; technical sessions on various water industry topics, including innovations in membrane technology, instrumentation and automation, desalination, high-density polyethylene pipe applications, and water supply strategies; and a poster session.

Exhibits The exhibit hall, which had 180 booth spaces, gave attendees another chance to network and learn about the latest and most innovative products and services in the water industry. Company personnel were available each day to help attendees pick the products that will help them solve their problems and meet future challenges.

Meetings Several councils, divisions, and committees held meetings during the conference,

Carl R. Larrabee, Jr. poses with the FSAWWA staff, who helped organize the conference.

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

which is where the real work of the section gets done. There’s a group for almost every water topic. Meetings are also held at other section events throughout the year.

Water Summit The fifth annual Florida 2030 Water Summit topic was "Should Direct Potable Reuse Be a Part of Florida's Water Future?" Water sustainability has been the focus of the Florida 2030 initiative since its inception. The summit was open to all attendees and those at the session were able to participate in the discussions.

Awards The section’s annual business luncheon and awards ceremony celebrated the current roster of statewide officers and welcomed the new officers for 2014. Awards were also given for the top programs and to the outstanding individuals in the water field. See pages 26-31 for award recipients.

Contests Several contests, with both team and individual competitors, were held. Water Bowl The University of Central Florida was the winner of the 2013 Young Professionals Water Bowl. The winning team consisted of Erica LaBerge, Andrea Cumming, and David Yonge. The university provided two teams to compete for the title in a best-of-seven competition format. The contest is modeled after the classic “College Bowl” television quiz show. Team members were asked questions related to the water industry, encompassing water chemistry, operations, and design of treatment systems. The event was moderated by Greg Taylor (Region III chair), with Tyler Tedcastle (FSAWWA Young Professionals Committee chair) and Josenrique Cueto (FSAWWA Young Professionals Committee vice chair) serving as judges. Poster Contest Samantha Jeffery, E.I., from the University Continued on page 24

Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ February 2014

RECAP OF 2013 FSAWWA CONFERENCE Continued from page 22 of Central Florida, was the Fresh Ideas Poster Contest winner. She presented her poster entitled, “Evaluation of the Total Trihalomethane Formation Potential of Reverse Osmosis and Nanofiltration Permeate Blends.” By winning the competition, Jeffery receives a trip to ACE14, AWWA’s annual conference and exposition, to be held in June in Boston, to compete with contest winners from around North America. Meter Madness Bruce Miller with Orlando Utilities Commission was the champion for the 2013 contest. Meter Madness is a competition where participants receive a bucket of meter parts for a specific water meter to assemble against the clock. To make is more interesting, three to six miscellaneous parts are included in the bucket. After assembly, the meter must work correctly and not leak.

The contest has been held for several years and is open to anyone in the water industry. All contestants are given two opportunities to create their best time in the preliminary rounds, followed by semi-finals and the championship round with the two fastest competitors. The winner receives a cash prize to be used toward travel and accommodations for attendance in Boston at ACE14. Other contestants participating were Brian Rodriguez, with FKAA, and John Parsons, with City of St. Cloud.

Ductile Iron Tap Winners First Place: St. Cloud Soldiers, City of St. Cloud (Josh McDaniel, Matt Baker, Kaylon Bass, and Nick Emmons) Second Place: Orange County Utilities Third Place: Bonita Springs Utilities Inc.

Tapping Contests Using skill and dexterity, as well as speed, teams of four compete for the fastest time while they perform a quality drill and tap of pipe under available pressure. Two taps are allowed per team. The Fun Tap is the simpler version of the two contests. The judge and moderator for these events was Mike George.

Backhoe Rodeo Backhoe operators show their expertise by executing challenging lifts and drops of various objects in the fastest time. First Place: Nick Donato, Bonita Springs Utilities Inc. Second Place: Ozzie Samuels, City of Cocoa Third Place: Leslie Klein, City of St. Cloud

Fun Tap Winners First Place: City of St. Cloud (Kaylon Bass, Nick Emmons, Leslie Klein) Second Place: Bonita Springs Utilities Inc. Third Place: City of St. Cloud (Team 2)

And the winners are: Water Bowl

Poster Contest

Erica LaBerge, Andrea Cumming, and David Yonge receive their trophy from Greg Taylor.

Samantha Jeffrey with her poster.

Fun Tap

Ductile Iron Tap

The St. Cloud Soldiers team members pose with contest moderator Mike George (in the middle) and are, beginning left: Josh McDaniel, Matt Baker, Kaylon Bass, and Nick Emmons.

The City of St. Cloud team displays its medals with contest moderator Mike George (in tan shirt) and are, left to right: Kaylon Bass, Nick Emmons, and Leslie Klein

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Meter Madness

Winner Brian Miller accepts his medal from Mike George.

Backhoe Rodeo

Winner Nick Danato teaches Jason Parrillo how to maneuver the backhoe, while Ana Maria Gonzalez looks on.

RECAP OF 2013 FSAWWA CONFERENCE

Florida Water Resources Journal • February 2014

RECAP OF 2013 FSAWWA CONFERENCE

Annual Section Awards On December 4, the Florida Section AWWA honored outstanding individuals and organizations in the state’s water industry at the annual FSAWWA awards luncheon. Recipients of this year’s awards are noted and/or pictured on the following pages. (photos: Patricia Delaney)

AWWA GEORGE WARREN FULLER AWARD Charles (Chuck) Carden is the recipient of the AWWA George Warren Fuller award for his distinguished service to the water supply field. He was the section’s treasurer for the longest term (2000-2006), modernizing its financial and reporting system. Carden also served as section secretary, vice chair, chair-elect, and as 2010 chair. He was the founding chair of Florida 2030, a committee formed by the section to develop sustainable water infrastructure in the state. He will be recognized at the Fuller Award Breakfast at ACE14 in Boston.

ROBERT L. CLAUDY AWARD

DEDICATED SERVICE AWARD

Jeff Nash was the recipient of the 2013 Robert Claudy Award for his efforts in promoting water quality in the industry, the community, and the section.

Tim Brodeur was honored for his service to the section’s Executive Committee as Finance Committee Chair from 2006 to 2013.

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

CHARLES HOGUE AWARD Kevin Stine was honored by the Manufacturers/Associates Council (MAC) with the Charles Hogue Award as the MAC individual member of the year.

MAC DADDY AWARD The award was presented to Todd Lewis from the Manufacturers/ Associates Council.

ALLEN B. ROBERTS AWARD Kim Kunihiro was the recipient of the 2013 Allen B. Roberts Award for outstanding service to the section by a member.

RECAP OF 2013 FSAWWA CONFERENCE

FSAWWA SERVICE AWARDS The following were honored for their service to the Florida Section.

Pictured left to right are Bill Young, Tyler Tedcastle, Christine Ellenberger, Kim Kowalski, David Slonena, and Greg Taylor.

• David Slonena Region IV Chair, 2011-2013

• Jennifer McElroy Region XI Chair, 2011-2013

• Brian Reid Region IX Chair, 2011-2013

• Kim Kowalski Chair - Manufacturers/ Administrative Council, 2009-2013

• Bruce MacLeod Region X Chair, 2011-2013

• Greg Taylor Chair - Public Affairs Council, 2011-2013

• Christine Ellenberger Water For People Committee Chair, 2011-2013

• Bill Young Trustee, 2011-2013

• Tyler Tedcastle Young Professionals Committee Chair, 2011-2013

• Bill Young Chair - Likins Scholarship Committee Chair, 2007-2013

REGIONS VOLUNTEER OF THE YEAR AWARD This award is selected by the region chair. • • • • • • • • •

Aaron Van Smith, Region I Cecile Toupiol, Region II Erica Stone, Region III Paul Smith, Region IV Mary Meima, Region V Troy Lyn, Region VI Nelson Perez-Jacome, Region VII Stephen Doyle, Region VIII Carol Hinton, Region XI

COUNCIL CHAIR AWARDS OF EXCELLENCE Administrative Council - Lance Littrell Manufacturers/Associates Council - Cody Snell Operators Council - Andre A. Dieffenthaller Public Affairs Council - Scott Richards Technical & Education Council - Amy Gilliam Utility Council - Edgar Fernandez

Pictured are Carol Hinton and Paul Smith.

YOUNG PROFESSIONAL OF THE YEAR Stephanie Ishii was named the young professional of the year.

Pictured, from left, are: Scott Richards, Amy Gilliam, and Lance Littrell.

Florida Water Resources Journal • February 2014

RECAP OF 2013 FSAWWA CONFERENCE

GOLD WATER DROP AWARDS Recipients are honored for 50 years of AWWA membership. • Harold R. Cobb • J. Edward Singley, Ph.D.

SILVER WATER DROP AWARDS LIFE MEMBER AWARDS

Recipients are honored for 30 years of AWWA membership. • Khalil Z. Atasi, Ph.D. • Paul L. Brayton • James T. Cowgill • Henry Glaus • J. K. Kimes

Awardees have 30 years of AWWA membership and are 65 or older. • Paul L. Brayton • James T. Cowgill • Henry Glaus

WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM AWARDS The following utilities earned the first-place Outstanding Distribution System Award in their respective divisions.

Division 2 Bay County Utility Service Accepted by Donald Hamm and Mike Hollingsworth.

Division 1 Ozello Water Association

Division 4 City of Ocala Water Resource Department Accepted by Stacey Ferrante and Robert Bogosta.

Division 5 City of Boca Raton Utility Services Department Accepted by Lauren Burack and David Palmer.

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Division 6 City of Fort Lauderdale's Public Works Department Accepted by Mark Darmanin.

Division 3 City of North Port Utilities Accepted by Tony Payne and Tom Davel.

Division 7 Lee County Utilities Water Distribution Accepted by Justin Dodd and Dewayne Tagg.

FWPCOA TRAINING CALENDAR SCHEDULE YOUR CLASS TODAY! FEBRUARY 3-7........Water Distribution Level 3, 2 ..................Deltona ................$275/305 10-12........Backflow Repair ........................................Deltona ................$275/305 28........Backflow Tester Recert*** ........................Deltona ................$85/115

MARCH 4........Backflow Recert..........................................Lady Lake ............$85/115 3-6........Backflow Tester ..........................................St. Petersburg ......$375/405 24-28........SPRING STATE SHORT SCHOOL ............Ft. Pierce 28........Backflow Tester Recert*** ........................Deltona ................$85/115

APRIL 7-9........Backflow Repair ........................................St. Petersburg ......$275/305 21-24........Backflow Tester ..........................................Deltona ................$375/405 21-24........Backflow Tester ..........................................Pensacola ............$375/405 21-25........Reclaimed Water Field Site Inspector ....Orlando ..............$350/380 25........Backflow Tester Recert*** ........................Deltona ................$85/115

MAY 6........Backflow Recert..........................................Lady Lake ............$85/115 5-9........Wastewater Collection C, B ......................Deltona ................$325/355 12-15........Backflow Tester ..........................................St. Petersburg ......$375/405 19-21........Backflow Repair ........................................Deltona ................$275/305 23........Backflow Tester Recert*** ........................Deltona ................$85/115

JUNE 2-5........Backflow Tester ..........................................Deltona ................$375/405 9-13........Water Distribution Level 3, 2 ..................Deltona ................$275/305 23-26........Backflow Tester ..........................................St. Petersburg ......$375/405 27........Backflow Tester Recert*** ........................Deltona ................$85/115 Course registration forms are available at http://www.fwpcoa.org/forms.asp. For additional information on these courses or other training programs offered by the FWPCOA, please contact the FW&PCOA Training Office at (321) 383-9690 or training@fwpcoa.org. * Backflow recertification is also available the last day of Backflow Tester or Backflow Repair Classes with the exception of Deltona ** Evening classes

You are required to have your own calculator at state short schools and most other courses.

*** any retest given also Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ February 2014

RECAP OF 2013 FSAWWA CONFERENCE ROY W. LIKINS SCHOLARSHIP OPERATORS SCHOLARSHIP The Operators Council provides scholarships to students upgrading a drinking water or distribution system operator license or pursuing a degree related to the drinking water industry.

Accepting their Likins Scholarship Awards are from left to right: David T. Yonge, University of Central Florida; Hugo R. Sindelar, University of Florida; and Andrew Cone, University of Florida. Also pictured is Bill Young, chair of the Likins Scholarship Committee. Other recipients of the scholarship, but not pictured, are Joseph Goodall, University of Florida, and Lauren Shuler, University of Florida The scholarships are awarded each year by the section to outstanding graduate or undergraduate college students enrolled in an accredited Florida institution who are pursuing a degree related to the drinking water industry. The $5000 scholarship is named for the late Roy Likins, former president of Palm Coast Utility Corporation and a lifelong member of the American Water Works Association, who served as section chair and secretary/treasurer, as well as Region IX chair with the Florida Water & Pollution Control Operators Association.

Scott B. Lipp

Tim Charles Jr.

Jennifer Alexander (not in attendance)

WATER CONSERVATION AWARDS FOR EXCELLENCE PUBLIC EDUCATION

DEMAND MANAGEMENT

MERITORIOUS, MEGA UTILITY Orange County Utilities Water Division Water Conservation PSAs with County Mayor Teresa Jacobs Accepted by Carmen Santiago.

SHOW OF EXCELLENCE, LARGE UTILITY Polk County Utilities Multi-Faceted Public Outreach Campaign Accepted by Jacqueline Hollister.

SHOW OF EXCELLENCE, MEGA UTILITY Orange County Utilities Water Division Florida Friendly HOA Workshops Accepted by Terri Hill.

BEST IN CLASS, MEGA UTILITY The Florida Governmental Utility Authority (FGUA) and Pasco County Utilities Water Awareness Poster Contest and Community Outreach Program

February 2014 â&#x20AC;˘ Florida Water Resources Journal

Best in Class, Medium Utility Toho Water Authority Water Citation Program Accepted by Rodney Tilley.

COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM Best in Class, Medium Utility Natural Resources Planning and Management Division Broward Water Partnership

RECAP OF 2013 FSAWWA CONFERENCE

• American Ductile Iron Pipe / American Flow Control • ATKINS • Black & Veatch Corporation • Blue Planet Environmental Sytems Inc. • Cardno, Inc. • CDM Smith

• Cambridge Brass, Inc. • Clow Valve Company • Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. • Mueller Company Odyssey Manufacturing Company

• CH2M HILL • Data Flow Systems, Inc. • EBAA/Thames & Associates • Ferguson Waterworks • Hazen and Sawyer, P.C. • HDR Engineering • HD Supply Waterworks

• Parsons Brinckerhoff • Sunshine 811 • Tetra Tech • The Crom Corporation • The Ford Meter Box Company Inc.

• Hydra Service, Inc. • Paul Blastic & Company • R&M Service Solutions • Reiss Engineering, Inc. • Sigma Corporation • Wager Company of Florida Inc.

SILVER SPONSORS

GOLD SPONSORS

PLATINUM SPONSORS

CONFERENCE SPONSORS

• Garney Construction • Pollardwater.Com • Trihedral

PASSING THE GAVEL Jason Parrillo receives a plaque for his service as 2013 section chair from Rick Ratcliffe, who was chair in 2012. Jason Parrillo passes the gavel to the incoming chair for 2014, Carl R. Larrabee Jr.

Florida Water Resources Journal • February 2014

RECAP OF 2013 FSAWWA CONFERENCE

Conference Fundraisers Support Water For People Christine Ellenberger and Barika Poole

Exhibitors Raffle Fundraiser Sponsors

The recent FSAWWA Fall Conference provided an excellent opportunity to highlight and support the work of Water For People. As we learned about innovative water solutions, we also took the time to increase awareness and raise funds for the organization to bring clean water and sanitation throughout the developing world. Water For People’s goal is to empower regions and communities in developing countries develop creative, collaborative, and sustainable solutions to build and maintain their own reliable and safe water and sanitation systems. The Water For People conference fundraising events included an exhibitor’s raffle and the first-ever duck race. The two events raised a combined total of over $6,700 for

On behalf of Water for People, the committee would like to express its sincere gratitude to each of the 14 exhibitor sponsors who supported the raffle fundraiser. All of this support will help bring safe water, hygiene education, and sanitation to many communities in need. Gold sponsors received a plaque of appreciation, a sponsorship certificate, and a poster displayed in the exhibit hall featuring a Water For People project. The gold sponsors were Blue Planet Environmental Systems, CH2M HILL, Fluid Control Specialties, Hazen and Sawyer, Municipal Water Works, and Professional Piping Services. LJ Ruffin and Associates, Moss Kelley, and Pure Technologies were silver sponsors,

Water For People—the highest conference fundraising total to date! The Florida Water For People Committee appreciates the support from everyone who contributed, volunteered, visited the Water For People booth, and participated in the fundraising efforts.

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

RECAP OF 2013 FSAWWA CONFERENCE

Assessing Groundwater Sources in Blantyre, Malawi Anne M. Murray, PG, CPG Our Water For People-Malawi driver and cultural liaison, Chipi, led us from tiny Chileka Airport to downtown. We merged into traffic where exhaust-belching cars and buses honked their horns competing for roadway space with bicyclists and pedestrians. People expertly balancing stacks of luggage, bundles of 20-foot-long bamboo stalks, and sacks of cornmeal on their heads lined the streets. Women, dressed in colorful skirts and headdresses, called chitenies, moved effortlessly with babies strapped to their backs, while men, some barefoot, went about their business dressed in western trousers and suit jackets. Street vendors hawking goods, jewelry, woodcarvings, and paintings sang out on the street corners. A large open market next to the river was clogged with activity and goods: clothes and shoes piled high on the ground, smoky fires and cooked meats, and beautiful pyramids of ripened fruit and vegetables for sale, all at negotiable prices.

Water For People began working in Malawi in 2000. The organization shifted its emphasis in 2006 from widespread projects to concentrated efforts in rural Rumphi and Chikwawa, and peri-urban Blantyre low-income areas (LIAs). The primary communitybased initiatives in Malawi include Sanitation as a Business, The Circuit Riders Program, and the Water Users Association. These programs, among others, are monitored by the World Water Corps, the volunteer arm of Water For People, whose assignments are shaped by three strong programmatic emphases comprised of capacity-building and technical services, monitoring, and desk studies. Water For People programs, in partnership with the Blantyre Water Board (BWB), the city’s water and wastewater utility, and Blantyre City Council, numerous entrepreneurs, social organizations and the communities themselves, emphasize water and sanitation in the LIAs. Malawi is one of the most densely populated and least developed countries in the world. Among its top challenges is access to reliable and safe drinking water. The World Water Corps team, hydrogeologists Dan Weber and myself, and engineers/GIS specialists Kunal Nayee and Jeff Friesen (who was also team leader) traveled 24 hours from the United States to Malawi’s second largest

and the bronze sponsors were Carter & VerPlanck, Control Instruments, CROM Corporation, EnviroSales of Florida, and Erdmann Anthony.

ticipate in the next Duck Race at the 2014 FSAWWA Fall Conference.

Duck Race Fundraiser

The committee was fortunate to have the support of many individuals who not only volunteered their time to staff the Water For People booth, but also shared the significance of the organization’s work with those who stopped by. Based on the support during the conference, we can proudly say that over 80 hours were donated by energetic volunteers. Volunteers for the fundraisers included Colin Groff, Andy May, Tyler Tedcastle, Suzanne Goss, Anne Murray, Lance Littrell, Marjorie Craig, Mike Bailey, Marta Alonso, Rick Ratcliffe, Matt Verbyla, Grace Johns, Greg

New to the conference this year was a duck race benefitting Water For People. The race featured 200 rubber ducks racing around the lazy river at the conference hotel. Participants adopted rubber ducks and then cheered them on during the race. Special thanks go to volunteers Colin Groff for donning the duck costume, Andy May for being the duck caller, Tyler Tedcastle for jumping in the river to be the duck wrangler, and Greg Taylor for being the master of ceremonies. Please plan to par-

Volunteers

Map of Malawi ihttp://www.vidiani.com

city of Blantyre to provide technical services. Our assignment was to assess local groundwater resources to augment existing surface water supplies to meet immediate demands. The focus was on the unplanned and quickly expanding LIAs that ring the city. These peri-urban areas, located at the ends of Continued on page 34

Taylor, Holly Kremers, and this article’s authors. The committee would like to also recognize Jacobs for providing the poster graphics. We invite you to consider volunteering your time for the Water For People fundraiser at the Florida Water Resources Conference in April. We encourage you to become active and involved at the local level with Water For People and help keep safe water flowing to many more communities! For more information on how to become involved in your region, please contact Barika Poole (Barika@gmail.com), or to learn more about Water For People, visit www.waterforpeople.org. Christine Ellenberger and Barika Poole are members of the Florida Water For People Committee.

Florida Water Resources Journal • February 2014

WATER FOR PEOPLE Continued from page 33 the water distribution system, contain nearly 70 percent of the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s population of more than a million people. Most of these people were driven to the city from rural areas as a result of severe drought events and poverty. Blantyre depends on surface water pumped from the Shire River located 40 km northwest of the city. The city is grappling with aging infrastructure, unaccounted-for water losses of 50 percent or more, high pumping costs, and lack of long-term master planning. The result is reduced pressure, inconsistent delivery, or lack of service, which all together, make for an overtaxed water system, especially in the LIAs. Although there is likely enough surface water to meet demands, the system has numerous costly improvements that may take an extensive amount of time to complete and become operational. Without a dependable water source, people turn to untreated surface water or construct unauthorized shallow wells. These sources are susceptible to drought and contamination, especially from pit latrines constructed upstream, resulting in waterborne diseases that

can lead to sickness and death. The scope of work was to 1) locate groundwater exploration areas within eight identified LIAs; 2) recommend drilling sites and industry standard methods and type of equipment used for exploratory drilling; and 3) review two existing groundwater systems for design and installation adequacy. Blantyre is a geologically challenging area; the terrain is tough and the lack of data and records vexing. We began our data research before arrival and augmented our findings in the country by visiting government offices in Blantyre and Zomba where we uncovered hydrogeologic and topographic maps, some well and water quality information, and climatic data. The BWB staff provided base geographic information system (GIS) data, a recent water resource development plan, and population and demand projections. The collected maps were pulled into GIS and adjusted for spatial variability once the faults and joints were digitized and georeferenced in preparation for adding exploration targets and final mapping in GIS. These base maps were vital to desktop and field assessment,

Potential target area for well exploration.

along with the digital layers displayed on smartphones. A number of interviews with BWB staff, local drillers, and consultants were held to gain further perspective before heading into the field with ground-truth-created maps to determine location access to potential exploration sites. The Blantyre area is located on the eastern edge of the East African Rift Valley where tectonic activity causes complex faulting of the underlying Precambrian bedrock. Since the region is tectonic in nature, geologic faults are the best guide to where higher yield groundwater may exist. The maps, coupled with other collected geologic data, provided the tools used for the assessment. False color satellite imagery, not accessible during the assignment, will enhance understanding of the study areas in the future. Two aquifers systems exist: one in the deep, fractured bedrock and the other in the overlying shallow weathered bedrock, which is primarily used for water withdrawal. Small, low-yielding shallow wells averaging a depth of 40m below land surface are typically equipped with hand pumps for household or small-group use. These wells are highly vulnerable to seasonal water fluctuations and pollution. The BWBâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s desire is to expand the number of existing groundwater systems in the outlying LIAs that include wells, submersible pumps, chlorination, storage, and gravity feed distribution to community water kiosks operated by the Water Users Association. It is estimated, however, that considerably more than 100 shallow wells would be needed to meet immediate demands in the identified LIAs at an average yield of less than 2 L/second or 14 gal per minute (gpm). The deep fractured bedrock aquifer holds more promise for fewer, high-yielding wells; however, little is known about the actual groundwater potential at depths of 100-200m. It is evident that the exploratory program would be costly and that there is insufficient drilling equipment and lack of larger diameter well materials and drilling knowledge to perform deep aquifer exploration. Kunal Nayee, Anne Murray, Jeff Friesen, and Dan Weber on the balcony of the Kabula Lodge in Blantyre. (photo: J. Friesen)

Work session with Blantyre water board staff. (photo: J. Friesen)

February 2014 â&#x20AC;˘ Florida Water Resources Journal

Woman heading home from the kiosk. (photo: A. Murray)

Community water kiosk. (photos: A. Murray)

Small-group shallow well with hand pump. (photo: A. Murray)

It is clear from the completed groundwater assessment that regional hydrogeological conditions present challenges in finding consistent, dependable, and high-quality community groundwater supply in the Blantyre region. The availability of groundwater target areas is dictated by the structural geologic conditions and the depth of subsurface bedrock weathering. Although groundwater can augment the surface water supply in Blantyre, it will likely be a relatively small contribution. Our team identified several preliminary target locations for exploratory drilling of potential shallow and deep sources of water. An exploratory drilling program is recommended to understand the potential of the deep fractured bedrock aquifer, knowing that the program will be lengthy and cost-intensive, but a

New shallow groundwater system. (photo: A. Murray)

few wells could serve many. Shallow wells constructed in the weathered bedrock aquifer remain a viable short-term solution for water supply in the LIAs; however, such wells will be susceptible to inconsistencies in quality and quantity. Shallow-well placement at a recommended 1km spacing make the implementation and management of a water supply distribution network of connected shallow wells very complex. Water For Peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s efforts in peri-urban Blantyre provided the Blantyre Water Board, its funding partners, and communities with valuable groundwater data, GIS maps, and potential wellsite areas for shallow- and deep-wells-based hydrogeologic assessment. Based on our observations of immediate need, readily usable tools were developed, including

well construction and testing program guidelines, recommendations for general standards, and specifications for well and groundwater system design and installation, best practices for siting, construction and drilling, and construction and monitoring forms. Further, insights into the next steps for groundwater exploration were provided that outline a standardized procedure for detailed groundwater assessment and explore options for exploratory drilling technology and equipment. I would like to thank the Florida Section of the American Water Works Association (FSAWWA) for its support through the International Travel Assistance Program (iTAP). Anne Murray is an active World Water Corps volunteer and fundraiser for Water For People.

Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ February 2014

F W R J

Providing Minimum Flows to the Lower Hillsborough River and Sulphur Springs Run While Minimizing Impacts to Tampa’s Potable Water Supply Brian D. Pickard, David W. Schoster, Mike Pekkala, Kenneth J. Broome, and Bryan T. Veith he Southwest Florida Water Management District (District or SWFWMD) is directed by Florida Statutes to establish minimum flows and levels (MFLs) for water resources within its service area boundaries. The minimum flow for a surface watercourse is defined as “the limit at which further withdrawals would be significantly harmful to water resources or ecology of an area.” The District has established a minimum flow for two City of Tampa water bodies, including the Lower Hillsborough River and Sulphur Springs Run.

Established Minimum Flows Lower Hillsborough River The Lower Hillsborough River is tidally influenced and extends approximately 9.9 river mi from the Hillsborough River Dam to Tampa Bay. The Hillsborough River Dam separates the Lower Hillsborough River from the Hillsborough River Reservoir (Figure 1). Municipal water supply withdrawals from the Hillsborough River Reservoir result in near-

zero freshwater flow to the Lower Hillsborough River for approximately half of each year (Figure 2). Salinity values near the base of the Hillsborough River Dam can be as high as 10-13 practical salinity units (psu) during periods of no reservoir discharge. This negatively affects fish and wildlife that use tidal freshwater and low salinity habitats. As a result, the creation of a dry season <5 psu salinity zone downstream of the Hillsborough River Dam was chosen as the principal ecological criterion for establishing the Lower Hillsborough River minimum flows of 20 cubic ft per second (cfs), with an increase to 24 cfs during April through June. Sulphur Springs Run Sulphur Springs is an artesian spring that discharges to the Lower Hillsborough River via Sulphur Springs Run approximately 2.2 mi downstream of the Hillsborough River Dam (Figure 3). Sulphur Springs provides flows of low-salinity water that support downstream biological communities in Sul-

Figure 1. The Hillsborough River Dam impounds freshwater for the City of Tampa’s water supply.

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Brian D. Pickard, P.E., is engineer III with Tampa Water Department. David W. Schoster, P.E., is project manager with CH2M HILL in Gainesville. Mike Pekkala, P.E., is an associate with Greeley and Hansen in Tampa. Kenneth J. Broome, P.E., is principal project manager with MWH in Tampa. Bryan T. Veith, P.E., is executive engineer and client services manager with Brown and Caldwell in Tampa.

phur Springs Run and the Lower Hillsborough River. Sulphur Springs management goals were established (Figure 4) and resulted in a Sulphur Springs Run minimum flow between 10 and 18 cfs, depending on manatee thermal refuge temperatures, tidal water levels in the Lower Hillsborough River, and the extent of salinity incursions from the Lower Hillsborough River into Sulphur Springs Run.

Figure 2. The City of Tampa’s potable water supply needs have resulted in a significant reduction of freshwater flow into the Lower Hillsborough River.

Figure 3. Sulphur Springs Run connects Sulphur Springs with the Lower Hillsborough River. The spring water contributes to decreasing Lower Hillsborough River salinity.

Lower Hillsborough River Recovery Strategy A recovery strategy has been adopted for the Lower Hillsborough River since its flow is periodically less than the established minimum flow. Rather than releasing reservoir water stored for potable water supply, the Lower Hillsborough River recovery strategy consists of diverting flows from Sulphur Springs, the Tampa Bypass Canal (TBC), Blue Sink, and Morris Bridge Sink to the base of the Hillsborough River Dam. The recovery strategy also includes a study to determine if the identified sources are sufficient to comply with the minimum flows. The City of Tampa implemented projects that are projected to cost $21.4 million, with 50 percent cooperative cost-sharing funded by the District (Table 1). The recovery strategy establishes the order that the resources are to be utilized to comply with the minimum flow rules. The priority order (listed in decreasing priority) for the Lower Hillsborough River is as follows: 1. Sulphur Springs* 2. Blue Sink 3. Morris Bridge Sink** 4. Raw Water Transmission Pipeline/TBC Diversions** * Provided 1) Sulphur Springs minimum flow compliance is first achieved and 2) No public health and safety concerns exist due to decreasing the potable water supply available from Sulphur Springs. Continued on page 38

Figure 4. Management goals provided the framework to establish a Sulphur Springs Run minimum flow.

Table 1. Multiple water sources are planned to be utilized for Lower Hillsborough River minimum flow purposes.

Figure 5. Water resource study results project the identified recovery strategy project will provide sufficient source capacity to comply with the Lower Hillsborough River and Sulphur Springs minimum flows. Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ February 2014

Continued from page 37 ** Diversions from Morris Bridge Sink and the TBC are prioritized based on TBC water levels. The cumulative flow from these resources and the minimum flow requirements were compared to determine if a deficit existed. It has been determined that the identified water sources are sufficient to meet the requirements nearly 100 percent of the time (Figure 5). The development of these sources has also been found to be conceptually feasible; however, the implementation of each project will be subject to an assessment of potential impacts and the approval of required permits. Sulphur Springs Sulphur Springs is a second-magnitude artesian spring that discharges to the Lower Hillsborough River approximately 2.2 mi downstream of the Hillsborough River Dam. This discharge occurs via a short spring run named “Sulphur Springs Run.” The spring pool has been enclosed by a circular concrete wall since the early 1900s when the site was developed as a recreational swimming facility. The site remains within the boundaries of a municipally owned park; however, swimming in Sulphur Springs and Sulphur Springs Run is no longer permitted. The City of Tampa owns and operates this site and utilizes the resource to supplement the Hillsborough River Reservoir via a pump station and pipeline. The pre-existing Sulphur Springs Pump Station utilized a single fixed speed pump. The station was constructed in the 1960s and was designed to supplement the City of Tampa’s potable water supply by pumping

Sulphur Springs flow to the Hillsborough River Reservoir. Piping has since been modified to concurrently allow spring water discharge below the Hillsborough River Dam for Lower Hillsborough River minimum flow purposes. Lower Hillsborough River and Sulphur Springs Run minimum flow requirements could not be achieved using the 1960s pump station. These requirements included concurrently providing a variable amount of water to Sulphur Springs Run, the Lower Hillsborough River at the base of the Hillsborough River Dam, and the Hillsborough River Reservoir. Historical data indicated Sulphur Springs flow was sufficient for minimum flow requirements at spring pool levels below the Sulphur Springs Pool overflow weir; however, continuously operating in this manner would eliminate the aeration associated with spring water overflowing the weir and dropping approximately 7 ft into Sulphur Springs Run. The following features were included in the pump station modifications to comply with minimum flow requirements: The existing building was repurposed into an electrical room for the new pumping station. The finished building was aesthetically enhanced by a commissioned native wildlife mural on the building exterior (Figure 6) minimizing visual impacts to the adjacent recreational facility. Two new 350-horsepower (HP) variable speed pumps were installed capable of meeting the highly variable flow and head requirements. The achievable pumping rate is 3 to 44 cfs from each pump; one pump is normally dedicated for pumping to the Lower Hillsborough River discharge location, and the other pump is normally dedicated for pumping to Sulphur Springs

Figure 6. Sulphur Springs Pump Station building aesthetics were an important consideration because the facility is located within a municipal park.

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Run. The need for pumping redundancy required that each pump be sized for the combined flows to Sulphur Springs Run, the Lower Hillsborough River, and the Hillsborough River Reservoir. The pre-existing Sulphur Springs pump station pumped water to the Hillsborough River Reservoir via a 30-in. pipeline. A new pipeline segment, meter, and electricmotor-actuated throttling valves were installed to divide this flow between the Hillsborough River Reservoir and the Lower Hillsborough River. The need for highly variable flow rates required that each venturi meter be equipped with dual transmitters for accurate metering. Operating Sulphur Springs Pool at a decreased water level (to increase spring flow) required lowering the pump station intake. This was accomplished by installing new high-density polyethylene piping conforming to the funnel-shaped spring bathymetry and anchoring this piping onto precast concrete panels cabled to the spring pool wall. The spring run discharge was accomplished with a nozzle-equipped discharge header (Figure 7). This effort improved Sulphur Springs Run aeration and provides an aesthetic feature for the adjacent park. Sulphur Springs Run minimum flow requirements continuously change based on tide level, water temperatures, and water salinity. These data are obtained in real time via links to gages operated and maintained by the United States Geological Survey. This assures that compliance data are collected through an independent third party. Continued on page 41

Figure 7. The new Sulphur Springs Run discharge header provides sufficient aeration to support downstream fauna.

Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ February 2014

Figure 8. The Sulphur Springs Run minimum flow rule allows decreased spring run flow provided the salinity difference between the upper run and spring pool does not exceed 1 ppt for > 1 hour.

Figure 9. The new pump station automatically increases spring run flow when a salinity incursion is detected.

Figure 10. Sulphur Springs Run Lower Weir prior to rehabilitation (2009).

Figure 11. Rehabilitated Sulphur Springs Run Lower Weir (2011).

Figure 12. Preliminary performance results indicate significant success in meeting management goals for Sulphur Springs Run. Trend points (in blue) above the dashed red line indicate a time when the salinity management goals are not met.

February 2014 â&#x20AC;˘ Florida Water Resources Journal

Figure 13. Lower Hillsborough River stage data suggest manatee access to the upper spring run is infrequent and for very limited durations.

Figure 14. The relatively shallow spring run has limited area accessible by manatees (red shaded area) at the median Lower Hillsborough River stage.

Continued from page 38 The new pump station was provided a bridge crane and monorail to an exterior loading dock, facilitating equipment maintenance. Salinity Management Goal One Sulphur Springs Run management goal is to minimize the incursion of brackish water from the Lower Hillsborough River into the upper spring run (Figure 8). This goal is considered to be achieved if the salinity difference between the spring pool conductivity gage and the upper spring run conductivity gage is >1parts per thousand (ppt) salinity for no more than 1 hour during each incursion. This goal has been achieved through a complex pump station automation scheme (Figure 9) and the rehabilitation of a weir dividing the lower spring run from the upper spring run. The weir rehabilitation has been completed (Figures 10 and 11) and consists of stop log replacement, gantry hoist installation to aid in stop log operation, and an improved aluminum walkway with guardrails. Hydraulic modeling projects that the operation of this structure will allow a 3 cfs reduction to the Sulphur Springs Run minimum flow, while still meeting management goals. This flow is anticipated to be diverted to the Lower Hillsborough if ongoing performance tests continue to be successful (Figure 12). Manatee Thermal Refuge Management Goal Permitting the Sulphur Springs improvements involved efforts to ensure the endangered Florida manatee would not be impacted. Regulatory concerns concentrated

Figure 15. Pump station automation ensures an 18 cfs spring run flow when Lower Hillsborough River water temperatures are less than 20°C.

on 1) not reducing the area accessible by manatees and 2) not reducing the thermal refuge area beneficial to manatees during cold weather periods. Figures 13 and 14 indicate that Sulphur Springs Run is relatively shallow and therefore does not permit manatee access at all Lower Hillsborough River tide levels, regardless if the weir structure is in place. In addition to the fact manatee access upstream of the structure is naturally limited, historical data indicate that a weir structure has been present in Sulphur Springs Run since 1906 or earlier (the structure is “grandfathered”). Thermal refuge concerns were investigated by modeling temperature changes in

the Lower Hillsborough River immediately downstream of Sulphur Springs Run. Results indicate it is best to maintain a Sulphur Springs Run flow of 18 cfs when water temperatures in the manatee refuge zone are less than 20°C (Figure 15). Minimizing Filamentous Algae Growth Filamentous algae (Figure 16) grow in long visible chains, resulting in the formation of large mats. It is believed this growth occurs fastest in surface water bodies having lowflow velocities. This increased growth has been observed in Sulphur Springs Run when flow is reduced. The Sulphur Springs Pump Continued on page 42

Florida Water Resources Journal • February 2014

Figure 16. Filamentous algae observed in Sulphur Springs Run.

Figure 17. An algorithm was developed and shown to be accurate at predicting when high tide occurs. When a high tide is detected, spring run flow is increased to deter filamentous algae growth within Sulphur Springs Run.

Continued from page 41 Station therefore included automation to periodically increase Sulphur Springs Run flow velocity to deter filamentous algae growth. This is accomplished by increasing Sulphur Springs Run flow immediately after high tide, while the decreasing tide is concurrently drawing water out of the spring run (Figure 17).

Figure 18. Historic flow path from Blue Sink to Lower Hillsborough River.

Figure 19. Proposed Blue Sink diversion facilities.

Blue Sink Blue Sink is a karst feature with standing water located approximately 2.8 mi from the Hillsborough River Dam. Pump tests, feasibility analyses, environmental permitting, a 90-percent pump station design, and a 100percent transmission pipeline design have been completed to divert 3.1 cfs of water from Blue Sink for Lower Hillsborough River minimum flow purposes. Blue Sink Project construction is expected to begin in 2014. Water in Blue Sink historically flowed below ground to the Lower Hillsborough River via discharge at Sulphur Springs. This flow path has since been blocked by a private construction project (Figure 18). Four alternatives, consisting of various combinations of pipeline, pump stations, and existing belowground flow channels were compared and ranked based on cost, regulatory requirements, wetland impacts, flood concerns, and reliability. The construction of a pump station adjacent to Blue Sink and a 16-in. pipeline to the Sulphur Springs Transmission Main was the highest ranking alternative (Figure 19). The recommended pump station

February 2014 â&#x20AC;˘ Florida Water Resources Journal

alternative is a vacuum-primed horizontal centrifugal pump capable of diverting 3.1 cfs from Blue Sink to the Lower Hillsborough River. The City of Tampa has been issued all environmental and water use permits for the Blue Sink project. During the permitting process, adjacent neighborhood associations expressed concerns, primarily related to lakelevel and aquifer-level impacts due to Blue Sink diversions. Figure 20 and Figure 21 (Results of Blue Sink Pumping Test No. 2, Hillsborough County, Florida, SWFWMD, 2009) summarize impacts to lake levels and groundwater levels during the 30-day 3.1 cfs pump test. This data was used to calibrate a groundwater model that was utilized to simulate long-term impacts of Blue Sink Diversions. The results were used to support the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s water use permit application. Raw Water Transmission Main and Tampa Bypass Canal Diversions The Lower Hillsborough River Recovery Strategy plan includes an 11 cfs TBC diversion. This canal serves as flood relief to the northern Tampa Bay area and consists of an upper pool, middle pool, and a lower pool separated by control structures. The Hillsborough River Reservoir and the TBC middle pool are connected via the Harney Canal. Originally, this diversion was to be accomplished via a pump station and pipeline between the Harney Canal and the Lower Hillsborough River (Figure 22). An indeContinued on page 44

Continued from page 42 pendent peer review panel concluded this approach resulted in only minor improvements to evapotranspiration (ET) and leakage losses, resulting in unfavorable economics. Therefore, the Hillsborough River Reservoir is planned to be used as a flow path in lieu of a pipeline. This option requires diversion facilities at the Harney Canal (S-161) and Hillsborough River Dam (Figure 23).

Figure 20. Lake drawdown (in ft) during the Blue Sink Pump Test.

Figure 21. Upper Floridan aquifer drawdown during the Blue Sink Pump Test.

Figure 22. Tampa Bypass Canal diversions are being used to contribute 11 cfs to the Lower Hillsborough River minimum flow (graphic courtesy of SWFWMD).

Figure 23. Planned infrastructure at TBC S-161 and the Hillsborough River Dam to implement Tampa Bypass Canal diversions.

February 2014 â&#x20AC;˘ Florida Water Resources Journal

Structure 162 Diversion Facility The Structure 162 Diversion Facility supplements the TBC middle pool by pumping from the TBC lower pool (Figure 24). Water pumped from the TBC lower pool discharges to the Lower Hillsborough River via the Structure 161 Pump Station and the Hillsborough River Dam Diversion Facility (refer to Figure 23). Per rule, this facility is to be owned and operated by the District. Harney Canal (Structure 161) Diversion Facility As elucidated in Figure 23, the Lower Hillsborough River recovery strategy requires up to 17 cfs, or 11 mil gal per day (mgd), to be diverted from the TBC middle pool to the Hillsborough River Reservoir. The existing Harney Canal connects these water bodies, while Structure 161 (located within the Harney Canal) maintains the water elevation difference between the reservoir and the TBC middle pool. Tampa Bay Water owns and operates the Harney Canal Pump Station located adjacent to Structure 161 (Figure 25). This pump station is permitted to augment the Hillsborough River Reservoir at a peak monthly rate of 40 mgd for the City of Tampaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s potable water demand. The Harney Canal Pump Station design firm capacity matches the per-

Figure 24. Southwest Florida Water Management District S-162 Pump Station.

mitted peak monthly rate; however, recent test results indicate the current firm capacity is approximately 36.6 mgd. Because the City of Tampa’s potable water demand utilizes the entire firm capacity of the Harney Canal Pump Station, there was not sufficient existing capacity to concurrently meet potable water demand and minimum flow demands. Per the recovery strategy implementation schedule, the District constructed additional pumping capacity to divert water “uphill” around Structure 161. This was to provide the City sufficient time to construct the then-planned permanent pumping facility and raw water transmission main. The District-constructed facility was therefore designed to be temporary in nature. Because the raw water transmission main was determined uneconomical, rule requires the City to assume the long-term diversion responsibilities at Structure 161. The City and the District are presently negotiating a cost sharing agreement for the City to construct a permanent Structure 161 diversion facility. An alternatives analysis for the longterm 17 cfs diversion facility has evaluated several pump station configurations based on cost, regulatory considerations, schedule, operation and maintenance, reliability, and energy efficiency. Two main options were considered as follows: 1. Construction of a new pump station with a capacity matching minimum flow diversion requirements (17 cfs or 11 mgd firm capacity). 2. Modification of Tampa Bay Water’s existing 36.6-mgd Harney Canal Pump Station to concurrently meet minimum flow requirements and potable water supply needs (79 cfs or 51 mgd firm capacity). Several configurations were considered to achieve Option 1. These all involved two 65-HP pumps, variable speed pumping capacity, and a building with separate mechanical and electrical rooms. Improvement needs to achieve Option 2 included the replacement of two existing pumps with two larger 200HP pumps, suction and discharge piping upsizing, two new variable frequency drives, intake structure modifications, and minor building modifications to provide conditioned space for the variable frequency drives. The alternatives analysis recommends Option 1 be pursued primarily due to an estimated $830,000 savings (20-year net present value) and a minimum four-month decrease in net implementation time. This project is in the preliminary design phase while the City and the District negotiate a cost sharing agreement.

Hillsborough River Dam Diversion Facility As shown in Figure 23, providing minimum flows to the Lower Hillsborough River involves diverting water from the TBC and Morris Bridge Sink through or around the Hillsborough River Dam. Water in the TBC is lower in elevation than water in the Hillsborough River Reservoir (Figure 26). Because it is known that the Hillsborough River Reservoir leaks east towards the TBC, the recovery strategy indicates that 25 percent of

the water pumped into the Hillsborough River Reservoir at Structure 161 is not required to be diverted to the Lower Hillsborough River. This results in the need for a Hillsborough River Dam Diversion Facility with a 12.8 cfs (9.2 mgd) capacity. Similar to the temporary pump station at Structure 161, the District also installed a temporary pump station adjacent to the Hillsborough Dam (Figure 27). Rule requires Continued on page 46

Figure 25. The Hillsborough River Reservoir (far left) is separated by the Tampa Bypass Canal middle pool (right) at Structure 161 (center left). Tampa Bay Water’s Harney Canal Pump Station is pictured bottom right; the District’s temporary minimum flows and levels diversion facility is pictured top right.

Figure 26. Lower Hillsborough River, Hillsborough River Reservoir, and Tampa Bypass Canal water surface elevations.

Florida Water Resources Journal • February 2014

Figure 27. Temporary Southwest Florida Water Management District Pump Station at the Hillsborough River Dam.

Continued from page 45 the City to assume the long-term diversion responsibilities at the Hillsborough River Dam because the raw water transmission pipeline was found to be uneconomical. The City and the District are therefore negotiating a cost sharing agreement to construct a

Figure 28. Proposed Hillsborough River Dam Siphon location.

permanent Hillsborough River Dam Diversion Facility. An alternatives analysis for the permanent 12.8 cfs Hillsborough Dam Diversion Facility evaluated the following four alternatives: 1. Gravity flow pipeline 2. Siphon 3. Pump station 4. Gate modifications Option 1 (gravity flow pipeline) was preferred due to the minimal energy requirements and simplicity; however, it was eliminated from consideration due to the risk associated with trenching through the Hillsborough River Dam embankment. Option 4 (gate modifications) was eliminated primarily for physical feasibility reasons; however, the low probability/high impact of a catastrophic gate or equipment failure was also considered. Option 2 (siphon) and Option 3 (pump station) were identified as feasible and studied further. Twenty-year life cycle cost estimates were prepared for the pump station and siphon alternatives. An educator-primed siphon was recommended for implementation based on technical (less equipment and complexity) and economic analysis (estimated $290,000 savings, 20-year net present value). Figure 28 summarizes the preliminary siphon design that is intended to replace the temporary pump station. Morris Bridge Sink Morris Bridge Sink is a karst feature with standing water located near the upper reaches of the TBC. Use of this source involves sequentially pumping water from the sink to

February 2014 â&#x20AC;˘ Florida Water Resources Journal

the TBC, then to the Hillsborough River Reservoir and eventually to the Lower Hillsborough River for minimum flows. A pump test has been completed and determined that the sink has the potential to deliver 6 cfs of flow on a sustainable basis. The pump station has been designed and is currently being permitted. Similar to the Structure 162 Diversion Facility, the Morris Bridge Sink facilities will be designed, permitted, constructed, owned, operated, and maintained by the District.

Conclusion Although the recovery strategy has not yet been fully implemented, the completed projects show a high degree of effectiveness towards meeting the Sulphur Springs Run and Lower Hillsborough River management goals. The Sulphur Springs lower weir modifications and Sulphur Springs pump station modifications have proven to be effective at preventing salinity incursions into Sulphur Springs Run, while maintaining an effective manatee thermal refuge within the Lower Hillsborough River. Continuous salinity measurements made below the Hillsborough River Dam have shown a substantial reduction in salinity compared to previous years. Completion of the remaining projects is expected to fully meet the management goals, with anticipated improvements to fish and wildlife populations. The team effort between the City of Tampa and the District, along with the support and cooperation from multiple other regulatory agencies, has resulted in ongoing improvement to the Sulphur Springs Run and Lower Hillsborough River.

FSAWWA SPEAKING OUT

Celebrating Heroes and Mentors Carl R. Larrabee Jr.

someone who cared about his job and other people.

Chair, FSAWWA

e’ve all had heroes, people we looked up to and wanted to be like when we grew up. Most of us have outgrown that youthful wish. But have we? Throughout our lives we’ve been in contact with people who have influenced us in positive ways. I’d like to share a few who have been extremely influential in mine. My dad, Carl R. Larrabee, Sr., gave me a Lionel Train Set at the age of three. When my mom prompted me to play with it, I replied that “it was Daddy’s.” But she informed me, “No, it belongs to you.” My daddy was an engineer (electrical, that is), but at that age I thought he drove trains when he wasn’t home. As I grew up, Dad took me fishing, camping, and to baseball games; coached my Sunoco Little League team; talked with me one-on-one late into the night; and told me how to treat and respect girls, how to be faithful to my wife, and how to be a dad to my two lovely daughters. Together we did the electrical wiring for the first house that Jan (my wife) and I lived in. Dad was also an ordained lay leader in our church. He even filled in to preach at nearby churches when their ministers were away. (I still have his collection of sermons!) Dad was my first hero, my closest mentor. There were many more to come.

Aris Catsam was the golf course maintenance superintendent where I worked during my University of Central Florida (UCF) college years. One of our young workers was driving a tractor and dozed off while heading back to the barn. He made a slight detour into a pond; the only thing showing was the seat. Mr. Catsam wasn’t pleased; he got a chain and pulled the tractor out and then towed it to the barn. That night, he stayed late draining all of the fluids, replacing the oil and fuel filters, and putting in fresh oil and diesel. The next day that tractor was out mowing fairways. Nothing was said, and the young worker responsible for the accident didn’t lose his job. Mr. Catsam was another very special person in my life—a wonderful example of

Dr. Yousef A. Yousef, a professor at UCF, was my advisor for my postgraduate degree. He was from Egypt, which is where he received his undergraduate degree. He was tricky to understand during lectures, but his mastery of the written English language was like no one I had met before. He helped me immensely through organizing and writing my thesis. He cared about his students, and he challenged them. He encouraged me to study water and wastewater engineering, saying, “People will always need water and wastewater systems.” Dr. Yousef was actually the one who encouraged me to join AWWA and even served as my sponsor!

learn from my wife, my daughters, their husbands, my mom (93 years young), fellow workers, fellow AWWA members, my Sunday School classmates, my friends—the list goes on and on. You have special people in your life who have made you what you are today. They taught you, encouraged you, and provided an example to you in your life. Please take time to stop and think about who they are and what they’ve done to enrich your life. And recognize this: you are special in the lives of others around you. Each and every day you interact with others. They’re watching, listening, and learning from you. You’re making a lasting difference in their lives, sometimes without you ever knowing it.

FSAWWA Mentoring Program Bill Stephenson (FSAWWA chair #63) was my first boss after finishing school. Fifteen years my senior, Bill was active in FSAWWA as Awards Committee chair and passed that position on to me. As a fellow engineer, Bill encouraged innovation, risk taking, and in-house projects. As public works director for Cocoa Utilities, Bill oversaw the rapid expansion of a water system serving Kennedy Space Center, Port Canaveral, Patrick Air Force Base, six municipalities, and extensive unincorporated areas. He was honest, conscientious, and caring in his dealings with customers, consultants, and employees.

Jay Clark is a fellow member at First Baptist Church of Merritt Island, and has long been a positive encourager to my family and me. He’s portrayed one of the three wise men in Christmas plays, and was a principal at Fairglen Elementary School. His school’s marquee once read “What have you done lately, for heaven’s sake?” This caused an uproar with the local American Civil Liberties Union, which threatened legal action for violation of separation of church and state. Jay didn’t back down; he kept the marquee’s message in spite of the challenge until a new marquee appeared: “In God We Trust.” Jay is one of my heroes, too.

The FSAWWA now has a voluntary mentoring program. It was conceived during Matt Alvarez’s (FSAWWA chair #81) tenure as chair and implemented during Jason Parrillo’s (FSAWWA chair #86) term. This program pairs new members with those who are more experienced, facilitating the exchange of knowledge and wisdom. My FSAWWA mentor is Tim Brodeur (FSAWWA chair #60). As a past chair and current Finance Committee chair, Tim and I worked closely during the three years I was the section’s treasurer. He led the effort to establish a financial plan for fund investment, reserve balance, and professional oversight. His continued meaningful involvement in the section 27 years after he was chair is exemplary. I want to be like Tim; of course, I’ll be in my late 80s by then (Tim is much younger than that!). I envision a time when each new member will be paired automatically with an existing member, but until then, I encourage each member of FSAWWA to become a mentor or mentee. The sign-up forms are posted on the section’s website at www.fsawwa.org. Please take full advantage of this opportunity to make another section member a very special person in your life. Help pass life’s blessings along!

I have had countless other heroes in my life that I haven’t mentioned. I continually Florida Water Resources Journal • February 2014

GUEST COLUMN: WORDS ON WATER

Arsenic Mobilization: Patience, Persistence, and Science Pay Off Robert Beltran n 1997, arsenic mobilization discovered at a City of Tampa well site threatened a critical component to ensuring a sustainable water supply. Today, nearly 17 years later, after significant efforts involving many governmental agencies, and navigating a complex maze of federal regulations, we have solved the riddle and saved a major piece of the water sustainability puzzle.

Creating Storage Capacity When it comes to water supply, we don’t save for rainy days, we save on rainy days. Alternating annually among droughts, flooding and seasonal fluctuations, and finding innovative ways to capture and store water when it’s available becomes critical to meeting the water supply needs of the five million people in west-central Florida. For thousands of years, people have taken water from the ground, but it’s only recently that we have created storage capacity by injecting water into an aquifer and then withdrawing it for use. Among the various advantages of aquifer storage and recovery (ASR), the water is not subject to evaporation and there are no costly reservoirs to build. Today, the Southwest Florida Water Management District (District) is heavily invested

in ASR, partnering on more than 27 projects. The ASR projects use potable water, reclaimed water, groundwater, reverse osmosis water, and surface water. The majority of the ASR projects are in marginal aquifer areas with poor water quality (high total dissolved solids) and low to no potable use, especially along the coast. However, we are also exploring new areas in the interior of the District. These projects are exploring ASR in the Lower Floridan Aquifer. The world’s deepest ASR well is now in Polk County and is nearly 3,000 feet below grade. Two of the largest ASR-producing facilities in the state are within the District. The Peace River Manasota Regional Water Supply Authority (PRMRWSA) ASR wellfield can produce 21 mil gal per day (mgd) and the City of Tampa’s ASR facilities can supply 10 mgd. Both facilities have served the public well, producing critical water during some of the worst droughts on record.

Addressing the Arsenic Challenge The issue of arsenic mobilization at the Tampa site in 1997 was later found at all ASR sites in the state. Other areas of the country also have encountered similar issues. State geologist Jon Arthur and his team identified early on what was occurring: when water was injected into the aquifer, oxygenated water reacted with pyrite in an anoxic aquifer. Simply stated, we were oxidizing (rusting) iron-bearing minerals that contain trace amounts of arsenic.

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

However, we also determined that the released arsenic didn’t travel very far. The oxidation of pyrite is just the first step in a chain of reactions that occur. The released iron is converted into yet another compound that attaches to the aquifer and grabs onto the arsenic; thus, the reason arsenic never traveled far. And finally, in the last step, when water is recovered, the native water eventually sweeps back and releases the arsenic to the recovered water. Public safety is always ensured and any arsenic in the aquifer is removed through the standard water treatment processes prior to distribution. Yet, despite the fact that the treated water meets the drinking water standards, interpretations of federal regulations at that time didn’t allow the mobilization of any drinking water standard, blocking our ability to obtain necessary permits to continue using this critical tool. This was the first true geochemical process problem that water management faced in Florida. The state’s water management districts and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) formed a work group to examine the problem and encourage regulatory solutions. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) could see the benefits of ASR, but was concerned that any modifications to its complex regulatory program designed to protect the public and the aquifer could have unintentional adverse impacts to other areas. Making the case for change was going to require a considerable effort. From experience, we knew that the mobilized arsenic didn’t travel far (less than 300 feet) but we needed to prove our case. The District funded the installation of 13 additional monitoring wells at the PRMRWSA facility and another five wells at the Tampa site. The results were conclusive: no arsenic was detected in any of the monitoring wells beyond 300 feet. Data was now available at two large facilities. We also observed decreasing concentrations of mobilized arsenic in each successive cycle of injection and withdrawals. We believed the issue was a shrinking problem, not a growing one; a problem that will eventually disappear as we remove arsenic from the aquifer. Operating under special consent orders, sites like Tampa continued to supply water for beneficial use and continued to observe arsenic concentrations drop in each

cycle. Eventually, with time and cycling, Tampa achieved consistent compliance with the arsenic standard. As a result, the city will be receiving its operation permit in February 2014. Through persistence and patience, the city proved attenuation can work.

Research Provides Answers The District also initiated the City of Bradenton degasification study. Co-funded by Bradenton, PRMRWSA, and the South Florida and St. Johns River water management districts, the pivotal study proved in the field that dissolved oxygen (DO) was the primary factor causing the arsenic issue. By removing the DO prior to injection, the project produced a new arsenic-free water supply that the city is now using. The District sponsored other studies with the University of South Florida, University of Florida, and the Florida Geological Survey. Out of this research came the first geochemically unaltered core collection and preservation methods, protocols for core leaching studies, and predictive arsenic mobilization models. These are tools in use today helping to make better projects. In October 2013, after more than 10 years of discussions among the water management districts, FDEP, ASR users, and EPA, it was announced by EPA and FDEP that they had developed a regulatory approach that would allow arsenic mobilization under certain limited conditions at ASR facilities operated by public drinking water systems. The EPA recognized the vital importance of ASR in meeting water supply demands and restoring impacts from traditional water supplies. After 17 years of collecting, analyzing, and evaluating data and implementing pilot projects, we now have the PRMRWSA, Tampa, Bradenton, Englewood, and St. Petersburg ASR sites fully permitted. We are no longer compromising on the project designs just to meet the old regulatory approach. We can now optimize each project to provide the largest yield with the best water quality at greatly reduced costs, thus providing a sustainable alternative water supply to millions of residents in southwest Florida. Robert Beltran is executive director of the Southwest Florida Water Management District in Brooksville.

Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ February 2014

F W R J

Have We Been Here Before?: Hindcasting Lake Levels for Minimum Flows and Levels Evaluations Using a Rainfall Decay Model Fatih Gordu, Brett Goodman, Tony Cunningham, and Adam B. Munson Fatih Gordu, P.E., and Brett Goodman, P.E., are senior project engineers with Jones Edmunds & Associates Inc. in Gainesville. Tony Cunningham, P.E., is water/wastewater systems engineer director with Gainesville Regional Utilities. Adam B. Munson, P.E., Ph.D., is lecturer in the department of information systems and operations management at the University of Florida in Gainesville.

ver the past 30 to 40 years, significant downward trends in the Keystone Heights-area lakes have raised public concerns about declining property values and economic hardships in the nearby communities. Lakes have been stressed significantly in north Florida due primarily to severe rainfall deficits. The population of north Florida has also grown dramatically over the same period, causing increased groundwater use and raising concerns about declining lake levels. Figure 1 is an aerial photograph of Lake Brooklyn in 2012. The water management districts in Florida set minimum flows and levels (MFLs) to protect the lakes from significant harm caused by consumptive uses. One of the great challenges in establishing MFLs and measuring their compliance is the availability of sufficient data to evaluate an appropriate range of conditions and to suitably characterize the frequency of specific hydrologic events in the history of a particular waterbody. Establishing the natural long-term variations in lake levels is extremely difficult when lakes exhibit wide fluctuations in levels and the period of record does not capture several high- and low-level cycles. While a 50-year record can be sufficient for making observations about annual cycles, it may be insufficient for discussing events with infrequent return intervals. The difficulty arises if the expectations for high flow or stage conditions established during the late 1950s and early 1960s are viewed as events that are likely to occur with

Figure 1. Lake Brooklyn

Figure 2. Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation Index Departure (NOAA, 2008)

February 2014 â&#x20AC;˘ Florida Water Resources Journal

a frequency of once every 50 years, when they actually represent less frequent events or more extreme events. If this is the case, the expected return frequency of a minimum flow and level could be overstated. The study presented is an attempt to understand the influence of climate on lake levels in the Keystone Height area, which can be useful in establishing the return frequency and levels used in establishing MFLs. The goal was to use readily accessible data to establish relationships between climate and recorded lake levels from 1957 to the present to “hindcast” lake levels from 1874 to 1957. In central Florida, the period from about 1930 to 1965 is considered a period of high precipitation and the period from 1965 to 1995 is considered to have been generally dry. This effect has been tentatively linked to the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) by Kelly (2004) (Figure 2). According to Enfield (2001), Florida rainfall and lake levels have strong correlations with warm and cool phases of the AMO. The National Oceanic and Atmosphere Administration (NOAA) indicates that rainfall in central and south Florida becomes more plentiful when the AtContinued on page 52

Figure 3. Composite Annual Rainfall from 1874 to 2010 with 60-Month Moving Average for the Sandhill Lakes Region

Florida Water Resources Journal • February 2014

Continued from page 51 lantic Ocean is in its warm phase, and droughts are more frequent in the cool phase. For establishing MFLs, a lake record without a full AMO cycle could bias the determination of the frequency of extreme events and result in erroneous thresholds. The Rainbow River is an example of how the period of record can influence the interpretation of trends and extreme events. From

1965 onward, the Rainbow River shows a 25 to 30 percent decline in flow. These significant declines are based on U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) measurements that began in 1965. However, if the physical flow measurements collected by USGS since 1917 are included in the period of record, the flow decline is considerably less alarming. The Southwest Florida Water Management District concluded that the reduction to the

Figure 4. Lake Brooklyn Level and Rainfall Memory Factor (Merritt, 2001)

mean annual springflow caused by groundwater withdrawals is about 1 percent (Basso, 2009). This is consistent with the composite rainfall record developed for this study (Figure 3), which shows that in the 1910s and 1920s rainfall was similar to that of recent years. The composite record is made from the following gauges: several Gainesville NOAA gauges from 1874 to 1989; Lake Brooklyn gauges from 1989 to 1991; Lake Geneva gauges, with some additions from Lake Brooklyn, from 1991 to 2001; Lake Lily gauges in 2002; and Goldhead State Park gauges from 2002 to 2010. Understanding the declines in lake levels without sufficiently addressing the climate’s influence on the Sandhill Lake system would be difficult. Many concerns result from limited observed lake levels in periods of known rainfall deficits. As a result, Jones Edmunds focused on overcoming limitations in the period of the lake-level records and assessed the possibility of using long-term rainfall to extend the lake-level records back to 1900, or earlier. Since Lake Geneva has not been receiving water from Lake Brooklyn since the 1970s, developing a correlation between Lake Geneva and rainfall for the recent period and using it to predict the water levels before 1957 would be difficult. Fortunately, sources of Lake Brooklyn inflows have not been changed since 1957. Therefore, Lake Brooklyn was chosen for extending the lake level records to before the 1950s. Fortunately, numerous studies of this area (Clark et al., 1963; Motz and Heaney, 1991; Robison, 1992; and Merritt, 2001) provide a foundation of information that supports the understanding of the influence of climate on these lake systems.

Rainfall Decay Model Development Merritt (2001) established a relationship between the rainfall data obtained from the Gainesville weather station and Lake Brooklyn levels, which was called the Rainfall Memory Factor (RMF). The basic equation of this factor is:

Figure 5. Comparison of Rainfall Memory Factors Using Gainesville and Composite Rainfall

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Where Rmf is rainfall memory factor Ri is the rainfall total for month i n is the number of months in system “memory” The concept of rainfall decay is that observed lake levels serve as the system’s mem-

ory to past rainfall events. Rainfall occurring closer to the observation is given more weight in predicting lake levels. As Figure 4 shows, a clear correlation between the rainfall memory factor and lake levels was established by USGS; a notable exception to the strong correlation is between 1989 and 1996. Using Merritt (2001) as a basis, a rainfall decay model (RDM) was developed to simulate lake levels of Lake Brooklyn back to the 1870s. The RMF was modified using 12-month moving average data and a composite rainfall dataset that is more representative of the Keystone Heights area. The rainfall dataset indicated a cumulative difference of 68 in. in rainfall from 1989 to 2008 between Gainesville and local rainfall, which explains the lack of correlation between the RMF and Lake Brooklyn levels from 1989 to 1996 (Figure 5). Once the local rainfall dataset was used and a better match was obtained between the 1989 and 1996 data, the RDM was refined through correlation and verification.

a series of trials, the best correlation between the modified RMF and Lake Brooklyn level that can be achieved is with a 60-month (fiveyear) memory span (Figures 6 and 7). The correlation period (1980 to 2009) could include anthropogenic influences on lake levels; however, the latest double-mass curve

analysis from the St. Johns River Water Management (SJRWMD) indicated that the water level decline in the Upper Floridan Aquifer (UFA) well (C-120) adjacent to Lake Brooklyn due to pumpage is no more than 2 ft from 1960 to present (Robison, 2012 draft). ThereContinued on page 54

Model Correlation The period from 1980 to 2009 was used as the correlation period for the model. After

Figure 6. Correlation Between Lake Brooklyn Level and Modified Rainfall Memory Factors

Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ February 2014

Continued from page 53 fore, possible anthropogenic influences on lake levels during the correlation period are not significant compared to the long-term fluctuation of lake levels.

Model Validation The 1957-to-1980 period was used to test the model’s predictive capability. Figure 8 shows the predicted water levels for the entire period and that the observed lake levels are available.

As Figure 8 shows, the RDM predicted the lake levels reasonably well. The following reasons could explain the significant differences between the simulated and observed levels at some periods: Lack of local rainfall. The lake is broken into multiple lobes; therefore, stage-area relationship changes dramatically when the lake stage is very low. Lake-bottom seepage is not uniform due to the existence of sinkholes. Possible sinkhole activities at lake-bottom or within the drainage area over time.

Predicted Historical Lake Levels After correlation and validation, the model was used to predict the lake levels from 1874 to 1957 in Lake Brooklyn. Figure 9 shows the results of the modeling analysis. The simulated water levels were kept at the top elevation of the lake when water levels are higher. The model-predictive water levels were compared with some historical information provided by SJRWMD, with court records showing high levels in February and April 1954, and lake levels in the area increasing from 1942 to 1949 when Lake Geneva was estimated to reach a high water level of 109.1 ft. In addition, a drop of 20 ft was recorded in Lake Brooklyn levels in 1957, whereas the rainfall decay model predicted an 18-ft drop (Figure 9).

Summary and Conclusions

Figure 7. Simulated and Observed Lake Levels (Correlation Period)

The evaluation of the predicted longterm lake levels indicates that lake levels are highly correlated with long-term climatic cycles and that the current conditions likely represent conditions experienced during the droughts from 1910 to 1920 (Figure 10). The analysis also reveals that the oscillating wetdry periods are consistent with the AMO climate cycle presented by Enfield et al. (2001), and lake levels are unlikely to return to the levels recorded in the early 1970s over the next 15 to 20 years, even in the absence of anthropogenic influences. Hindcasting historical lake levels results in a better understanding of long-term water level fluctuations. Recognizing correlations between long-term climate cycles and lake levels can help water management districts improve their methodologies for establishing return intervals for MFLs.

References

Figure 8. Simulated and Observed Lake Levels (Correlation and Validation Periods)

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

• Basso, Ron (2009). Predicted Groundwater Withdrawal Impacts to Rainbow Spring based on Numerical Model Results, Southwest Florida Water Management District, Draft Technical Memorandum, April 27, 2009. • Clark, M., Musgrove, R., Menke, C., Cagel, J. Hydrology of Brooklyn Lake Near Keystone Heights, Florida. U.S. Geological Survey. State Board of Conservation Divisions of Geology. Florida Geological Society Report No. 33. Tallahassee, 1963. • Enfield, D. B., Mestas-Nunez, A. M., Trimble, P. J. The Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation and its relationship to rainfall and

•

river flows in the continental U.S. Geophysical Research Letters. Vol 28. Pg. 2077– 2080. 2001. Kelly, M.H. (2004). Florida River Flow Patterns and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation. Draft report. Ecologic Evaluation Section. Southwest Florida Water Management District. Brooksville, FL. 80 pp. + appendix. Merritt, M. Simulation of the Interaction of Karstic Lakes Magnolia and Brooklyn with the Upper Floridan Aquifer, Southwestern Clay County, Florida. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigation Report 00-4204. Tallahassee, FL 2001. Motz, L. and Heaney, J. St. Johns River Water Management District Special Publication SJ 91-SP5 Upper Etonia Creek Hydrologic Study –Phase 1 Final Report. Palatka, FL 1991. National Oceanic and Atmosphere Administration (NOAA). Atlantic Multidecadal Timeseries. http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/Correlation/amon.us.long.data. 2008. National Oceanic and Atmosphere Administration (NOAA). Frequently Asked Questions about AMO. http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/ phod/amo_faq.php#faq_5. Robison, C.P. 1992. Surface Water Modeling study of the Upper Etonia Creek Chain of Lakes, Clay County, Florida. St Johns River Water Management District Technical Publication SJ 92-3. Robison, C.P. 2012 (draft). Upper Etonia Chain of Lakes, Minimum Flows and Levels Hydrologic Methods Report. St. Johns River Water Management District publication.

Figure 9. Modified Rainfall Memory Factors Model Results

Figure 10. Long-Term Observed and Predicted Water Levels and 60-Month Moving Average Rainfall

Don’t miss out to advertise in the two busiest months of the Florida Water Resources Journal

APRIL– Florida Water Resources Conference JUNE – Conference recap For more information on advertising visit fwrj.com or contact Mike Delaney at 352.241.6006

Join the Celebration and Reserve Your Space Today! Florida Water Resources Journal • February 2014

FWEA FOCUS

Greg Chomic President, FWEA

re you a utility manager or supervisor who is looking for ways to reward individual or team excellence within your organization? Are you a consulting engineering manager looking for ways to recognize a member of your staff or a client who has implemented an outstanding project, or who manages an outstanding wastewater operation? If you are, then I welcome you to consider making a nomination for a FWEA award. Both FWEA and WEF offer a variety of awards that recognize achievement and service to the water environment profession. Awards are presented at the FWEA annual meeting at the Florida Water Resources Conference (FWRC) for service in education, innovative facility design, published papers, research, excellence in water quality improvement, outstanding personal service, service in the operations field, plant safety, and more. The photos included here show the awards ceremony and some of the winners from the 2013 FWRC. Applications for most awards are short and simple and are due by mid-February, so you still have time to review the schedule of

Looking for an Awarding Experience? awards that FWEA offers and prepare an application. Please go to our website, www.fwea.org, and click on the “Committees” tab, and then on the “Awards Committee” tab from the drop-down menu. At the end of a short introduction to the committee, you will be directed to click on a link to a complete list of available awards. For your convenience, I would like to highlight several of these awards, starting with two that are new this year.

Awards Young Professional of the Year Award The purpose of this award is to recognize an outstanding young professional (YP) for his or her service to the wastewater industry through involvement in FWEA. The definition of a YP is a professional who is less than 35 years old and has no more than five years of experience in the industry. The award includes a plaque that is presented at the FWEA annual meeting at the FWRC, statewide recognition in the Florida Water Resources Journal (FWRJ) and the FWEA website, and a grant to cover

expenses to attend the annual Federation’s YP Summit in 2015! This summit is a one-day conference that focuses on leadership and networking skills for YPs. Visit the “Member Resources” page of the FWEA website for more information on the 2014 summit. The onepage nomination form submission deadline is February 14, so you need to move fast for your outstanding YP to be considered! Utility Management Committee Award for Operational Performance Excellence This award is sponsored by the FWEA Utility Management Committee (formerly OPEC). The purpose of this award is to recognize a utility for best business practices. Winners will receive award plaques that will be presented at the FWEA annual meeting at the FWRC and receive statewide recognition in the FWRJ and on the FWEA website. Your application should not exceed 10 pages (double-spaced, minimum 12-point font, singlesided) in length and must address seven specific categories of business performance. The deadline for submitting an application is also February 14, so you still have enough time to prepare your application. Thomas T. Jones Public Education Award This award has a new name in memory of our good friend, former FWEA Public Communication and Outreach Committee chair (PCOC) and FWEA leader Thomas T. Jones, P.E. Tom passed away suddenly last year while working overseas on assignment. Tom loved to teach. He selflessly donated his time and talent to FWEA over many years by working to educate students on the value of a clean water environment and environmental engineering careers. This award recognizes individuals for significant accomplishments that foster and support the development of public outreach programs and integrate public education as a core element of wastewater and water utility planning and management. In addition to the Thomas T. Jones Public Education Award for individuals, there are also public education awards offered by FWEA for organizations and events or campaigns. Applications for all three categories of this award are sought from individual members, FWEA local chapters, and

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

FWEA committees. Winners will receive award plaques that will be presented at the FWEA annual meeting at the FWRC and receive statewide recognition in the FWRJ and on the FWEA website. The one-page nomination form is due on February 14, so there is still time to get your nomination submitted to the PCOC awards coordinator, Julie Karleskint of Hazen and Sawyer. Visit the FWEA Awards Committee webpage for a copy of the application and criteria. Wastewater Collection System of the Year Award This award is sponsored by the FWEA Collections System Committee. It recognizes utilities for significant accomplishments fostering excellence in the operation and maintenance of wastewater collection systems. The award is intended to encourage utilities to provide adequate resources and exhibit excellent practices within their wastewater collection system operation. Awards are presented in three different categories based on the size of the population served: under 20,000; 20,000 to 75,000; and over 75,000. Winners will receive award plaques that will be presented at the FWEA annual meeting at the FWRC and receive statewide recognition in the FWRJ and on the FWEA website. Nominations are due on February 14, so don’t waste any time to getting your nomination submitted to Larry Johnson of Charlotte County Utilities. Visit the FWEA Awards Committee webpage for a copy of the criteria.

Other Awards Other FWEA awards include: Biosolids Residuals Management Award, Integrated Water Resources Award, David W. York Reuse Award, Leroy H. Scott Award (for exceptional plant operations), Earle B. Phelps Award, the FWEA safety awards, and several more. There are also two WEF awards: the William D. Hatfield Award, which is for outstanding performance and professionalism by a wastewater operator; and the Quarter Century Operators Club recognizing 25 years of service as a wastewater operator and WEF/FWEA member. In all, the FWEA awards program includes 18 awards that provide our members abundant opportunities to bring statewide and national recognition to an outstanding individual, plant operation, program, or event in your or a client’s organization. I encourage you to visit the Awards Committee webpage on the FWEA website and consider making a nomination for one of these awards. I assure you it will be an awarding experience! Florida Water Resources Journal • February 2014

SPOTLIGHT ON SAFETY

Safety Training: What are Your Responsibilities? Doug Prentiss Sr. n interesting question was submitted to me recently by David T. Pachucki concerning safety requirements for arc flash training. The answer to his question may be of interest to some of you since it was broader than just the arc flash issue and addresses the basic question of a company’s responsibility to train its workers. David was the Florida Water & Pollution Control Operators Association (FWPCOA) Region IV Education Committee chair, and while traveling around the state and serving as a wastewater collection instructor for FWPCOA, he had received questions about arc flash safety. His main concern was that city and county utilities personnel feel that they are not required to provide personal protective equipment (PPE) training to their employees. He continues to encourage them to become familiar with National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Standard 70 E and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Standard 29 CFR 1910. He also asked me to clarify the NFPA and OSHA standards for city and county utility personnel and suggested I writer this column for the magazine. This is not a new question and my answer may not satisfy everyone. I experienced the same thing as David in a class last spring in which a water plant manager stood up at the beginning of a training session to state, “We don’t have to follow these OSHA rules.” This manager knew there had been comments about not having to follow rules from OSHA and wanted to bring the issue up for clarification—so we did and here I go again!

Since 1979, all Florida government workers, including state, county, and city personnel, were subject to safety inspection for OSHA compliance until 2000. In that year, the safety department, which here in Florida was a division of the workers compensation group, was simply written out of the budget by the governor at that time as a cost saving measure. The state safety workers scattered, the services disappeared, and it was gone. Instantly in 2000 there were no more safety inspections of public utility facilities, no enforcement of safety procedures, and most importantly, no assistance for safety issues. Utilities were left on their own to develop safety programs, and the majority of them have done just that. From the Florida Keys Aquaduct Authority in the southern tip of Florida, all the way to Escambia County Utility Authority in the northwest tip of Pensacola, the government agencies I deal with are all trying to do better than the minimums that OSHA requires and are more attuned to the best management practices of their industry. If you asked Keith Starbuck at Tallahassee if he has to follow OSHA at work he would tell you in a heartbeat that, “We can do better than that stuff,” but then he would go on to tell you that yes, they do really do better. If you asked someone at Orange County if they follow OSHA safety rules, they would be wondering why you’re asking such an obvious question, but would be too polite to point out your obvious confusion. What really happened in Florida in 2000 was government agencies lost assistance in complying with safety rules, but were still required to provide a safe work place for their workers. The fact is that a legal document that exempts Florida government agencies from complying with OSHA regulations does exist

Florida Public Task Force on Workplace Safety meeting. (photo: Doug Prentiss Sr.)

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

and OSHA will not inspect a state, county, or city organization, but that document does not exempt them from providing a safe work place. Large power plants rarely comply with the specific OSHA regulation for lockout/tagout, but they all use programs that provide more protection than the basic lockout requirements. You can say you don’t have to comply, but nothing can eliminate an employer’s responsibility to provide at least the minimum safety standards as others in the same industry. If you don’t use OSHA regulations, you have to do something better. The answer is simple and rooted in common sense: every employer in the United States is responsible for providing a safe work place. The process of developing safe work methods, procedures, and facilities started in the early 1900s and has continued to this day. Commonly referred to as industry practices, they are the tasks and procedures workers do to avoid hurting themselves and others, while efficiently making quality products and services. Even the early pioneers like Henry Ford recognized an injured worker on the assembly line slowed things down, and safety became the foundation of productivity. Every industry has it standards and there are standards for every job. The reality is that OSHA is the default setting in everyone’s safety manual. If you are at a water plant or distribution department then you follow the American Water Works Association (AWWA) standards—and guess what they use for their minimum safety standards? That’s right: the OSHA-established minimum standards for safety. Almost everybody uses them as the foundation upon which they build. In many cases, our industry standards were incorporated into the OSHA rules while they were being developed. So you may not have to put up with an OSHA inspector going through your logs, but you better have something that accomplishes the same thing for worker safety. Again, if you don’t use OSHA regulations, you have to have something better. If you have workers operating a backhoe, the manufacturer of that backhoe bases many of its training components to operate that piece of equipment on industry standards, but then uses OSHA training requirements as the standard of the skill level for workers who operate that equipment. So, OSHA regulations do impact state, county, and city workers both directly and indirectly.

The risk management plan/process safety management (RMP/PSM) standards for hazardous chemicals are another example where state, county, and city workers do comply with both the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and OSHA. When asked if you comply with OSHA safety standards, the reply from an AWWA, Water Environment Federation (WEF), or FWPCOA member should be “We try to do better than the minimums when it comes to worker safety!” There are isolated organizations that live in silos and let in no light and hide behind any exemption, but that type of management will self-destruct given time and the stupidity of their leaders. In many applications, OSHA standards are not enough and companies are expected to know the work that their employees perform and ensure that they are properly trained, and where necessary, re-examine their workers at appropriate times. When employers do not fulfil their responsibilities to worker safety, they may be held personally liable, and the most egregious of those penalties can include felony criminal convictions and prison time. Criminal penalties usually happen when a repeat fatality or series of repeated injuries clearly show a lack of disregard for worker safety. In 2006, multiple fatalities at a municipal treatment plant here in Florida resulted in a

written report by the U.S Chemical Safety Board (CSB), with associated videos and animations, demonstrating who had done right and wrong and what must be done in the future. State, county, and city government are not exempt from the CSB report. The results of the report became the evidence and the resulting legal and organizational resolutions were, to at least some small degree, compared to basic OSHA requirements for workers handling hazardous or flammable materials. The American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE) pushed legislation requiring all Florida cities, counties, municipalities, school districts, state agencies, and special districts to comply with OSHA standards. They are also to provide occupational safety and health coverage for public sector workers as recommended by the December 2008 final report from the Florida Public Task Force on Workplace Safety to the state legislature and governor, but it was never signed and has since been completely dropped. The photo on the previous page shows the final meeting I attended where all participants agreed on the value of the program and the need to bring it back to Florida municipal workers, but it died in committee in Tallahassee. Calling this declaration “a last-resort attempt by [CSB] to bring attention to the fact that public worker safety is an important issue,” CSB Chair Rafael Moure-Eraso called on the state of

Florida to reconsider legislation that would provide adequate workplace protection for public employees. For the first time in its history, the CSB declared a state’s inaction and failure to adopt recommendations to provide federal-level workplace protections for state and municipal public workers an “unacceptable response.” With all the other issues faced by our country, and 25 other states in a similar situation to Florida, the idea of OSHA stepping back in and taking over Florida regulations is simply not in the cards at this time. So you may not have to submit to OSHA inspections and safety programs before accidents happen, but you will after a serious accident occurs. Review your industry guidelines, and in most cases, you are required to meet or exceed the minimum requirements of OSHA. The simple rule to remember is: there are no exemptions for providing workers with a safe work place. You may not have to complete an OSHA form, but you have to ensure workers are trained. Doug Prentiss is president of DPI, providing a wide range of safety services throughout Florida. He also serves as chair of the Florida Water Environment Association Safety Committee.

Florida Water Resources Journal • February 2014

F W R J

The Environmental and Economic Benefits of Blending Nanofiltration Concentrate Water With Reclaimed Water as a Method of Disposal Steve Urich and Brent Weidenhamer Steve Urich is wastewater department manager with Seacoast Utility Authority in Palm Beach Gardens and Brent Weidenhamer, P.E., is associate engineer with Holtz Consulting Engineers Inc. in Jupiter.

eacoast Utility Authority (Authority) is a utility providing potable water, wastewater, and reclaimed water services to the City of Palm Beach Gardens, the Village of North Palm Beach, the south portion of the Town of Juno Beach, the Town of Lake Park, and areas of unincorporated Palm Beach

Table 1. Existing Authory Customers

County in south Florida. The Authority was formed in August 1988 to acquire the assets of Seacoast Utilities, a privately-owned water and sewer company. It has a governing board made up of one member from each of the five entities to which it provides services. The Authority does not have the ability to levy any taxes, but instead receives funding from the rates and fees that it charges its customers. These rates and fees must be approved by the governing board. It also has the ability to secure additional funds through the issuance of government bonds, which must also be approved by the board. In this way, the Authority functions in a very similar fashion as utilities within cities where they are designated as enterprise funds. However, because the Authority was once a part of the private MacArthur Foundation (and later became publicly owned) there are some legacy agreements from that process (including some for reclaimed water allocations) that will not be considered in this article. All return on investment (ROI) and feasibility calculations will be performed as if these agreements were not in place, as they are truly unique to the Authority and not at all applicable in a general sense for other utilities considering this option for the disposal or reuse of their nanofiltration (NF) concentrate. The Authority is in the process of replacing its two lime softening water treatment plants (WTPs) with a combined rated capacity of 30.5 mil gal per day (mgd) with a single NF and reverse osmosis (RO) water treatment plant rated at 30.5 mgd. While the disposal method for the RO concentrate will be deep well injection, the primary method for disposal of the NF concentrate will be through the existing reclaimed water system by being

Table 2. Supplemental Wells

February 2014 â&#x20AC;˘ Florida Water Resources Journal

blended with the treated effluent from the PGA Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) in Palm Beach Gardens (in the western portion of the Authorityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s service area) already being distributed via the reclaimed water system. As a permit requirement, there must be a secondary disposal method for the NF concentrate for periods where the WTP deep well is out of service. The secondary disposal method will be via the same deep well that is utilized for the RO concentrate disposal. There is no requirement for an alternative means of disposal for the RO concentrate, as the RO is a supplemental process at the WTP and can be curtailed or even shut down until the primary disposal method (deep well injection) is brought back on line. The environmental and economic benefits of disposing of the NF concentrate through the reclaimed water system, in lieu of more traditional methods of disposal such as multiple deep injection wells, is presented here.

Existing Reclaimed Water System The Authority currently delivers reclaimed water to 30 large-usage customers throughout its distribution system from the PGA WWTP. There are two distinct types of customers in the reclaimed water system: customers that receive

the water continuously each day over a 24-hour period in large storage lakes, and customers that do not have reclaimed water storage facilities and must receive the water only during the period when they irrigate. The latter customers typically receive and distribute the reclaimed water during a 10-hour period overnight. Table 1 lists each customer, the agreed-upon daily maximum allocation the customer can receive, and the time when the reclaimed water is typically delivered. Figures 1, 1A, and 1B depict the existing reclaimed water system, with end-user locations shown. Based on the reclaimed water agreements, the total demand of the customers with storage is 8.92 mgd and the total demand of customers without storage is 1.853 mgd, giving a total daily demand of 10.773 mil gal (MG). The average annual wastewater effluent generated from the PGA WWTP produced approximately 8.2 mgd of reclaimed water, less than the total reclaimed water agreement allocation. In order to supplement the reclaimed water that is available to its customers each day, the Authority has installed three supplemental surficial aquifer wells that are available to augment the reclaimed water system at 0.25 mgd each, for a total supplemental well contribution of 0.75 mgd. In addition, the Authority utilizes a surface water

supplemental system that withdraws up to 1.5 mgd of water from the C-17 Canal and pumps it via the wastewater collection system to the PGA WWTP when it is necessary to increase effluent available for the production of reclaimed water. Withdrawals from the supplemental wells and surface water pump are permitted by the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) as consumptive use. The three supplemental wells are capable of pumping directly into the reclaimed water distribution system at the capacities included in Table 2. As a result, the three wells can provide up 0.75 mgd of additional reclaimed water to Authorty customers. Monthly or annual limitations established by the SFWMD may restrict the duration of the withdrawals indicated; however, for the purposes of this evaluation, the flow rates depicted in Table 2 from each well are assumed to be constant. Therefore, the approximate average daily effluent flow from the PGA WWTP, plus the water from the C-17 Canal and supplemental wells, equates to approximately 10.45 mgd of available reclaimed water, which is less than the reclaimed water demand of 10.773 mgd. However, the existing reclaimed water agreements state that the Authority does not have to proContinued on page 62

Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ February 2014

Continued from page 61 vide the agreement amounts if the reclaimed water is not available. The users that do not have storage ponds may not receive the agreedupon amount of reclaimed water during irrigation hours, as the water is not available.

Existing Revenue Stream Currently, the Authority charges reclaimed water users at a rate of $0.28 per 1,000 gal of reclaimed water utilized. The revenue generated if the Authority meets all customer reclaimed water demands, or 10.773 mgd, is approximately $1.1 million per year, not considering the unique legacy agreements associated with the MacArthur Foundation.

Quality and Quantity of Concentrate Water In order to decrease the reliance on supplemental wells, and to provide additional reclaimed water to existing customers or to new customers, the Authority will supplement its reclaimed water supply with NF reject water or “concentrate” from its Hood Road WTP. Based on a maximum NF permeate capacity of 26.0 mgd and a membrane recovery rate of 80 percent, the maximum expected reject or concentrate flow rate will be 6.5 mgd. The minimum concentrate flow rate will be based on the minimum capacity of the NF membranes operated, which is expected to be at a rate of approximately 14 mgd of permeate. Assuming an 80 percent recovery rate, the concentrate generated from 14 mgd of permeate production will be approximately 3.5 mgd. If the recovery rate is 85 percent, then the concentrate generated from 14 mgd of permeate production will be 2.47 mgd. Therefore, the NF concentrate will potentially range in flow from 2.47 to 6.5 mgd. The expected water quality of the NF concentrate is shown in Table 3.

The NF concentrate will be conveyed to the PGA WWTP through a 16-in. pipeline from the Hood Road WTP, which is approximately four miles west of the PGA WWTP. During the preliminary stages of design, an evaluation was performed to determine the most cost-effective method of constructing the NF concentrate main. During this evaluation, it was decided that the main would be installed via open-cut methods where possible, even through a private golf course. Through close coordination with the owners of the course, the construction was phased in so that the main was installed across the golf course while it was closed during a twomonth period for maintenance. A portion of the open-cut section of the NF concentrate main would utilize high-density polyethylene (HDPE) welded pipe to allow the main to be installed directly adjacent to an existing raw water main, where the required separation would not be possible through bell and spigot pipe. With one exception (Central Boulevard), the major roads were crossed via horizontal directional drilling (HDD) of HDPE pipe in order to minimize restoration efforts and construction costs. The HDD was the only feasible and allowable means of installation for the crossings of I-95 and the Florida Turnpike; open cutting these major highways was not an option, for obvious reasons. Both Palm Beach County and the Florida Department of Transportation allowed the HDPE pipe to be installed without a casing; however, the Florida Turnpike Authority required that a 30-in. HDPE casing be utilized. At Central Boulevard, an abandoned section of 24in. ductile iron pipe was used for a casing and the NF concentrate main was installed within the 24-in. ductile iron casing. Figure 2 shows the major road crossings and the pipe installation method utilized throughout the pipe route. The concentrate main was ready for use in mid-2013. Based on the NF water quality, it was determined that the concentrate main would be

Table 3. Nanofiltration Concentrate Quantity and Quality

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

constructed of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe, ceramic epoxy-coated ductile iron fittings, and rubber-lined butterfly valves in order to minimize required maintenance and to extend the expected lifetime of the main. The rubber-lined butterfly valves were selected because only the rubber would come into contact with the NF concentrate, prolonging the expected life of the valve. Originally, the main was designed with high-performance, wafer-style stainless steel butterfly valves with restrained-flanged coupling adapters; however, upon inspection, when the valves were delivered, the Authority and its consulting engineer were not comfortable with the possible maintenance issues associated with the design and construction of the actuator for buried service of the wafer-style butterfly valve. Because of this, the original valves were returned and a rubber-lined, mechanical-joint butterfly valve was used in lieu of the stainless steel wafer-style butterfly valves. The NF concentrate will be pumped through the new pipeline into a lined storage pond at the PGA WWTP, where it will be stored prior to blending. A new variable speed pump station at the PGA WWTP will convey concentrate from the lined pond to the chlorine contact basin, where it will be blended with reclaimed water and pumped to the reclaimed water distribution system. By sending the NF concentrate to the chlorine contact basin, the Authory is eliminating the expense and lost capacity of putting the concentrate through the treatment system at the PGA WWTP. An additional benefit of blending with the effluent of the plant is that the monitoring equipment used to determine if the reclaimed water meets treatment standards is located immediately after the blending point. Should the cause for the noncompliance-requiring diversion be the concentrate itself, there is no appreciable amount of concentrate still moving through the treatment system. If the concentrate were introduced to the front of the treatment process, there would be the potential of several MG of effluent that would need to be diverted until the concentrate has passed through the treatment process. The lined concentrate storage pond will also allow the NF concentrate to be conveyed from the Hood Road WTP to the PGA WWTP at the rate it is produced, regardless of the effluent flow rate at the PGA WWTP. During wet weather periods, when reclaimed water demand is low, the NF concentrate can be disposed of at the WTP through an existing deep well utilized for the reverse osmosis portion of the new WTP. Based on previous experience, it is expected that as the NF membranes age, the quality of the NF concentrate will “improve.” As the Continued on page 64

Figure 1. Existing Authority Reclaimed Water System

Figure 1A. Authority Reclaimed Water System: Western Portion

Figure 1B. Authority Reclaimed Water System: Eastern Portion Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ February 2014

Continued from page 62 membranes at the WTP age, the concentrate will contain less and less total dissolved solids (TDS); in other words, the concentrate becomes less concentrated. This will happen because the membrane will start fouling up, allowing less permeate to pass through the membrane. When this occurs, the expected water quality of the NF concentrate will improve because the volume of NF concentrate water will increase as the volume of permeate decreases. The increased volume of NF concentrate water will allow for an increased blending ratio with reclaimed water, based on the TDS. While this is great on the reclaimed end of the operation, it is less so at the production end. As the reject rate goes up, so does the cost of producing water from those membranes. There is a significant cost associated with the replacement of membranes, which must be considered when looking at the increased cost of water production. At a certain point, the cost of producing water with aged membranes becomes more expensive, and the membranes will be replaced. When this happens, the NF concentrate water quality will return to the original quantities, listed in Table 3.

Permitting and Blending Obstacles Encountered The concentrate will be discharged into a recently constructed lined storage pond at the PGA WWTP. A proposed concentrate pump station there will pump the concentrate from the storage pond to the chlorine contact basin, where the concentrate will be blended with the reclaimed water at a ratio of 1 part of concentrate to 3.5 parts of reclaimed water. It is expected that this ratio may be modified in the

future to allow for a higher blending ratio, based on blended TDS once the actual water quality of the NF concentrate is known, but that modification is a) possibly not needed as the new plant is not actually producing concentrate at this point and the quality could be more or less concentrated than estimated, and b) not guaranteed as it needs regulatory approval. As the water quality of the NF concentrate changes because of the fouling of the membranes, it is expected that the higher blending ratio mentioned will be utilized. This blending ratio will be determined by the TDS concentration. As part of the NF concentrate blending pump station project, a sample pump and conductivity analyzer is being installed that will continuously monitor the conductivity. After a baseline ratio of conductivity-to-TDS concentration is determined, the ratio of NF concentrate to reclaimed water can be modified so that a constant TDS level is maintained in the effluent. For this reason, the blending pump station is equipped with variable frequency drives, allowing the pump speed to increase or decrease in order to maintain a constant TDS level by continuous monitoring of the conductivity of the blended effluent. There were several permitting obstacles that needed to be overcome, not the least of which was the requirement from the regulatory agency that there be a physical separation between the piping and appurtenances of the WTP and treatment systems at the WWTP. Effectively, this meant a complete separation of concentrate storage pond and any process streams at the WWTP. This also meant that additional design was required to repipe and isolate the existing lift station that was previously installed to drain the effluent reject stor-

Figure 2. Concentrate Main Route

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

age pond, and which would now become the concentrate storage pond. The lift station is now dedicated solely to the north storage pond, which remains as an effluent reject storage pond and allows it to be drained through the lift station and pumped directly to the anoxic zone for retreatment. The liner will be peeled back over the path of the new piping to be installed, and hard pipe will be installed to connect the north pond with the existing lift station. This approach will provide two complete barriers between the reject storage and the concentrate storage: piping and liner. Either separation method would likely have satisfied the regulatory concerns, but by providing both, it removes any lingering concerns of cross contamination in the event of a failure of one of them. Additional piping changes needed to be made to sever existing cross connections to other storage ponds so that all possible sources of cross contamination were removed. The “duckbill” check valves installed in the chlorine contact chamber satisfied the required check valve and air gap separation requirements of the regulatory agencies. The design for the blending station was incorporated into the five-year permit renewal for the WWTP, which saved the Authority the cost of performing a permit modification in addition to the cost of renewing the permit. By taking that path, however, the Authority was unable to renew the permit until it was able to satisfy all concerns. Alternatively, had any of the outstanding issues with the changes to the permit as submitted not been resolved, the Authority could have withdrawn the sections pertaining to the blending system and later submitted them as a substantial modification to the new permit. In the end, the Authority was able to accommodate all the requests by the regulating agencies and retain them as part of the permit renewal. In addition to the permitting obstacles discussed, the Authority was also in the process of renewing its water use permit (WUP) from the SFWMD. One concern that the SFWMD had as part of the WUP renewal was the supposed effect that the Hood Road Wellfield had on several wetlands within the Mirasol development. Mirasol is a golf-course community located west of Florida’s Turnpike that surrounds the PGA WWTP and is an existing reclaimed water customer that receives 1.75 mgd of reclaimed water through a single metered location. Ac-

cording to SFWMD, during drought conditions, the water level within the existing wetlands was decreasing faster than normally observed, and this drawdown was caused by the adjacent wellfield owned and operated by the Authority. In order to alleviate this possible issue, it was determined that during drought conditions, an additional 2.1 mgd of reclaimed water would be delivered to the Mirasol lake system to minimize the drawdown of the wetlands, should certain threshold conditions occur. Without the supplemental NF concentrate water, the Authority would need to decrease the volume of reclaimed water delivered to existing customers during drought conditions, when the reclaimed water is needed the most. However, with 3.5 to 6.5 mgd of NF concentrate available, existing customers will still receive the agreed-upon volume, even during drought conditions.

New Reclaimed Water Volume and Revenue Available The quantity of new reclaimed water available from NF concentrate will vary slightly day-to-day, depending on finished water production, but is estimated to be approximately 3.5 mgd. This additional volume

of reclaimed water will generate $357,700 of revenue per year, based on the current billing rate of $0.28 per 1,000 gal received. The cost of construction of the 16-in. NF concentrate main is $2.5 million and the cost of constructing the NF concentrate blending pump station is $1 million. The Authority will also receive $500,000 in grant funding from the SFWMD to help fund this project. The funding from SFWMD is due to the benefit this reclaimed water will have in regards to minimizing the drawdown on the wetlands within the Mirasol development. Therefore, the total cost for the additional reclaimed water paid by Authority rate payers is $3 million. Based on an additional revenue stream of $357,700, the ROI for this project is 8.4 years, which is significantly less than the expected life span of either the pipeline or the pump station. In this evaluation, it is assumed that the additional reclaimed water will be conveyed to existing customers, or that new customers will pay for the capital improvements needed to receive reclaimed water. There are several existing customers with small daily allocations who have approached the Authority in the past about increasing their daily allocation, but they have been denied because of the lack of available reclaimed water. In addition, there are sev-

eral potential large-development customers who have approached the Authority about obtaining reclaimed water for irrigation of their landscaping and golf courses. With the additional reclaimed water available, the Authory will be able to expand its reclaimed water customer base and better serve existing customers.

Conclusion The use of NF concentrate main as reclaimed water will allow for the required elimination of withdrawal of supplemental surficial water should a severe drought occur that results in the curtailment of water use permits, decrease the quantity of concentrate being sent to the deep injection well, allow for additional customers to be provided with reclaimed water, and provide additional reclaimed water to existing customers. Utilizing NF concentrate will also allow the Authority’s reclaimed water to be “drought proof ” in that reclaimed water from surficial water sources will no longer be required to meet current obligations. This will, at the same time, return additional flows back to the surficial aquifer through irrigation that would otherwise have been permanently lost through disposal via deep well injection.

Florida Water Resources Journal • February 2014

FWRJ READER PROFILE manage and control project costs and scheduling. What education and training have you completed? • Bachelor’s degree in civil engineer from Florida International University • Master’s degree in environmental engineering from Stanford University • LEED Accredited Professional from Green Building Certification Institute • Professional engineer in Florida

Melissa Velez Carollo Engineers, Miami Work title and years of service. I’ve been a project engineer for more than six years. What does your job entail? As a project engineer, I design water and wastewater treatment plants. My responsibilities include construction/design document preparation (specification and drawings), including performing hydraulic calculations and equipment sizing and design coordination between multiple engineering disciplines. I also

What do you like best about your job? I am passionate about water conservation. What is most fulfilling about my job is that it allows me to help communities by providing drinking water, as well as make an environmental difference by treating wastewater. My job allows me to engage with the local communities, visit water and wastewater treatment plants, and use my creativity to develop innovative treatment solutions. I also enjoy working for Carollo, a company that shares my passion and dedication for water. What organizations do you belong to? FSAWWA, FWEA, and WateReuse Association. How have the organizations helped your career? These organizations have allowed me to be part of a diverse network of individuals who are driven to make

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

change. Through my volunteer activities I have met community leaders, professionals, and individuals who have become mentors, colleagues, and friends throughout my career. Overall, these organizations have provided me a platform to make a positive impact in the industry and in my community. What do you like best about the industry? This is a dynamic industry that is constantly evolving with new technologies. This is something that I love because there are constant challenges and opportunities to bring forth innovation. What I like best, however, is the industry’s responsibility to enhance the sustainability of people’s daily lives and improve the lives and environment of future generations. What do you do when you’re not working? For the past five years I have had the pleasure to help run the FSAWWA Drop Savers Poster Contest, which promotes water conservation in schools though the arts. I also assist in the FSAWWA Water Model Tower Competition and Annual Water Taste Competition. When I’m not working or volunteering, you will most likely find me with my castanets in hand dancing the flamenco, which I’ve been passionate about since I was 10 years old.

Florida Water & Pollution Control Operators Association

FWPCOA STATE SHORT SCHOOL March 24 - 28, 2014 Indian River State College - Main Campus – FORT PIERCE –

COURSES Backflow Prevention Assembly Tester ..........................$375/$405

Utility Customer Relations I, II & III................................$260/$290

Backflow Prevention Assembly Repairer ......................$275/$305

Utilities Maintenance ....................................................$225/$255

Backflow Tester Recertification ......................................$85/$115

Wastewater Collection System Operator C, B & A ......$225/$255

Basic Electrical and Instrumentation ............................$225/$255

Water Distribution System Operator Level 3, 2 & 1 ......$225/$255

Facility Management Module I......................................$275/$305

Wastewater Process Control ........................................$225/$255

Reclaimed Water Distribution C, B & A ........................$225/$255 (Abbreviated Course) ................................................$125/$155

Wastewater Sampling for Industrial Pretreatment & Operators................................................................$160/$190

Stormwater Management C & B ...................................$260/$290

Wastewater Troubleshooting ........................................$225/$255

Stormwater Management A .........................................$275/$305

Water Troubleshooting ..................................................$225/$255

For further information on the school, including course registration forms and hotels, download the school announcement at www.fwpcoa.org/fwpcoaFiles/upload/2014SpringSchool.pdf

SCHEDULE CHECK-IN: March 23, 2014 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. CLASSES: Monday – Thursday........8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Friday........8:00 a.m. to noon

FREE BBQ DINNER + Monday, March 24, 4:30 p.m. + 3209 Virginia Ave Fort Pierce, FL 34981

For more information call the

FWPCOA Training Office 321-383-9690 Florida Water Resources Journal • February 2014

C FACTOR

Membership and Training Keeps the Industry on Track Jeff Poteet President, FWPCOA hile almost the entire country is having recordbreaking low temperatures, here in Florida we are enjoying the benefits of living in a climate that traditionally doesn’t get too far below 70 degrees. During these wintery months, our climate does get the attention of the rest of the country. Many of our northern friends are fed up with shoveling the white fluffy stuff and decide enough is enough—they pack up their bags to seek refuge from Jack Frost. It is estimated that 1000 people relocate to Florida every single day! How does this affect us, the water industry, in the things that we do? Well, it’s like dominos: more people

means more water use, more water use means more infrastructure, more infrastructure means more treatment facilities, more treatment facilities means more operators needed to run those facilities, and I could go on and on. As I have said before, this is where membership in the Association can directly benefit you and the community that you serve. If you want to get the full benefits of membership, you need to become an active member. There are many ways to be an active member; however, the first step is going to a regional meeting. If you’re not aware what region you’re in, please visit www.fwpcoa.org and see our regional page. A visual breakdown of the state by region can be viewed and a simple click of the mouse on your region will give you the contact for that section. The regional page may also give the information of upcoming meet-

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

ing times and locations. The Association is here to help you gain the knowledge and leadership experiences needed to help you grow professionally so that we all can better serve our communities. The mission of FWPCOA is a simple one: we protect the health of the citizens and preserve the natural resources of our communities. We do this by advancing the professional status of water and wastewater professionals, providing a licensing system, and arranging training opportunities for the industry. I would like to highlight the efforts of a great member and leader of the Association, Ray Bordner. Ray has been active in the Association for well over 30 years and currently serves our organization as a past president and System Operator Committee chair. When I look at people who are involved and dedicated to bettering our industry, few people have the intrinsic drive that Ray possesses. He has taken our backflow “on the road” program to a new level and has provided training for thousands of Florida’s water professionals. When I took the reins from Ray, it was comforting to know that I could tap into his knowledge and leadership skills, and over the past year he has helped me with the trials and challenges of the presidency. I look forward to working with Ray for many years to come! We are really excited about the training opportunities that we are offering in 2014. Our Spring Short School is all set for March 24-28 at the Indian River State College. From April 6-9, the premier training event for Florida’s water professionals, the Florida Water Resource Conference, will be held in Orlando at the Disney’s Coronado Springs Resort. In August, the state will hold another short school to help our members meet their professional goals. All 13 of the Association’s regions will be holding many other training opportunities. Of course, if you like to get the training you desire in your own timeframe, our online training program is the platform for you. Please see our website for more information on our training programs, the Association, and additional regional information. The next board of director’s meeting will be held on March 23 at the Indian River State College in Ft. Pierce. I hope to see you there.

ENGINEERING DIRECTORY

Tank Engineering And Management Consultants, Inc.

Engineering • Inspection Aboveground Storage Tank Specialists Mulberry, Florida • Since 1983

863-354-9010 www.tankteam.com

Florida Water Resources Journal • February 2014

ENGINEERING DIRECTORY

Fort Lauderdale 954.351.9256

Jacksonville 904.733.9119

Miami 305.443.6401

Orlando 407.423.0030

Gainseville 352.335.7991

Key West 305.294.1645

Navarro 850.939.8300

Tampa 813.874.0777 813.386.1990

West Palm Beach 561.904.7400

Naples 239.596.1715

Showcase Your Company in the Engineering or Equipment & Services Directory Contact Mike Delaney at 352-241-6006 ads@fwrj.com

EQUIPMENT & SERVICES DIRECTORY

February 2014 â&#x20AC;˘ Florida Water Resources Journal

EQUIPMENT & SERVICES DIRECTORY

Motor & Utility Services, LLC

Instrumentation,Controls Specialists Instrumentation Calibration Troubleshooting and Repair Services On-Site Water Meter Calibrations Preventive Maintenance Contracts Emergency and On Call Services Installation and System Start-up Lift Station Controls Service and Repair

Central Florida Controls,Inc. Florida Certified in water meter testing and repair P.O. Box 6121 • Ocala, FL 34432 Phone: 352-347-6075 • Fax: 352-347-0933

CEC Motor & Utility Services, LLC 1751 12th Street East Palmetto, FL. 34221 Phone - 941-845-1030 Fax – 941-845-1049 prademaker@cecmotoru.com • Motor & Pump Services Test Loaded up to 4000HP, 4160-Volts • Premier Distributor for Worldwide Hyundai Motors up to 35,000HP • Specialists in rebuilding motors, pumps, blowers, & drives • UL 508A Panel Shop, engineer/design/build/install/commission • Lift Station Rehabilitation Services, GC License # CGC1520078 • Predictive Maintenance Services, vibration, IR, oil sampling • Authorized Sales & Service for Aurora Vertical Hollow Shaft Motors

w w w. c e nt r a l f l or i d a c ont rol s . c om

Florida Water Resources Journal • February 2014

EQUIPMENT & SERVICES DIRECTORY

CLASSIFIEDS Positions Av ailable Purchase Private Utilities and Operating Routes Florida Corporation is interested in expanding it’s market in Florida. We would like you and your company to join us. We will buy or partner for your utility or operations business. Call Carl Smith at 727-8359522. E-mail: csmith@uswatercorp.com

Town of Lake Placid, Florida Director of Utilities Civil Engineering Degree or Finance Degree preferred. Experience in managing and operating water and wastewater systems required. Experience in financial issues involving the management, operation and acquisition of utilities is required. Prefer that applicant have at least a Florida dual “C” Certification in water and wastewater treatment or ability to obtain within three months of hire. Interested parties may mail resumes to Town Administrator by email at lakeplacidinfo@gmail.com, 311 W. Interlake Blvd, Lake Placid, FL 33852. Download job description and emp. application from website at: www.lakeplacidfl.net. EOE/DFWP.

City of Clermont OPERATIONS CHIEF Position # 823 The City of Clermont is seeking a Waste Water Operations Chief. Minimum three (3) years supervisory experience in operations, maintenance and repair of public utility wastewater treatment plant. Strong management and computer skills required. Valid FL Drivers license req. Apply to Human Resources Department at: 685 W. Montrose St., Clermont, FL 34711. Resumes will not be accepted without a completed application. Position starting pay- $19.43 Pre-employment physical, drug screen and back ground check required. EOE/Vet Pref/DFWP

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Shop Mechanics and Field Service Tech Wanted Manufactures repair and service facility is looking for quality people in the Orlando and Tampa area. Shop mechanics: Must be experienced in pumps and motors repairs, minimum. Field Service Tech: Must be experience in pumps, lift stations and control panels. Must have a valid driver’s license and know how to operate the Autocrane on the truck. Excellent benefit package with employee medical paid, 401K, vacations and holidays. Equal Opportunity Employer. Please send resumes to tim@hydraservice.net or fax to 407-330-3404

Infrastructure Engineer I The City of Bradenton, Florida currently is seeking an Infrastructure Engineer I to provide project management for internal and external projects related to the City of Bradenton infrastructure systems. Work closely with Federal, State, and local governmental and utilities agencies to manage the City’s Right-of-Way Use permits and utilities locations services through the Sunshine One Call system. Essential duties and responsibilities will include pro-active planning, design and implementation of new infrastructure, and rehabilitation and replacement of existing City infrastructure, including water distribution, storage and pumping systems, wastewater collection and pumping systems, reuse water distribution, storage and pumping systems, and roadways and sidewalks. Bachelor of Science degree from an accredited engineering college if required along with 2 to 4 years of related experience in engineering planning and design of public infrastructure systems. Licensure as a Professional Engineer in State of Florida, or the ability to secure registration within 24 months. Salary range is $52,000 to $82,000, commensurate with experience and qualifications. For a detailed job description, please visit the City of Bradenton website at www.cityofbradenton.com.

We are currently accepting employment applications for the following positions: Water & Wastewater Licensed Operator’s – positions are available in the following counties: Pasco, Polk, Highlands, Lee, Marathon Maintenance Technicians – positions are available in the following locations: Jacksonville, New Port Richey, Fort Myers, Lake, Marion, Ocala, Pembroke Pines Construction Manager – Hillsborough Customer Service Manager - Pasco Employment is available for F/T, P/T and Subcontract opportunities Please visit our website at www.uswatercorp.com (Employment application is available in our website) 4939 Cross Bayou Blvd. New Port Richey, FL 34652 Toll Free: 1-866-753-8292 Fax: (727) 848-7701 E-Mail: hr@uswatercorp.com

Water and Wastewater Utility Operations, Maintenance, Engineering, Management

CITY OF WINTER GARDEN – POSITIONS AVAILABLE The City of Winter Garden is currently accepting applications for the following positions: - Collection Field Tech – I & II - Utilities Operator II - Customer Service Technician I - Distribution Field Tech – I Please visit our website at www.cwgdn.com for complete job descriptions and employment application. Applications may be submitted online, emailed to jobs@cwgdn.com or faxed to 407-877-2795.

Utilities Storm Water Supervisor $53,039-$74,630/yr. Plans/directs the maintenance, construction, repair/tracking of stormwater infrastructure. AS in Management, Environmental studies, or related req. Min. five years’ exp. in stormwater operations or systems. FWPCOA “A” Cert. req.

Utilities Treatment Plant Operator I $41,138-$57,885/yr plus $50/biweekly for “B” lic.; 100/biweekly for “A” lic. Class “C” FL DW Operator Lic. & membrane experience required.

Lift Station Operator I $37,313 - $52,503/yr. Inspects/repairs wastewater pumps, electrical equipment and radio telemetry system. FL Class “C” WW Collection cert. & Class “B” CDL required. Apply: 100 W. Atlantic Blvd., Pompano Beach, FL 33060. Open until filled. E/O/E. http://pompanobeachfl.gov for details.

Seminole County Environmental Services Positions Available Distribution Supervisor $34,091.20 - $59,675.20 Responsible for the management of the distribution system to include meters 2" and smaller. Manages and coordinates the meter change out program, meter testing program and service line installations. Must have experience managing multiple databases. Mechanic I $28,683.20 - $50,211.20 Technical work in the installation, maintenance, and repair of electrical, mechanical, and hydraulic systems, pumps, and controls in the Water and Wastewater Division. Responsible for all aspects of maintaining, repairing, and updating water and sewer systems countywide. To view the full job descriptions and to apply, please visit our website at: http://agency.governmentjobs.com/seminolecountyfl/default.cfm

Assistant Director Field Services Department Toho Water Authority Assistant Environmental Services Director This is a newly created position requiring experience at an operational management level for oversight and management of the solid waste department, capital projects, asset management and administrative policy. The City of Clermont Environmental Services prides itself by operating under a business model in a rapidly growing, dynamic community. Annual salary range is $56,888 - $90,522. Please visit our website for details: www.cityofclermontfl.com EOE, M/F, V/P, D/V, DFWP.

Toho Water Authority is seeking applications from experienced and talented individuals in the water and wastewater industry for the position of Assistant Director for Field Services. The Asst. Director will work closely with the Field Services Director to provide leadership and supervision and manage the daily activities for the department. The successful candidate will have demonstrated good organizational skills, supervisory experience, communication skills, and experience providing mentorship and training to employees. Starting salary is $56,506. To view the full job description and apply online, please visit www.tohowater.com

Florida Water Resources Journal • February 2014

Certification Boulevard Answer Key February 2014

From page 21 1. C) Degasification Degasification is the term used to describe the removal of volatile compounds from water. The removal rate of volatile compounds increases as the rate of air through water is increased. The basic principle of degasification is to force a column of air up and through a column of water flowing down. The degasifier has three main components: the tower, the blower, and the sump. 2. C) 3.48 cfs 1,000,000 gpd ÷ 86,400 sec/day ÷ 7.48 gal/cu ft x 2.25 mgd = 3.48 cfs OR 1.55 cfs per mgd x 2.25 mgd = 3.48 cfs 3. A) Pathogenic Pathogenic organisms are capable of producing disease in host organisms. Diseases that are transmitted through the water (waterborne) include typhoid, cholera, and dysentery. Organisms that do not cause disease are referred to as nonpathogenic. 4. B) 16.2 HP Horsepower = (gpm x TDH, ft x 8.34 lbs per gal) ÷ 33,000 ft lbs per second = (675 gpm x 95 TDH x 8.34 lbs per gal) ÷ 33,000 = 16.21 HP Note: TDH = Total Dynamic Head 5. B) Calcium and magnesium Hardness is a characteristic of water caused mainly by the salts of calcium and magnesium, such as bicarbonate, carbonate, sulfate, chloride, and nitrate. Excessively hard water will result in calcium scale forming in the distribution system. Water that is too soft will be corrosive.

6. B) "B" kit The “A” kit contains equipment for fixing a leak on a 150-lb cylinder. The “B” kit is for 1-ton cylinders. The “C” kit is for tank cars and tank trucks. 7. D) Liquid chlorine weighs 1.5 times more than water. Chlorine is a clear amber-colored liquid about 1.5 times heavier than water. Gaseous chlorine is greenish-yellow, about 2.5 times heavier than air. Uses include water purification; sanitation of industrial waste; disinfection of wastewater treatment effluent; swimming pools; bleaching of pulp and textiles; manufacture of carbon tetrachloride, glycol, and numerous other organic compound;, and phosgene gas. 8. C) About 11 psi. Each ft of water generates 0.433 psi 25 ft of water x 0.433 psi = 10.82 psi OR 1 psi = 2.31 ft of head 25 ft of head ÷ 2.31 ft per psi = 10.82 psi 9. A) Cationic Cationic polymer has a positive charge that will neutralize the negative charge associated with solids. Once the electrical charge is neutralized, the particles will no longer repel each other and will clump together. Anionic and nonionic polymers are typically used as filter aids. 10. A) Aluminum sulfate Aluminum sulfate (alum) is an acid with a pH typically below 4.0. Sodium hydroxide (caustic) is an alkaline with a pH typically greater than 12.

Questions 1, 3, 5, and 9 (and their answers) are from Scott Ruland, chief operator with the City of Deltona.

Display Advertiser Index CEU Challenge..................................................65 CROM ..............................................................57 Data Flow ........................................................39 FSAWWA Drop Savers ......................................59 FSAWWA Operator Awards................................51 FSAWWA Training ............................................43 FWPCOA Short School ......................................67 FWPCOA Training..............................................29 Florida Water Resources Conference ............9-14 Garney................................................................5 GML Coatings ................................................8,61

Hudson Pumps ................................................23 ISA ..................................................................48 Rangeline ........................................................75 Regional Engineering........................................53 Reiss Rngineering ..............................................7 Stacon................................................................2 Stantec ............................................................65 Treeo................................................................68 US Water ..........................................................49 Xylem ..............................................................76

February 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Editorial Calendar January . . .Wastewater Treatment February . .Water Supply; . . . . . . . . . .Alternative Sources March . . . .Energy Efficiency; . . . . . . . . . .Environmental Stewardship April . . . . . .Conservation and Reuse; Florida Water Resources Conference May . . . . . .Operations and Utilities Management June . . . . . .Biosolids Management and Bioenergy Production; . . . . . . . . . .FWRC Review July . . . . . .Stormwater Management; . . . . . . . . . .Emerging Technologies August . . . .Disinfection; Water Quality September .Emerging Issues; . . . . . . . . . .Water Resources Management October . . .New Facilities, Expansions and Upgrades November .Water Treatment December .Distribution and Collection

Technical articles are usually scheduled several months in advance and are due 60 days before the issue month (for example, January 1 for the March issue). The closing date for display ad and directory card reservations, notices, announcements, upcoming events, and everything else including classified ads, is 30 days before the issue month (for example, September 1 for the October issue). For further information on submittal requirements, guidelines for writers, advertising rates and conditions, and ad dimensions, as well as the most recent notices, announcements, and classified advertisements, go to www.fwrj.com or call 352-241-6006.