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: Editor: Graphic Design Manager: Mailing Coordinator:
Michael Delaney Rick Harmon Patrick Delaney Buena Vista Publishing
Published by BUENA VISTA PUBLISHING for Florida Water Resources Journal, Inc. President: Richard Anderson (FSAWWA) Peace River/Manasota Regional Water Supply Authority
News and Features 8 8 9 22 34 36 46 53
Marshall Takes Office as 2015-2016 FWEA President 2015-2106 FWEA Board of Directors 2015-2016 FWEA Officers, Chairs, and Advisors List Managing Florida’s Water—Florida Department of Environmental Protection WEF HQ Newsletter—Kristina Twigg and Peter V. Cavagnaro Water Reuse Organizations Merge FSAWWA Participates in 19th Annual St. Johns River Cleanup—Amy Hunter News Beat
Vice President: Greg Chomic (FWEA) Heyward Incorporated
Technical Articles
Treasurer: Rim Bishop (FWPCOA) Seacoast Utility Authority Secretary: Holly Hanson (At Large) ILEX Services Inc., Orlando
Moving? 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
4 12
Scullion, Jason Sciandra, and Rick Whalen
38
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
A Biosolids Public-Private Partnership Success Story in Charlotte County—Robert Pepperman
Education and Training 7 19 25 26 27 32 33
FSAWWA: Donna Metherall – 407-957-8443 or fsawwa.donna@gmail.com FWPCOA: Shirley Reaves – 321-383-9690
For Other Information
Backyard Biological Nutrient Removal: Florida On-Site Sewage Nitrogen Reduction Strategies Study—Damann L. Anderson and Josefin E. Hirst Comprehensive Evaluation of Dewatering Alternatives for the City of Fort Myers—Michael
FWPCOA Training Calendar FWPCOA State Short School FSAWWA Fall Conference Call for Papers FSAWWA Fall Conference Overview FSAWWA Fall Conference Exhibitor Registration CEU Challenge TREEO Center Training
Columns 18 20 28 30 43 44
Certification Boulevard—Roy Pelletier FWEA Focus—Raynetta Curry Marshall C Factor—Thomas King FSAWWA Speaking Out—Mark Lehigh FWRJ Committee Profile: Utilities Maintenance Committee FWRJ Reader Profile—Yanni Polematidis
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.
Departments 48 49 52 54
New Products Service Directories Classifieds Display Advertiser Index
Volume 67
ON THE COVER: A water tower for theCity of Cocoa is surrounded byscaffolding for repainting of the entirestructure.(photo: Jim Peters)
June 2015
Number 6
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 • June 2015
3
F W R J
Backyard Biological Nutrient Removal: Florida On-Site Sewage Nitrogen Reduction Strategies Study Damann L. Anderson and Josefin E. Hirst
pproximately 25 percent of the United States and 30 percent of Florida’s population rely on on-site wastewater systems (OWS) for wastewater treatment. Nutrient loading from many sources, including OWS, has received increased attention from water quality regulators and the public in many watersheds. Nitrogen in particular is an important nutrient of concern for water quality, and nitrate-nitrogen represents perhaps the most common groundwater pollutant from OWS. The environmental effects of excess nitrogen on groundwater and surface water can ultimately lead to the degradation of water quality, since excess nitrogen loading can lead to algal blooms and oxygen depletion in surface waters, which can be harmful to natural aquatic life. The protection of watersheds and surface water bodies from excess nitrogen loading has led to increasing regulatory actions requiring nitrogen reduction from OWS in areas such as the Florida Keys, Chesapeake Bay, and Cape Cod, to name a few.
A
In Florida, the degradation of water quality in the many freshwater springs and nitrogen-limited estuarine surface water bodies has led to legislation requiring protection of these areas, including requirements for nitrogen-reducing OWS. The Florida Department of Health initiated the Florida On-Site Sewage Nitrogen Reduction Strategies (FOSNRS) project to research, develop, construct, and test different on-site wastewater treatment systems to address nitrogen reduction from OWS. As part of the FOSNRS project, passive nitrogen reduction systems (PNRS) were developed and pilot tested and are now being evaluated at homes in Florida. The goal of these systems is to reduce nitrogen inputs to watersheds where OWS have been identified as a significant source of nitrogen. A PNRS system installed in Hillsborough County utilized the two-stage passive biofiltration concept. As shown in Figure 1, primary treated wastewater, or septic tank effluent (STE) from the home’s existing septic tank, is discharged to a two-stage treatment system consisting of a first-stage unsaturated porous media recirculating biofilter for ammonification and nitrification, followed in series by a second-stage saturated anoxic upflow porous media biofilter for denitrification. Effluent from the stage-one biofilter was pumped to the stage-two biofilter and also recirculated back to the stage-one biofilter at a ratio of ap-
Figure 1. Passive nitrogen reduction system (PNRS) process flow diagram
4
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
Damann L. Anderson, P.E., is a vice president and Josefin E. Hirst, P.E., is a senior principal engineer at Hazen and Sawyer in Tampa.
proximately 3:1 recirculation flow R to forward flow Q. The denitrified treated effluent was discharged into the home’s existing drainfield. The PNRS system was monitored over an 18-month period, receiving STE with an average total nitrogen (TN) concentration of 54.7 mg N/L. The overall system-treated effluent average TN concentration was 2.5 mg N/L, a reduction in TN of over 95 percent. A second PNRS system was developed and constructed to provide high levels of wastewater treatment, as well as landscape irrigation at a five-bedroom home in central Florida. This system utilized the same two-stage concept, but the first-stage biofilter was constructed in ground over a polyethylene liner rather than in a tank. The system was monitored over an 18-month period, and TN entering the system averaged 50.5 mg N/L. The overall system-treated effluent average TN concentration was 1.9 mg N/L, a reduction in total nitrogen of over 96 percent. This effluent was applied as irrigation water to turf grass at the home via drip irrigation. In addition to the treatment performance, groundwater quality was monitored at this site before and after installation of the PNRS. Prior to the PNRS installation, a groundwater monitoring network was established, which included over 60 groundwater monitoring wells downgradient of the existing conventional OWS. Figure 2 shows a site plan of maximum TN concentrations at all locations where groundwater samples were obtained during the four sample events (July 2011 through July 2012) taken prior to the PNRS installation. In addition, illustrated in Figure 2 are two transect cross sections A-A’ and B-B’. For comparison, Figure 3 depicts the maximum TN concentration at all locations where groundwater samples were obtained during Continued on page 6
Continued from page 4 the sample event conducted 468 days following PNRS start-up (Oct. 23 and 24, 2014), along with similar transect cross sections A-A’ and B-B’. As shown, a significant decrease in
TN concentration in the groundwater plume downgradient of the PNRS system has occurred since PNRS system installation. While these are preliminary results, they suggest the potential to significantly reduce N
input to sensitive watersheds from OWS. Five additional full-scale PNRS are currently under evaluation, and results from these systems will provide key additional data regarding PNRS performance.
Figure 2. Groundwater monitoring downgradient of the conventional OWS prior to PNRS installation
Figure 3. Groundwater monitoring 468 days following PNRS start-up
6
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
FWPCOA TRAINING CALENDAR SCHEDULE YOUR CLASS TODAY! June 1-5 1-5 1-5 1-5 1-5 8-12 8-22 8-22 8-22 8-22 15-18 22-26 22-26 22-26 26
......Reclaimed Water Distribution C ..........St. Petersburg ....$225/255 ......Stormwater C, B, A ..............................St. Petersburg ....$275/305 ......Utilities Maintenance III ........................St. Petersburg ....$225/255 ......Wastewater Collection C, B, A ............St. Petersburg ....$225/255 ......Water Distribution ......Wastewater Collection C, B ................Deltona ............$325/355 ......Stormwater A** ......................................Pembroke Pines $225/250 ......Stormwater C, B** ................................Pembroke Pines $260/280 ......Wastewater Collection C, B, A** ........Pembroke Pines $225/255 ......Water Distribution Level 3, 2, 1** ......Pembroke Pines $225/255 ......Backflow Tester* ..................................St. Petersburg ....$375/405 ......Wastewater Collection A ....................Deltona ............$275/305 ......Water Distribution 1 ............................Deltona ............$275/305 ......Stormwater A ........................................Deltona ............$275/305 ......Backflow Tester Recert*** ....................Deltona ............$85/115
July 6-10 13-15 24 27-30
......Reclaimed Water Field Site Inspector Deltona ............$350/380 ......Backflow Repair* ..................................St. Petersburg ....$275/305 ......Backflow Tester Recert *** ....................Deltona ............$85/115 ......Backflow Tester ....................................Deltona ............$375/405
August 10-14 ......FALL STATE SHORT SCHOOL ............Ft. Piece 31- Sept. 2 Backflow Repair ....................................Deltona ............$275/305 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 *** any retest given also
You are required to have your own calculator at state short schools and most other courses. Florida Water Resources Journal • June 2015
7
Marshall Takes Office as 2015-2016 FWEA President Raynetta Curry Marshall has begun her term as president of the Florida Water Environment Association (FWEA), following her election at the Association’s annual meeting on May 5. Marshall is currently director, water/wastewater grid project engineering and construction, for JEA in Jacksonville, where she is responsible for the engineering and construction management of the company’s water, wastewater, and reclaimed water delivery and collection infrastructure for new capacity projects, system upgrades, and major renewal and replacement projects. She has been a FWEA member since 1999, when she moved to Florida from Silver Spring, Md., and has served as chair of the FWEA Utility Committee
2015-2016 BOARD OF DIRECTORS
John A. Giachino WEF Delegate
Paul Pinault WEF Delegate
and a FWEA director-at-large. In addition to the FWEA groups, she is currently chair of the Water Environment Federation Utility Management Committee. Marshall began her career at the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, in Laurel, Md., in 1984, where she managed the design of capital improvement projects. She was also program director for the Water Environment Research Foundation from 1991 to 1999 and water resources director for the City of Titusville from 1999 to 2011. She holds a master’s of science degree in environmental engineering and a bachelor’s of science degree in civil engineering from Howard University. She and her husband, David, have four children.
Lisa Prieto President Elect
Tim Harley Vice President
Amber M. Batson Secretary/Treasurer
Greg Chomic Past President
Ron Cavalieri Director at Large
Kristiana Dragash Director at Large
Gregory Kolb Director At Large
Sondra Lee Director At Large
Kartik Vaith Executive Director
Karen Wallace Executive Manager
Photo Not Available
Michael Sweeney Director at Large
8
James Wallace Director at Large
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
Brian Wheeler Utility Council President
Bradley Hayes Operations Council Representative
2015-2016 FWEA Officers, Chairs, and Advisors The following officers, directors, committee chairs, chapter chairs, and student chapter advisors began their terms at the beginning of the FWEA annual meeting on May 5. BOARD OF DIRECTORS PRESIDENT Raynetta Curry Marshall, P.E. JEA 904-665-7613 marsrc@jea.com PRESIDENT ELECT Lisa Prieto, P.E., BCEE Amec Foster Wheeler 407-253-5523 lisa.prieto@amecfw.com VICE PRESIDENT Tim Harley, P.E. St. Johns County Utility Department 904-209-2626 tharley@sjcfl.us SECRETARY/TREASURER Amber M. Batson, P.E. 561-601-2456 fwea.batson@gmail.com PAST PRESIDENT Greg Chomic Heyward Inc. 407-628-1880 gchomic@heywardfl.com WEF DELEGATE John A. Giachino PC Construction 407-473-3628 jgiachino@pcconstruction.com WEF DELEGATE Paul Pinault, P.E. CDM Smith 239-938-9600 PinaultP@cdmsmith.com DIRECTOR AT LARGE Ron Cavalieri, P.E. AECOM Technical Services Inc. 239-278-7996 Ronald.cavalieri@aecom.com
DIRECTOR AT LARGE Kristiana Dragash, P.E. Carollo Engineers Inc. 941-371-9832 kdragash@carollo.com DIRECTOR AT LARGE Gregory Kolb, P.E. CH2M 407-423-0030 gkolb@ch2m.com DIRECTOR AT LARGE Sondra Lee, P.E. City of Tallahassee 850-891-6123 Sondra.Lee@talgov.com DIRECTOR AT LARGE Michael Sweeney, Ph.D. Toho Water Authority 407-944-5129 msweeney@tohowater.com DIRECTOR AT LARGE James Wallace, P.E. Jacobs Engineering Group 904-636-5432 jamey.wallace@jacobs.com UTILITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT Brian Wheeler, P.E. Toho Water Authority 407-518-2251 bwheeler@tohowater.com OPERATIONS COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE Bradley Hayes City of Tavares 325-742-6485 bhayes@tavares.org
COMMITTEE CHAIRS AIR QUALITY Darryl Parker Lee County Board of County Commissioners daparker@leegov.com AWARDS Nicole Quinby, P.E. Black & Veatch 407-419-3584 quinbyn@bv.com BIOSOLIDS Jody Barksdale, P.E. Gresham Smith & Partners 813-769-8948 jody_barksdale@gspnet.com COLLECTION SYSTEMS Walt Schwarz CH2M 305-745-3991 Walt.Schwarz@CH2M.com EXECUTIVE ADVISORY COUNCIL Mike Cliburn 407-513-8242 mdcliburn@aol.com INTEGRATED WATER RESOURCES Ricky Ly, P.E. Stantec 407-432-9563 rickyly2007@gmail.com MEMBERSHIP ACTION TEAM Tim Harley, P.E. St. Johns County Utility Department 904-209-2626 tharley@sjcfl.us
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Kartik Vaith, P.E. The Constantine Group 904-562-2185 kvaith@tcgeng.com EXECUTIVE MANAGER Karen Wallace 407-574-3318 admin@fwea.org Florida Water Resources Journal • June 2015
9
OPERATIONS CHALLENGE Chris Fasnacht City of St. Cloud 407-957-7104 cfasnacht@stcloud.org PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS AND OUTREACH Phil Kane, Ed.D. Florida Department of Environmental Protection 407-897-4156 pkane12@att.net MEMBER RELATIONS Suzanne Mechler CDM Smith 561-571-3800 MechlerSE@cdmsmith.com WATER REUSE Lynn Spivey ARCADIS U.S. Inc. 813-353-5747 Lynn.spivey@arcadis-us.com SAFETY AND SECURITY Judd Mooso Destin Water Users Inc. 850-337-3915 jmooso@dwvinc.com W. Scott Holowasko Gainesville Regional Utilities 352-393-1667 holowaskows@gru.com STRATEGIC PLANNING George B. Cassady, P.E. Hillsborough County Public Utilities Department 813-209-3009 cassadyg@hillsboroughcounty.org STUDENTS AND YOUNG PROFESSIONALS Danielle Bertini Carollo Engineers Inc. 813-888-9572 dbertini@carollo.com TRAINING AND CONTINUING EDUCATION Kenneth Blanton, P.E. Black & Veatch 407-419-3500 BlantonKM@bv.com UTILITIES MANAGEMENT Kerstin Kenty CH2M HILL 813-874-0777 Kerstin.kenty@ch2m.com
10
WASTEWATER PROCESS Jeffrey S. Lowe McKim & Creed Inc. 727-442-7196 jlowe@mckimcreed.com
CHAPTER CHAIRS BIG BEND Shanin Speas-Frost, P.E. Florida Department of Environmental Protection 850-245-2991 shanin.speasfrost@dep.state.fl.us CENTRAL FLORIDA Stacey Smich CH2M 407-423-0030 stacey.smich@ch2m.com FIRST COAST Leslie Samel, P.E., BCEE Hatch Mott MacDonald 904-203-1081 leslie.samel@hatchmott.com MANASOTA Lindsay Marten, EI Stantec 941-225-6178 Lindsay.Marten@stantec.com SOUTHEAST Eric Stanley, P.E. CDM Smith 561-571-3800 stanleyea@cdmsmith.com SOUTHWEST Kristopher Samples CDM Smith 239-938-9607 samplesk@cdmsmith.com TREASURE COAST Christine Miranda, P.E. Holtz Consulting Engineers Inc. 561-575-2009 Christine.Miranda@holtzconsulting.com WEST COAST Freddy Betancourt, P.E. Greeley and Hansen LLC 813-873-3666 fbetancourt@greeley-hansen.com
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
STUDENT CHAPTER ADVISORS FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY Dr. Daniel Meeroff 561-297-3099 dmeeroff@fau.edu Dr. Fred Bloetscher 239-250-2423 fbloetsc@fau.edu FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY Dr. Berrin Tansel 305-348-2928 tanselb@fiu.edu UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA Dr. Steven Duranceau, P.E. 407-823-1440 steven.duranceau@ucf.edu UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA Dr. John Sansalone 352-281-5806 jsansal@ufl.edu UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI Dr. James Englehardt 305-284-5557 jenglehardt@umiami.edu UNIVERSITY OF NORTH FLORIDA Dr. Chris Brown, P.E. 904-620-2811 Christopher.j.brown@unf.edu UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA Dr. Sarina Ergas 813-974-1119 sergas@usf.edu FAMU/FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY Dr. Youneng Tang 850-410-6119 ytang2@eng.fsu.edu FLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY Dr. Simeon Komisar 239-590-1315 skomisar@fgcu.edu
F W R J
Comprehensive Evaluation of Dewatering Alternatives for the City of Fort Myers Michael Scullion, Jason Sciandra, and Rick Whalen he City of Fort Myers (City) owns and operates two wastewater treatment facilities: the Central Advanced Wastewater Treatment Facility (AWWTF) and the South AWWTF. The City treats wastewater from its service area and from surrounding Lee County through an interlocal agreement. Approximately 50 percent of the wastewater treated at the Central and South AWWTFs is produced by Lee County. The Central AWWTF is an 11-mil-galper-day (mgd) facility. Wastewater entering the Central AWWTF is treated in a five-stage Bardenpho process prior to being distributed to the reclaimed water system for land application (R-001) or discharged to the Caloosahatchee River. The high-level disinfection system of the facility can produce up to 6 mgd of reclaimed water. The existing solids handling process includes aerobic digestion of secondary waste activated sludge (WAS) and alum chemical sludge, followed by dewatering using belt filter presses. The dewatered biosolids cake is hauled to the Lee-Hendry County Landfill for composting or disposal. The South AWWTF is a 12-mgd facility. Wastewater entering the South AWWTF is treated using the Bardenpho process prior to being discharged to the Caloosahatchee River. The existing solids handling process includes aerobic digestion of secondary WAS and alum chemical sludge, followed by dewatering using belt filter presses. The dewatered biosolids cake is hauled to the same landfill for composting or disposal. The existing dewatering facilities at the Central and South AWWTFs are approximately 30 years old and are in need of replacement. The current dewatering handling facilities utilize the addition of polymer to the feed sludge prior to being pumped to the belt filter presses. Significant advancements in dewatering technology have been made since the 1980s, allowing the production of cake with higher solids content than can be achieved with the existing belt filter presses. Dewatering technologies, including belt filter presses, centrifuges, and screw presses, were evaluated on a presentworth life cycle cost basis. A pilot study was also conducted at the South AWWTF to collect
T
12
actual field data on the performance of the units.
Dewatering Pilot Evaluation Dewatering of biosolids is a critical step in biosolids processing, impacting downstream treatment processes and transportation costs. Projecting the performance of biosolids dewatering equipment at a specific treatment facility is difficult to do based on sludge characteristics alone. Pilot testing of dewatering equipment is commonly conducted to compare dewatering technologies and to refine the expected performance of each technology. An on-site pilot testing program was conducted at the South AWWTF to provide a comparison among belt filter presses, centrifuges, and screw presses. Objectives of the pilot testing program included: Providing a comparison of the dewatering performance of each technology on feed sludge from the South AWWTF. Optimizing process parameters used to project annual operating costs associated with biosolids dewatering. Evaluating alternative polymers for use with the new dewatering technologies. The South AWWTF was chosen for pilot testing as its dewatering equipment has priority to be replaced over the Central AWWTF, and in the experience of the City, sludge at the South AWWTF is typically more difficult to dewater than sludge at the Central AWWTF. In addition to the determination of the solid content of the biosolids cake produced by each alternative dewatering technology, pilot testing was also conducted to evaluate polymer dosage, throughput, power, and solids capture. The dewatering technologies were pilot tested separately during the months of July and August 2014 for approximately two to three days each. The data and results collected from each pilot test at the South AWWTF were compiled and examined to characterize the expected performance of each technology. The specific manufacturers selected for pilot testing were chosen based on availability of pilot equipment. Other manufacturers offer similar
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
Michael Scullion, P.E., is project manager, and Jason Sciandra, P.E., is senior project manager with CDM Smith in Maitland. Rick Whalen, P.E., is senior project manager with City of Fort Myers.
quality equipment that can be expected to perform in a similar manner, as discussed previously.
Pilot Test Layout and Methodology The pilot testing trailers were set up south of the South AWWTF blower building between the aerobic digesters and the screening and grit removal building. Feed sludge was obtained from the aerobic digester through a pump-out connection. Both potable water and reclaimed water connections were located near the trailer for washdown and polymer makeup. Electricity was provided from a connection to a motor control center (MCC) for one of the City’s blowers. Filtrate or centrate was discharged into the wetwell of an in-site lift station near the trailer. Dewatered biosolids cake was collected in a dumpster and hauled to the landfill at the end of every day. Samples were collected and analyzed by the City’s laboratory on-site at the South AWWTF. A pilot test sampling and analysis protocol was created and distributed to the dewatering equipment manufacturers in late June 2014. The dewatering equipment vendors were requested to follow a standard pilot testing sequence, which consisted of polymer screening, dewatering unit optimization, polymer optimization, and finally, system stress testing. Polymer screening was intended to include evaluating different polymers to identify those that were most effective in dewatering the feed sludge at the South AWWTF. At the option of the dewatering vendor, polymer screening could be completed off-site prior to pilot testing or on-site during the week of testing. The centrifuge and belt filter press manufacturers chose to collect sludge samples prior to testing to conduct off-site analysis. The screw press manufacturer did not evaluate polymers prior to arriving at the South AWWTF.
The dewatering optimization step was intended to consist of initial test runs to identify the most effective settings of the dewatering unit. These settings include items such as belt filter press belt pressure and speed, centrifuge pond depth, and screw press operating pressure. Following optimization of the dewatering unit, the polymer optimization step was intended to consist of dewatering sludge with the polymers identified during the polymer screening stage at varying dosages. The final stage of the pilot testing was intended to be system stress testing where the feed sludge flow rate is steadily increased to observe the impact of increased throughput on cake solids. Pilot unit operators were expected to document dewatering unit settings, sludge flow rate, polymer type and dosage rate, power draw, and other process variables throughout testing.
different variables to determine the impact on cake solids. The performance of the dewatering unit at each data point must be independently evaluated to accurately assess the performance.
Belt Filter Press The belt filter press was pilot tested from July 28, 2014, to Aug. 1, 2014. The pilot unit trailer is shown in Figure 2. A sludge sample was collected from the South AWWTF prior to the start of pilot testing, and evaluated to select polymers for pilot
testing. Three polymers were selected for testing: BASF Zetag 7878FS40, Polydyne C-6266, and Polydyne C-9530. The BASF polymer was tested over three runs and Polydyne C-6266 was tested over nine runs, as was Polydyne C9530. Polymer doses ranged from 13.8 to 32 pounds active polymer per ton dry solids (lbs/ton). While all of the polymers yielded good dewatering results in the range of 15.9 to 20.7 percent cake solids, the Polydyne C-6266 polymer was found to be the most effective polymer for the belt filter press in terms of dewatering performance. Continued on page 14
Table 1. Feed Sludge Characterization
Feed Sludge Characterization Samples of the feed sludge were taken periodically during the pilot testing period and analyzed for total suspended solids (TSS) and volatile suspended solids (VSS). The feed sludge characteristics were very consistent throughout the pilot testing period. A summary of the feed sludge characteristics is presented in Table 1. It is important to note that due to the nature of the pilot testing process, simply averaging the data is not adequate to gauge the full-scale performance of the dewatering unit. The pilot testing process is intended to optimize the performance of the units by testing
Figure 2. Belt Filter Press Pilot Unit
Table 2. Partial Belt Filter Press Test Results
Figure 3. Belt Filter Press Throughput Versus Cake Solids Florida Water Resources Journal • June 2015
13
Continued from page 13 All of the test runs yielding over 20 percent solids were obtained using Polydyne C6266 polymer. Three out of the five dewatering results reporting above 20 percent solids required high polymer doses ranging from 27 to 32 lbs /ton. Polymer doses of approximately 20 lbs/ton produced similar cake solids, while resulting in a substantial savings in polymer. The pilot test report recommends an expected polymer consumption rate of 2830 lbs/ton. The sizing of a belt filter press is based on the solids loading per meter of belt width. In this manner, the results obtained from the 0.6m pilot unit can be scaled up to the 2m units proposed for full-scale installation.
Throughput testing was conducted simultaneously with the polymer optimization testing. The majority of the test runs were conducted at lower solids loading rates than the design value of 750 pounds per hour per meter (lbs/m/hr), and the expected performance presented in the pilot study report was based on a solids loading of 300-500 lbs/hr/m. While the pilot unit was not tested at the exact loading rate, four tests were conducted that were used to estimate the performance of the belt filter press. As these four runs bracket the design solids loading rate of the proposed belt filter presses and the polymer dose was roughly the same in three of the four runs, these results are representative of the expected results of a full-scale pilot unit. Sludge load-
ing rate versus cake solids for these four test runs is presented in Figure 3. The linear relationship between cake solids and sludge loading rate was used to estimate the performance of the belt filter press at the design sludge loading rate of 750 lbs/hr/m. A cake solids concentration of 17.9 percent would be expected based on the curve presented in Figure 3. Some variability in the performance of the dewatering equipment is to be expected due to variations in the feed sludge, and a range of 17 to 19 percent is reasonable to expect for a full-scale installation. Data used in estimating the performance of the belt filter press and the projected full-scale performance are presented in Table 2.
Centrifuge
Figure 4. Centrifuge Pilot Unit
Table 3. Centrifuge Throughput Test Results
Table 4. Centrifuge Energy Consumption Data
14
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
The centrifuge was pilot tested Aug. 11-14, 2014, and is shown in Figure 4. The centrifuge vendor conducted polymer screening prior to pilot testing. Three polymers were identified for on-site testing: Polydyne C6242, BASF 8868FS, and Polydyne SE-1026 (the polymer currently used at the City’s AWWTFs). Polymer optimization tests were conducted with each of the three polymers at a sludge feed rate of 65 gpm. All polymers began testing at a high dosage (55 to 60 lbs/ton) and reduced thereafter to create the polymer optimization curve. The BASF 8868FS polymer was found to be the most effective in terms of dewatering performance, significantly outperforming the Polydyne SE-1026 currently used at the plant. After the polymer optimization tests, throughput testing was conducted using the BASF 8868FS polymer. The sludge flow was increased while monitoring the cake dryness to determine where throughput begins to limit the dewatering results. The results of the throughput testing and the projected performance of the full-scale unit are presented in Table 3. The centrifuge manufacturer reports expected performance of 19 to 22 percent cake solids at a polymer dose of 25 to 29 lbs/ton and at a sludge loading rate of 1,500 lbs/hr in a fullscale unit. Upon review of the data presented in the pilot test report, these ranges are representative of the expected performance of a fullscale installation. Energy consumption of the centrifuge was monitored using a power meter during each of the test runs. An average of 120 kWh/ton was used to estimate the energy consumption of the full-scale centrifuge installation. Energy consumption data are presented in Table 4. Continued on page 16
Continued from page 14
Screw Press The screw press was pilot tested Aug. 18-21, 2014. The screw press vendor chose not to collect a sample of sludge prior to pilot testing for polymer screening and instead relied on the Polydyne polymer vendor to recommend the type of polymer to be used in testing. The dewatering vendor recommended using Polydyne SE-1026, the same polymer used by the City at the AWWTFs. Another Polydyne product, Clarifloc C-6262, and a number of Ashland Chemical products were also tested throughout the week. Ashland Chemical polymers K-279 FLX, K-275 FLX, and K-274 FLX were tested over a
total of seven runs and yielded poor dewatering results. The polymer currently used at the AWWTFs, Polydyne SE-1026, was tested five times, yielding relatively poor dewatering results. The Polydyne Clarifloc C-6262 polymer was found to be the optimal polymer for the screw press. Due to the large number of polymers tested on-site and the size of the pilot unit, only five runs were completed using the optimal polymer. Two of these runs were conducted at low solids loading rates, and high polymer doses skewing the results. The remaining three results were conducted at the rated solids loading capacity of the unit (320 lbs/hr). These results were considered typical of the expected full-scale performance. The screw press test re-
Table 5. Partial Screw Press Test Results
Table 6. Screw Press Energy Consumption Data
sults and expected performance of the full-scale unit are presented in Table 5. Note that the cake solids values presented in the screw press pilot test report are the values reported by the equipment vendor. The cake solids values presented in this report are the values obtained by the City laboratory, which were typically lower than the vendor-reported values. Although not specified in the pilot test report, the screw press vendor reported an expected performance of 17.5 to 19 percent solids at a polymer dose of 28-32 lbs/ton. The expected performance of the units is near the lower end of this range based on the observed performance. Overall, the screw press produced a cake solids similar to the belt filter press at a higher polymer consumption. The pilot test report indicates that the poor results may have been in part due to the age of the City’s Polydyne SE-1026 polymer and the fact that plant water was used for polymer makeup for all of the test results in lieu of potable. A potable water source was available for polymer makeup and it is not clear why it was not used by the screw press vendor. Energy consumption of the screw press was monitored using a power meter during the majority of the test runs. An average of 2.8 kWh/ton was used to estimate the energy consumption of the full-scale screw press installation. Energy consumption data are presented in Table 6.
Pilot Test Summary and Conclusions
Table 7. Projected Biosolids Cake Solids Content
Table 8. Projected Polymer Dosing Rates
Note: Numbers presented are in lbs active polymer/ton dry solids.
16
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
A detailed discussion of the data collected during the pilot testing is presented. Due to the process of optimizing the dewatering equipment with many variables, including throughput, polymer dosage, and polymer type, some data were not included in the performance considerations. Other factors impacting performance are discussed in other equipment specific sections of the report. One of the key parameters is the cake dryness attainable by each dewatering technology. The solids content values presented are based on the optimized polymer type and their performance during pilot testing. As previously discussed, cake solids content can directly impact treatment and transportation costs; the higher the percent solids, the less disposal and transportation costs there will be. Solids content of the biosolids cake produced using each dewatering technology is presented in Table 7. Each dewatering technology experimented with multiple polymers to determine the optimal performing polymer based on the cake dryness results. Over the course of the
pilot testing, only the Andritz centrifuge and the Schwing Bioset screw press tested the polymer (Clarifloc SE-1026) currently in use at the plant. Compared to the other polymers tested, the Clarifloc SE-1026 did not perform as well. The optimal polymers for the Andritz centrifuge and Schwing Bioset screw press were BASF Zetag 8868FS and Polydyne Clarifloc C6262, respectively. An optimal polymer for the belt filter press was not reported; however, based on the data, the optimal polymer appeared to be Polydyne C-6266. In addition to the optimal polymer, an optimal dose was identified during the pilot test. An optimal polymer dose increases the stability of the flock, resulting in increased water release and cake dryness. Overdosing polymer can result in overflocculation, hindering dewatering results. The expense of polymer can also outweigh the benefits of a marginal increase in solids content achieved. Polymer dose ranges based on the optimal polymers mentioned are presented in Table 8. Solids capture generally exceeded 95 percent during the pilot testing, and is expected to remain high during full-scale operation. Average solids-capture values with each technology are presented in Table 9. Very high solids capture rates have become the industry standard in dewatering. The equipment pilot tested at the South AWWTF is no exception; at design loading rates, the solids capture of the units can be expected to be in excess of 95 percent. Throughput of dewatering equipment is a function of both hydraulic loading and solids loading. Biosolids dewatering equipment should provide adequate throughput to meet solids production within the desired operating schedule. The throughput must also be balanced with the required solids retention time to achieve sufficient cake solids content. Table 10 presents the required number of proposed units to achieve the design throughput. All dewatering equipment was sized to require three units at the Central AWWTF and two units at the South AWWTF to achieve the 1,500 lbs/hr throughput. Energy consumption of the full-scale dewatering units was estimated based on the results of the pilot tests for the centrifuge and screw press. As the belt press vendor did not report measured energy consumption, the rated motor horsepower was used to estimate energy consumption. The belt filter press motors are small, and although the projected energy consumption is conservative, it has minimal impact on the project operation and maintenance costs. The projected energy consumption for each dewatering technology is presented in Table 11.
Table 9. Reported Solids Capture
Table 10. Units Required for Design Throughput
Table 11. Projected Energy Consumption
Note: Belt Filter Press is based on motor Hp.
Table 12. Summary of Dewatering Alternative Performance
Summary of Dewatering Alternatives A summary of the sizing, performance, and projected costs of each dewatering alternative is presented in Table 12. The total present-worth cost estimates are based upon the City’s current practice of composting biosolids cake. Hauling and disposal costs represent the majority of the annual operations and maintenance costs, and any change in the method of disposal of biosolids cake or renegotiation of the current contract with Lee County has the potential to significantly impact the total present-worth cost of each alternative, as shown in the sensitivity analysis.
Recommended Alternative Centrifuges are recommended for installation at the Central and South AWWTFs. Centrifuges and belt filter press have comparable present-worth costs over the 20-year evaluation period. However, centrifuges offer the highest noncost score, are best able to fit within the confines of the existing building, and provide the highest cake solids. Centrifuges are also proposed for the City’s future East Water Reclamation Facility, allowing a common spare-parts inventory to be shared among the three facilities.
Florida Water Resources Journal • June 2015
17
Certification Boulevard
Test Your Knowledge of Residuals Management Roy Pelletier 1. What is an unacceptable range of total suspended solids (TSS) in the liquid sidestream of a gravity thickener or gravity belt thickener? a. 1 to 3 mg/L b. 5 to 15 mg/L c. 50 to 100 mg/L d. 20 to 30 mg/L 2. Which action will typically allow the float sludge to become thicker in a dissolved air flotation (DAF) process? a. Increase the sludge feed rate. b. Decrease the recycle water rate. c. Decrease the top skimmer speed. d. Increase the top skimmer speed. 3. Which adjustment will normally decrease the flocculation (floc) size exiting in an in-line venturi mixer of a gravity belt thickener or belt filter press? a. Open the venturi mixer. b. Close the venturi mixer. c. Place a second venturi mixer into service. d. The venturi mixer has nothing to do with floc size.
6. Which digester, in a two-stage anaerobic digestion process, is normally not mixed and/or heated? a. Primary digester b. Secondary digester c. Neither is normally mixed or heated. d. Both are normally mixed and heated. 7. What does the following formula represent? OUR, mg/l/hr = mg/hr/gm TS, gm/l a. Oxygen uptake rate (OUR) b. Specific oxygen utilization rate (SOUR) c. Sludge volume index (SVI) d. Fecal coliform 8. Which process modifications may best resolve a condition of massive white foam and low pH in an aerobic digester? a. Increase the sludge feed rate. b. Increase the air supply and increase the dissolved oxygen (DO).
4. Given the following data, how many lbs/day of centrate solids will this centrifuge produce? · Sludge feed rate is 250 gal per minute (gpm) · Sludge feed solids concentration is 1.5 percent total solids (TS) · Centrate is 97 percent of sludge feed rate · Centrate solids content is 100 mg/L · Centrifuge operating time is 24 hrs/day a. 150 lbs/day b. 291 lbs/day c. 45,036 lbs/day d. 95 lbs/day 5. What is the hydraulic retention time (HRT) in days of an aerobic digester given the following data: · 75-ft diameter tank · 20 ft deep · Digester sludge feed is 15,500 gal per day (gpd) · Tank depth averaged 85 percent full during the calculation period a. 62.6 days b. 31.3 days c. 23.5 days d. 36.2 days
18
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
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/wastewater professional? All past editions of Certification Boulevard through 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.
c. Decrease the digester solids retention time (SRT). d. Decrease the air supply and decrease the DO. 9. What is a typical range for gas production in a properly operated anaerobic digestion process? a. 1 to 2 ft3 per lb volatile solids (VS) reduced b. 5 to 7 ft3 per lb VS reduced c. 11 to 20 ft3 per lb VS reduced d. 40 to 60 ft3 per lb VS reduced 10. If a volatile solids reduction calculation for an anaerobic digestion process is 37 percent, does this digester meet EPA's vector attraction reduction regulation for Class B residuals? a. Yes b. No c. Not enough data to answer this question. d. This requirement does not exist.
Answers on page 54
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 & Pollution Control Operators Association
FWPCOA STATE SHORT SCHOOL August 10 - 14, 2015 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 III & II ..........................................$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/2015FallSchool.pdf
SCHEDULE CHECK-IN: August 9, 2015 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 AWARDS LUNCHEON + Wednesday, August 12, 11:30 a.m. +
For more information call the
FWPCOA Training Office 321-383-9690 Florida Water Resources Journal • June 2015
19
FWEA FOCUS
Strategically Planning for FWEA's Future Raynetta Curry Marshall President, FWEA
ello! It is with great pride and excitement that I write my first article for the magazine as FWEA's 72nd president. I am looking forward to the upcoming year and am certain that it will be filled with the wonderful, great-quality events that FWEA is known for. During our 2014-2015 fiscal year, the FWEA board was "all in." We hunkered down, and under the leadership of President Kart Vaith, developed a strategic plan that sets a strong foundation to build a successful future for FWEA. Before I get into specifics concerning the plan, I would like to give out some big "thank yous." The first thank you goes to the FWEA board. Rarely have I had the opportunity to work with such an energetic and invested group of volunteers! This board donated countless hours to ensure that FWEA is headed in the
H
Committee chair Jody Barksdale at the Leadership Development Workshop.
Board of directors and FWEA chapter and committee chairs at the February 2015 Leadership Development Workshop in Daytona Beach.
20
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
Planning committee and volunteers for the October 2014 Central Florida Water Festival at Cranes Roost Park in Orlando.
right direction and provides the necessary support and guidance for our eight local chapters and 20 statewide committees. My second thank you goes to FWEA's 2014-2015 president, Kart Vaith. For those who don't know, this year was filled with challenges. In the beginning of the year, when our president-elect was not able to fulfill the role of president due to personal reasons, Kart, a two-term past president, agreed to step in and fill the gap. During the year, despite an unbelievable family tragedy—the unexpected loss of his eldest son, Jackson—Kart kept his head up, kept going, and continued to conduct FWEA business. For this, we are all amazed, in awe, and deeply appreciative. Thank you, Kart! For those of you that were able to attend the FWEA annual meeting and awards program at the Florida Water Resources Conference last month, you were given an overview of FWEA's new strategic plan, which is meant to be a living document, and includes the following: Vision: A Clean and Sustainable Water Environment for Florida's Future Generations Mission: The Florida Water Environment Association (FWEA), a leading nonprofit organization, will promote a clean and sustainable water environment by: • Supporting and uniting our members and the public through public awareness • Providing professional development of our members • Promoting sound science-based public policy • Maintaining a strong organization In addition to the vision and mission statements there are 14 goals and objectives. And, for the first time, FWEA has also established metrics that will allow us to measure our progress in meeting the goals. I welcome all of you to visit our website to see the plan in its entirety. In closing, I would like to add a last thank you to all of our local chapters, committees, and members! You are the heart of FWEA and without you we wouldn't be able to produce the quality events such as the Student Design Competition, Operators Challenge, water festivals, technical seminars, and scholarship golf tournaments, just to name a few. With your continued involvement and commitment our future is indeed bright, and together we will all realize A Clean and Sustainable Water Environment for Florida’s Future Generations!
February 2015 Operations Challenge Meet and Greet.
The First Coast Chapter annual golf charity tournament, held jointly with FSAWWA Region II, August 2014 in St. Augustine. Florida Water Resources Journal • June 2015
21
Managing Florida’s Water 22
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
Florida Department of Environmental Protection A multitude of springs and lakes, thousands of miles of rivers and runs, and many aquifers to tap have created the illusion that Florida has water aplenty. However, a growing population, an all-time high in tourism, higher demand for power, and the need to protect fresh-water-dependent ecosystems are testing the limits of water resources. Across the state, plans and projects are in the works to ensure that Florida will have enough water to sustain a healthy environment and a healthy economy until 2035, and beyond. Each year, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) collects information from the water management districts to evaluate water supplies and demands. Information includes projected water needs for a 20-year period, alternative water supply development, and progress reports on projects paid for through the water protection and sustainability program, which was funded in fiscal years 2006 through 2009 to assist with construction of alternative water supply projects. The report also includes estimates of the amount of water each project will make available.
supply plans for its three western-most counties. Protection of the coastal Floridan aquifer continues to be the major focus. The district has worked with utilities to develop inland groundwater sources that serve the region’s coastal areas. The district also has expanded hydrologic data collection to include new monitoring wells in the sand and gravel aquifer in Santa Rosa County, as well as additional surface water data stations. The district awarded seven water supply development grants, including three reclaimed water projects, to public supply utilities in the region. Another district focus is protecting Deer Point Lake Reservoir, the main water source for Bay County. The reservoir is vulnerable to saltwater intrusion from coastal storm surge, and development of an alternate upstream intake for water supply is underway. A restoration project at Williford Springs on Econfina Creek, upstream of the reservoir, has begun to help protect the groundwater recharge area for the reservoir. By the end of fiscal year 2013-14, $98 million had been spent on 10 alternative water supply projects. These projects have made available more than 22 mgd of water. The district expects these projects to produce over 30 mgd by 2035.
Preliminary research indicates that the potential for additional water conservation and reuse is significant and will be needed to satisfy projected 2035 water demands for regions 1 and 2, which includes coastal counties from Nassau south to Volusia, as well as Baker, Clay, Putnam, and portions of Alachua Marion and Lake counties. In addition, aquifer replenishment and other alternative water supply projects may be needed for these regions. In Region 4, which includes Brevard County and a portion of Indian River County, the district expects that future demands can be met with the limited naturally occurring fresh groundwater, along with the brackish groundwater and surface water sources already being used. Additional water conservation and reuse will be needed in all regions to secure sufficient water supply. The district is investigating indirect potable reuse as a future option to meet water supply needs. By the end of fiscal year 2013-14, more than $1.2 billion had been spent on 39 alternative water supply projects. These projects have already made available more than 82 mgd of water. The district estimates these projects to produce more than 192 mgd by 2035.
Northwest Florida Water Management District
St. Johns River Water Management District
Suwannee River Water Management District
In 2010, water use in the Northwest Florida Water Management District was about 357 mil gal per day (mgd). By 2035, the district expects water use to increase by almost 17 percent to more than 417 mgd. The district has developed regional water
In 2010, total water use in the St. Johns River Water Management District, including the portion within the Central Florida Water Initiative, was around 1,200 mgd. By 2035, the district expects water use to increase by about 26 percent to more than 1,500 mgd.
In 2010, water use in the Suwannee River Water Management District was approximately 256 mgd. By 2030, the district expects water use to increase by about 4 percent to more than 266 mgd. Continued on page 24
Florida Water Resources Journal • June 2015
23
Continued from page 23 The district’s report, “2010 Water Supply Assessment,” concluded that regional groundwater withdrawals over the past 75 years have caused Upper Floridan Aquifer levels to decline significantly in the northeastern portion of the district, and aquifer levels in this area will continue to decline during the 2010–2030 planning period. The district, along with the St. Johns River Water Management District and FDEP, are developing the North Florida Regional Water Supply Plan. In 2014, the districts worked on developing 2035 water demand projections and estimating water conservation potential for the region. The district is investigating the feasibility of aquifer recharge projects, alternative water supply projects, and water resource development projects. The Eagle Lake project, focused on alternative water supply, was approved for funding in 2014 and will offset up to 20 mgd of groundwater with a surface water source. Proj-
ects in the works include the Middle Suwannee River and Springs Restoration and Aquifer Recharge Project and the Brooks Sink Project, which will direct excess surface water runoff into existing natural features to recharge the aquifer.
Southwest Florida Water Management District In 2010, total water use in the Southwest Florida Water Management District was about 1,303 mgd. By 2030, the district expects water use to increase by more than 19 percent to about 1,556 mgd. Water supply concerns throughout the district include the existing impacts to minimum flows and levels (MFLs), limited availability of traditional groundwater resources, and saltwater intrusion (in the Tampa Bay and southern planning regions). Solutions to these challenges in-
clude reducing water demands through increased conservation and reclaimed water use, developing alternative water supply sources, reallocating unused water during land use transitions, and establishing MFLs. By the end of fiscal year 2013-14, $1.34 billion had been used for projects that will provide nearly 168 mgd by 2030. Of this amount, more than 58 mgd has already been created.
South Florida Water Management District In 2010, total water use in the South Florida Water Management District was almost 3,300 mgd. By 2030, the district expects water use to increase by almost 23 percent to almost 4,050 mgd. Water supply issues include a continuing need for additional hydrogeological studies and groundwater models, developing methods to meet water supply needs for users and MFLs in the lower east coast region, complying with the 2008 Ocean Outfall Act, completing Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan projects, meeting water demands related to the increase or decrease in citrus acreage, and alleviating the impact of Lake Okeechobee releases on the Caloosahatchee and St. Lucie estuaries. The water supply plans indicate that the district’s 2030 needs can be met with appropriate management, diversification of water supply sources, increased water storage, and conservation. By the end of fiscal year 2013-14, the district had spent almost $6.9 million on projects identified in its regional water supply plans. Almost $1.6 billion had been spent on 234 alternative water supply projects. These projects have made available more than 287 mgd of water. The district expects the projects to produce more than 432 mgd by 2030.
Priceless Resource In a thirsty state, conservation, diversification of water sources, and coordination among water districts, state and local governments, utilities, and residents will help to ensure a reliable water supply for the environment, the economy, the wildlife, and the lifestyle to which Floridians are accustomed. Read the FDEP “2014 Annual Report on Regional Water Supply Planning” at www.dep.state.fl.us/water/waterpolicy/docs/201 4_Annual_rwsp.pdf. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection is the lead state agency for environmental management and stewardship, protecting air, water and land. The agency is divided into three primary areas: regulatory programs, land and recreation, and water policy and ecosystem restoration.
24
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
26
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
Florida Water Resources Journal • June 2015
27
C FACTOR
Gullible’s Travels, or the Life and Times of a Wayward Facility Manager Thomas King President, FWPCOA
entered the wastewater industry haphazardly, as did most of you I suppose. I can’t imagine a young child saying, “Mom, I want to grow up to be a wastewater plant operator.” I was sent on an interview to the Snap Finger Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant, just outside Atlanta. The older man sitting at a desk covered with phones, ashtrays, and a radio system was red-faced and in full blown “utility panic mode.” He was yelling at a guy in the office, commanding that “any moron would have checked the pump for gas before deploying it to the lift station site.” The worker on the radio was asking repeatedly if anyone could hear him. The phones were all on hold, blinking with the prospect of other emergencies he had not yet handled. He answered one (again, red-faced) yelling, “Try handling this one on your own; it’s the least of our problems right now.” He looked up, probably just noticing I was there and said, “What do you want?” All I could say was, “I’m here for an interview.” He froze, staring me in the eye and said, “Kid, three years ago I was in a car wreck, and I was in a coma for two weeks— THAT was the best two weeks of my life.” He picked up a phone and went back at it full speed, while writing on a note pad: Be here Monday at 6 a.m. And so began a career (so to speak) of one emergency after another. I always seem to be assigned jobs with no
I
28
materials and lots of issues. And that’s how you learn, working for utilities that are understaffed and underfunded, with an endless list of problems. The best “utility college” in the world is taught out of necessity. I have picked up old pool cleaning brushes, skimmers, and tanks from trash piles and used them at package plants to modify systems designed for 10,000 gallons per day, and getting all that flow in four hours during the school’s lunch periods and cleanup.
Best Management Practices As a young manager I started a program for the meter readers and line crews to meet our customers and help with a neighborhood watch program. On one occasion we noticed suspicious behavior behind the home of one of our customers. We called him at work to confirm that no one should be home. Later (during the divorce proceedings) we were called to testify that we had indeed witnessed a man entering the back door of his home. In this case, only one customer wrote a satisfied response to our survey. And “What about the line crew?” you might ask me. Well, weeks later (yeah, I was still convinced it was a good idea) they helped a man struggling to load a bigscreen TV into a truck, only to find out it was not his TV or his truck. I stopped the program and bought “How’s my driving?” bumper stickers. I was hired to a dream job working for NASA as the person in charge of “everything wet and broke.” We were the masters of innovation and the first rule was “don’t delay a launch.” We had a water outage that took down water to the vehicle assembly building (that big building where they made the rockets for the
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
shuttle). I was told to get the bathrooms in service within the next hour, no matter what it took. We all have had those moments where someone driven by an unrealistic deadline gives an unachievable command. And yet we, as the humble servants we are, choose the admirable path. I had the crew put Portalets in the elevators and put signs on them and on each floor that said, “If you need a bathroom just push the elevator button and one will come to you.” For the most part, this brilliant (from my perspective) idea was not met with the accolades one would expect. I removed the Portalets and had the system up in six hours. Anticlimactic as it was, it is worth mentioning. There have been some innovative uses of equipment to make repairs in my past and one that drew attention was my “Volkswagen crane.” I used my Volkswagen bus as a crane to pull small pumps. I backed the VW bus up to the lift station and used a pulley set up over the station to run a cable to the pump. I removed the back wheel and attached a custom wheel with a notch for the cable. One end of the cable was attached to the wheel and the other to the pump (over the pulley). I would crank the VW and use low gear to pull the pump. As long as you chocked the front tires it worked fine. Once you saw the polyvinyl chloride discharge pipe through the back window you could unplug the pump and lower it back in place. It doesn’t quite meet today’s standard for safety and equipment use, but neither did a lot of things we did back then. The summation is simple: utility management is a career that kids should choose but don’t. It comes with adventure, camaraderie (if done right), challenge, and a steady income. You will work for a cause worth documenting as your life’s mission, protect the environment, treat and guard the water supply, and as with most things in life, you get back what you invest. As long as you suck at math (so you can’t divide your pay by the hours you work) and you don’t have the expectation of glory (because there is none), the utility field is great.
Florida Water Resources Journal • June 2015
29
FSAWWA SPEAKING OUT
Florida Section AWWA Staff: Hard at Work for You Mark Lehigh Chair, FSAWWA thought this would be a great opportunity to have the FSAWWA staff introduce themselves (in their own words) and give you an idea of some of the things they do for the section. I personally know the amount of effort, enthusiasm, and dedication they put into their jobs on a daily basis, and let me tell you, it is impressive. Their professionalism, customer service, and all-around great attitude make it a pleasure to serve as chair of the section.
I
Introducing the Staff Peggy Guingona As the FSAWWA executive director, I oversee the strategic vision of the section. Over the past eight years, I’ve had the great privilege of working with the most talented and smartest people in the water industry. I am still in awe as to how they are able to volunteer and dedicate their time to provide total water solutions to effectively manage water, the world’s most important resource. Coming from a third-world country and knowing how precious water is, I am honored to be a part of the water industry.
My responsibilities per the standard practices manual (SPM) include but are not limited to: Carry out the policies, procedures, and goals of the Florida Section AWWA as stated in the bylaws and SPM, under the overall supervision of its officers. Actively participate in the work activities of the section. Recommend and assist in the formulation of policies and make decisions within existing policies as approved by the board of governors. Through effective leadership and management, achieve high staff productivity and sound management of financial resources. Assist the treasurer and section chair with the preparation of the annual budget, including management of the section’s QuickBooks, bill payments, reimbursements of expenses, and other accounting responsibilities. Coordinate and maintain communications with all councils, regions, and major committees. Confer with and advise council and regional chairs in the administration of their functions and provide assistance in interpretation of their responsibilities, and provide guidance to newly installed officers. Responsible for the coordination of executive committee and board of governor meetings, give adequate notice of meetings to attendees, develop notebooks and documents, secure location of the meeting room and prepare the space for an effective meeting, and prepare accurate minutes of the meetings.
Mark LeHigh with FSAWWA staff.
30
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
Attend all the FSAWWA board meetings, the Florida Water Resources Conference (FWRC)/Florida Water Resource Journal board meetings, represent FSAWWA at section functions, and attend the AWWA Annual Conference and Exposition (ACE) and miscellaneous Association meetings. The staff ’s mission is to maximize the effectiveness of the section through communication, training, and face-to-face interaction. The other three section staff members are each assigned specific duties and responsibilities. However, when crunch time comes for the fall conference, all hands are on deck; everyone has a part in making the fall conference a success. One of their shared responsibilities is populating and maintaining the conference phone app and making sure that the FSAWWA booth is well equipped with materials and giveaways. To ensure that the members are served well, answering the phones is also a shared responsibility, as well as updating the database. Contact information: fsawwa@gmail.com and (407) 957-8449 I am extremely proud of the following staff and fortunate that they have been with FSAWWA for five years or longer. What they do for the Florida Section AWWA members is summarized here. Casey Cumiskey I am the membership specialist/training coordinator, hired in July 2009 as a full-time staff member. What I do as a membership specialist: Association Level • Send membership applications to AWWA headquarters in Denver. • Ensure that all AWWA emails on membership are passed to the section’s membership committee. • Work with other sections regarding membership initiatives. Section Level • Contact people for membership. • Make regular updates to the section database to ensure that it contains the members’
most current contact information. • Send volunteer forms received to the respective regions or councils based on the volunteer’s areas of interest. • Offer administrative support to the chair of the Section Membership Committee, which is under the Administrative Council. • Serve as a link between the outgoing and incoming membership chairs when rotations occur and help to keep the committee functioning smoothly during the transition. • Receive applications for the mentor program, help to pair mentors with mentees, and coordinate introductory conference calls. What I do as a training coordinator: Section Level • Work with volunteers to keep the online training program up-to-date and make edits to the courses as necessary. • Report continuing educations units (CEUs) and professional development hours (PDHs) for the on-demand courses, online programs, conferences, and other approved courses. Mail printed certificates to attendees. Work directly with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) and Florida Board of Professional Engineers to resolve any problems that may arise. • Perform other assignments as needed by the executive director. Contact information: fsawwa.casey@gmail.com and (407) 957-8447
Donna Metherall I work as the training coordinator, hired in February 2010 as a full-time staff member. What I do as a training coordinator: For Training • Manage and coordinate on-demand training (training that is brought to a facility). • Ensure that workshops/seminars have the right information per FDEP guidelines before they are advertised. • Locate instructors as needed for on-demand training and workshops/seminars for regions. • Create training classes as requested for regions or councils. • Send sign-in sheets to Casey for reporting of credits. • Pre-approve all new programs that require CEUs/PDHs before sending to the Certification and Training Committee for final approval.
FSAWWA headquarters in St. Cloud City Hall
For Regional Events • Work closely with region chairs and volunteers in setting up events. • Maintain the section calendar of events. • Create flyers for some of the events and send out event blasts. • Manage event registrations. • Receive and enter payments in the section’s database. • Maintain the sign-in sheets for social and training events. • Complete the treasurer’s final event report (TFER) for training events. Other Assignments • Co-maintain the section’s Facebook with Jenny. • Perform other assignments as needed by the executive director. Contact information: fsawwa.donna@gmail.com and (407) 957-8443
Jenny Arguello I am the staff assistant, hired in January 2009 as part-time staff. My primary responsibility is to assist the executive director with whatever needs to be done. My other duties include but are not limited to: Administrative Assignments • Mailing of the monthly “welcome packet” for new FSAWWA members. • Manage the Utility Council membership by sending out the yearly dues and post payments. • Update the region and council pages on the section’s website.
• Maintain and update contact lists. • Co-maintain the section’s Facebook with Donna. • Assist the executive director with reviewing the yearly membership directory and resource book before it goes to print. • Prepare and mail the monthly accreditation certificates. • Deposit the checks at the section’s bank. • Assist in “April is Water Conservation Month” proclamations and the annual water conservation awards for the Technical and Education Council’s Water Use Efficiency Division. • Maintain headquarters and order office supplies. • Attend FWRC and FSAWWA fall conference. • Prepare the board of governors meeting materials and binders. • Order all the awards for both conferences. • Help maintain the conference website. • Assist in getting meeting materials, order food and refreshments for other section meetings. Contact information: fsawwa.jenny@gmail.com and (407) 957-8448 ______________________________________ So there they are—your FSAWWA section staff. I applaud all of them for the way they work together as a team and collaborate to improve the section. Their seamless effort in maintaining continuity through changing section chairs has always amazed me. They are our backbone and our life support. Way to go ladies—I know I couldn’t do it without you!
Florida Water Resources Journal • June 2015
31
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, Biosolids and Bioenergy Management. 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!
___________________________________________
Comprehensive Evaluation of Dewatering Alternatives for the City of Fort Myers Michael Scullion, Jason Sciandra, and Rick Whalen (Article 1: CEU = 0.1 WW) 1. Which of the following sludge dewatering processes was not evaluated? a. b. c. d.
Dissolved air flotation Screw press Belt filter press Centrifuge
2. Feed sludge analysis provided to the equipment manufacturers indicated a. widely varying volatile suspended solids (VSS) concentration. b. VSS slightly less than 50 percent of total suspended solids (TSS) concentration. c. TSS less than twice the concentration of VSS. d. 20 percent solids by volume. 3. The sizing of a belt filter press is based on a. b. c. d.
solids loading per meter of belt width. hydraulic flow capacity. mass loading of belt rollers. upstream treatment system capacity.
4. Of the processes tested, which was projected to consume the least energy? a. b. c. d.
Dissolved air flotation Screw press Belt filter press centrifuge
SUBSCRIBER NAME (please print)
Article 1 ________________________________________
5. In part, centrifuges were recommended for the Central and South WWTPs because
LICENSE NUMBER for Which CEUs Should Be Awarded
If paying by credit card, fax to (561) 625-4858 providing the following information:
a. they were the lowest present-worth cost alternative. b. of the equipment evaluated the operations staff was most familiar with centrifuges. c. they are most compatible with the facility’s noise abatement program. d. they provide the highest cake solids.
___________________________________________ (Credit Card Number)
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.
(Expiration Date)
32
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
Florida Water Resources Journal • June 2015
33
From Problem to Profit: A Fort Worth Water Resource Recovery Facility Turns Industrial Waste Challenges Into Energy Opportunities
Kristina Twigg and Peter V. Cavagnaro The Village Creek Water Reclamation Facility in Fort Worth, Texas, lies on Trinity River’s
west fork. Every day, the facility treats more than 378,541 m3 (100 mil gal) of wastewater. With about 6437 km (4,000 mi) of sewers, the wastewater, carried largely by gravity, can take eight to 12 hours to travel to the facility. Within this time, flows can become septic, and highstrength industrial wastes can be problematic for local industries to dispose of. However, the Village Creek plant has turned the problem into an energy solution: now the facility generates 75 percent of its electricity on site. “The plant’s codigestion program has shifted the industrial wastes to a point in the plant where its energy can be harnessed,” said
Madelene Rafalko, a senior professional engineer at the Fort Worth Water Department. “By injecting these concentrated wastes directly into the digester, the plant has decreased the amount of energy needed for aeration treatment.”
Wastes Boost Methane Production With the addition of codigestion waste, the facility has doubled its gas production. However, facility staff members are very selective about the wastes they bring in. “We are looking for wastes with high chemical oxygen demand, or COD, which are more easily converted to methane,” said Jerry Pressley, water systems superintendent. “The plant looks for wastes that produce a high gas yield with low residuals, but avoid wastes with sulfides and sanitizers because they can cause process upsets, such as digester foaming.” For 10 minutes every hour, the highstrength wastes are injected into six of the plant’s 14 anaerobic digesters. The plant has been capturing digester biogas for decades and uses it to power one of two 5.2-MW turbines. These turbines generate about half of the plant’s energy, most of which is used for the plant’s aeration system.
Steam Heat Provides Return on Investment
The codigestion building is where the plant receives industrial wastes. Operators ensure that the wastes do not contain chemicals that would upset the anaerobic digestion process. (photo: Kristina Twigg)
34
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
The Village Creak Water Reclamation Facility has also found a way to reduce the energy needed for its aeration basins. In the process of using the turbines to generate electricity, heat is also created. The plant has harnessed this heat to make steam, which powers two of the plant’s blowers. The heat is
The Village Creek Water Reclamation Facility generates both energy and steam. The steam is used to power two of the plant's aeration basin blowers. (photo: Kristina Twigg)
also used to warm buildings and anaerobic digesters during winter. Even the steam itself is not wasted—it is condensed and reused. “The cost savings from the steam process has paid for everything else,” Rafalko said. “The project, started in 2007, has saved $3 million so far.”
Improvements Lead to Other Efficiencies
Biogas, used to generate energy via the plant’s turbines, is created in these anaerobic digesters fitted with linear motion mixers. (photo: Kristina Twigg)
While the steam process is the largest part of the plant’s energy efficiency program, staff has also taken advantage of low-hanging fruit, such as optimizing process controls, upgrading pumps and motors, replacing its supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) system, and installing a web-controlled lighting system. “Going through and taking measures helped us to identify maintenance needs and further energy improvements,” Pressley said. The plant also created anoxic zones in six of its 13 aeration basins. In the presence of oxygen, bacteria convert ammonia to nitrate (NO3); then, in the anoxic zones, the bacteria can utilize the oxygen present in the NO3. This eliminates mechanical aeration in these sections of the basins, further reducing the plant’s energy needs. These improvements bring the facility one step closer its goal of net-zero energy. Note: The information provided in this article is designed to be educational. It is not intended to provide any type of professional advice, including, without limitation, legal, accounting, or engineering. Your use of the information provided here is voluntary and should be based on your own evaluation and analysis of its accuracy, appropriateness for your use, and any potential risks of using the information. The Water Environment Federation (WEF), author and the publisher of
Using anoxic zones in the aeration basin improves energy efficiency at the Village Creek Water Reclamation Facility. (photo: Kristina Twigg)
this article, assumes no liability of any kind with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents and specifically disclaims any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness of use for a particular purpose. Any references included are provided for informational purposes only and do not constitute endorsement of any sources.
______________________________________ Kristina Twigg is the associate editor of World Water: Stormwater Management at the Water Environment Federation in Alexandria, Va. Peter V. Cavagnaro is a project development consultant at Johnson Controls Inc. in Milwaukee.
Florida Water Resources Journal • June 2015
35
Water Reuse Organizations Merge The WateReuse Association and Research Foundation have announced a plan to merge the leadership of their organizations to more aggressively address the challenges that local communities face in meeting growing demands for water supplies, such as drought; climate change; aging infrastructure; environmental degradation; and federal, state, and local regulations. “While the Research Foundation and Association will remain two separate organizations, our united leadership will have one vision and one voice,” said Foundation Board Chair Doug Owen, an executive vice president with ARCADIS, a global consulting firm. The leadership of the two organizations adopted a board merger plan that will serve as the
36
catalyst for a stronger alliance. The plan calls for a core group of directors to simultaneously serve on each board, thus facilitating maximum strategic collaboration. Known collectively as WateReuse, the two organizations have been international leaders in alternative water supply development and a global source for applied research, education, and advocacy on water reuse for nearly three decades. While its efforts to foster scientific advances, technological innovations, and public awareness and acceptance are turning water reuse into a mainstream method for ensuring a safe, reliable, and
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
sustainable supply of water, the leadership has identified a need for the two organizations to more deeply integrate activities to leverage resources and maximize strengths. The organizations share the vision of a world in which “the right water is used for the right purpose, all the time, everywhere.” The Research Foundation will continue to conduct research to improve the treatment, distribution, and acceptance of water reuse, while the Association will continue to advocate for laws, policies, and funding that promote and increase water reuse. Together, both organizations will
work to educate policymakers and the public on the science, economic value, and environmental benefits of treating water to safely use it for designated purposes, such as irrigation, manufacturing, and drinking water. As part of the transformation, WateReuse has developed and adopted a new brand that better represents the singular vision of the organizations. The two organizations now share a single logo, which connects three drops of water into a circle to represent the continuous cycle of water. The water drops are the color of reuse, with a subtle gradation in hues to reflect the spectrum of purification available in water treatment. Finally, the three water drops represent the three, interconnected keystones of WateReuse: research, education, and advocacy.
F W R J
A Biosolids Public-Private Partnership Success Story in Charlotte County Robert Pepperman harlotte County, located in southwest Florida, provides many services to its 165,000 full-time residences. Like most communities in the Sunshine State, Charlotte County experiences the seasonal migration of “snowbirds” during winter months; the County Chamber of Commerce projects the population swells by about 30 percent in the period between January through April. Charlotte County Utilities (CCU) provides potable water and wastewater treatment and disposal, and reclaimed water for irrigation, serving more than 60,000 homes and businesses throughout unincorporated Charlotte County. Four wastewater treatment facilities are operated by CCU: Burnt Store Water Reclamation Facility (WRF), able to treat 0.5 mil gal per day (mgd); the 2-mgd Rotonda WRF, which is a membrane bioreactor (MBR)style plant designed to mechanically filter wastewater and to provide an environment for biological nutrient removal (BNR); the West Port WRF, which treats 1.2 mgd; and the 9mgd East Port WRF. The East Port WRF receives and dewaters residuals from the
C
County’s other plants. Historically, CCU transported its dewatered biosolids to a private landfill approximately 100 mi away. Solid Waste Management (SWM) provides solid waste and recycling services throughout the County. The 108-acre County SWM landfill, located on Zemel Road in the southern portion of the County, is a key component of these services. The Zemel Road Landfill was opened in 1975 and is projected to be in operation until 2026. As part of the development of the facility, several important infrastructure improvements sized to support the built-out landfill were made, including surface (storm) water collection and retention, leachate treatment and disposal, and a landfill gas collection system. Additionally, the County developed an approximately 10-acre portion of the landfill on which white goods, yard waste, and tires could be collected and prepared for recycling. The maps (Figures 1 and 2) show the location of Charlotte County in Florida and generally depict the location of the Zemel Road Landfill near the south-central border of the County near Lee County.
Robert Pepperman is a project developer with Synagro in Baltimore.
In 2007, the County solid waste management team recognized that the 10-acre processing area (Figure 3) might have an additional use—composting of CCU’s biosolids. By composting at Zemel Road, CCU could reduce its transportation costs considerably, while also reducing the “tipping fee” it paid to a third party. Prior to that time, SWM engaged an outside vendor to grind yard waste, and then the ground yard waste was utilized as cover on the landfill. Blending the two streams would save the County money, while still providing the cover material needed. The solid waste team isolated an approximately 1-acre area within the processing area by creating a “speed bump” berm on the perimeter. Within that area, SWM received dewatered biosolids from CCU and blended it with ground yard waste. Windrows were created and SWM
Figure 1. Map showing location of Charlotte County in Florida. Figure 2. Map depicting general location of Zemel Road Landfill.
38
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
added an “enzyme” that claimed to accelerate the composting process. The windrows stayed in place for about four weeks (the windrows were not turned or aerated by any mechanical means), during which time the temperatures were monitored to demonstrate compliance with Class A pathogen reduction standards. After any windrow had achieved the regulatorymandated time and temperature, the mixture was moved to the landfill for use as final cover. No attempt was made by the County to certify the compost as meeting Class AA standards, and therefore, there was no development of a market for the compost. At about the same time, SWM recognized that the landfill gas produced could have value in the marketplace. In 2008, it entered into an agreement that allowed a private third party to collect and treat the landfill gas and then install engines to produce electricity. The third party entered into a power purchase agreement with a local utility, and development of the landfill gasto-energy facility proceeded for the next few years. As the planning and development of this project commenced, the SWM team recognized that much of the energy derived from producing electricity via internal combustion engines would be lost in the form of exhaust heat and jacket cooling water. Synagro, which dries biosolids for other Florida municipalities, was one of the companies contacted by SWM to determine if there was an interest in utilizing the “waste heat” to dry biosolids. While Synagro’s development team and engineers determined that the waste heat could be utilized to dry biosolids, the amount of waste heat available was insufficient to process enough biosolids to recover the capital and operating costs for the drying facility. In addition to operating nine biosolids drying facilities, Synagro also operates several regional or merchant composting facilities. These other operations provided its development team with an unique perspective—it was able to envision developing a regional composting facility on the 10-acre site on which the County was already managing yard waste and composting CCU biosolids.
Synthesis of the Public-Private Partnership Synagro manages the biosolids for over 20 communities in Florida. The value proposition for many of its clients has two key factors as its foundation: Many treatment facilities do not treat their sludge to a degree that meets land application standards. As a consequence, a substantial
Figure 3. County’s 10-acre processing site.
mass of the state’s wastewater solids are disposed in landfills. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) estimates that, in 2012, approximately 111,552 dry tons of biosolids were disposed in landfills, representing about one-third of the state’s total production.1 Few smaller facilities have installed their own dewatering systems. Synagro operates nine mobile centrifuges throughout the state, rotating these units among plants without internal dewatering. After dewatering, Synagro transports and manages the cake solids. Many of the dewatered solids in southwest Florida have to be disposed in landfills that are generally 50-150 mi from the point of origin. Transportation costs, as well as landfill tipping fees, have been escalating over the past few years. Transportation costs are largely a function of fuel, and in the 2010 time frame, over-the-road diesel fuel was in a rising environment, ultimately reaching just around $4.00 per gal in 2011-14.2 During this time, FDEP was in the process of modifying its biosolids land application regulations to limit nutrient applications in the sensitive waters of the state; in the case at hand, most notably the Okeechobee drainage shed, which includes the Caloosahatchee River (Figure 4). As land application became less viable
as a management technique for biosolids generated in southwest Florida, landfill pricing also started to climb. Tipping fees at the few landfills in central Florida that were able (and willing) to accept biosolids began to escalate from the mid-$20’s per ton to $38-$45/ton almost overnight. Odor, structural stability, and regulatory limits on the ratios of biosolids to solid waste were all cited as the reasons for these increases, but whatever the reason, costs of disposal were becoming problematic for the partner generators. Under these circumstances, it became clear that controlling its own biosolids management site would provide value not only to the company but also to its customers and partners. The Zemel Road site provided a tool to reduce transportation costs for Synagro’s municipal partners, while avoid paying tipping fees to third-party companies.
The Public-Private Partnership The public-private partnership, or P3, business model is typically a tool by which a community and private enterprise can expeditiously develop and implement a project that serves the community’s stakeholders, while relying on the expertise of the private entity to design, operate, and maintain the project; in Continued on page 40
Florida Water Resources Journal • June 2015
39
Continued from page 39 some cases, the private entity also provides financing for the project, and ownership of the project or assets typically resides with the financing entity. The preferred P3 project format is often a function of the time available to meet the project goals and the relative cost of money. Where an expedited project delivery schedule is necessary, a P3 with a design-build component accelerates the project (versus the traditional design-bid-build). When municipal capital is limited or needed for other improvements, a design-buildfinance-own-operate-and-maintain (DBFOM) delivery is preferred. In such arrangements, the private entity will typically provide an equity investment to enhance financing. Where the community has capacity to obtain capital through general obligation bond issuance or other lowinterest programs, a design-build-operate-andmaintain (DBOM) format fits best in this scenario. Synagro has been operating with its partners under P3 approaches since the early 1990s, when it developed one of the first biosolids public-private partnerships with the City of Balti-
more. That project was delivered under a DBFOM approach, which built a biosolids drying facility sized to process 110 dry tons per day that has operated for the past 20 years. That contract was recently renewed by the City for an additional 10-year period. Through this project and the dozen or so subsequent P3 projects undertaken, several key factors that can make (or break) a successful partnership between the community and the private sector were identified. These include: Early and appropriate establishment of roles, goals, support, and objectives for all involved stakeholders to ensure that all of the P3 issues can be predicted and solved. It is imperative to have a “win-win” situation for all parties so that the stakeholders can see the true value in the partnership The public entity should take the initial step to ensure that the private entity has the appropriate resources (financial, technological, experience, and support) to deliver on its P3 commitments. Once the private firm is successfully vetted, the next step would be to establish the P3 relationship among the parties, including hav-
Figure 4. Permitted land application sites affected by new FDEP rule making3.
40
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
ing open, honest, and consistent communications. A legal framework favorable to the successful completion of the project is imperative. The framework should not only spell out the commitment and responsibility of the public and private sectors to the arrangement, but also provide for appropriate milestones by which the performance of the parties can be judged. Ultimately, to secure the success of P3 projects, both the public and private sectors should bring their complementary skills and commit their best resources to achieve a good relationship. The Charlotte County project generally followed these tenets as described in the following. Charlotte County Biorecycling Center (CCBRC) In April 2011, after the initial site review to consider the potential for use of the landfill gas-to-energy waste heat for drying, a concept was presented for use of the 10-acre area for a regional composting facility to the County’s solid waste team. A P3 relationship was suggested, based on the landfill gas-to-energy agreements through which the County would be entitled to certain “host” benefits in return for allowing Synagro to develop a composting facility on site. Some of the host benefits offered to the County included: Lease payments Host fees for out-of-county biosolids delivered to the facility Elimination of certain expenses incurred by the County Local employment opportunities CCU biosolids management costs maintained at below market rates To comply with Florida procurement law, Charlotte County issued a request for proposal (RFP) in July 2011, seeking firms that could enter into an agreement to lease and develop a composting facility on the 10-acre site at the Zemel Road Landfill. Through the RFP, the County indicated that the site available was only about eight acres (reserving some of the 10 acres for the landfill gas-to-energy operations), but also suggested that the adjacent 10 acres of unimproved land could be leased as well. The County indicated that it received about 9,000 wet tons per year of dewatered biosolids, along with approximately 23,000 tons of yard waste per year, that the project would have to assimilate. So as not to take away from any future capacity of the landfill leachate treatment facility, the County required the selected
firm to install a canopy system over the composting site. Two proposals were submitted to the County in August 2011 and it selected Synagro’s proposal as the preferred submission. Synagro’s proposal mirrored most of the other major public-private partnership arrangements in which the company had entered: Lease and Hosting Benefits – A 20-year lease for the site. The overall financial benefits to the County proposed were on the order of $280,000 per year, or more than $5,600,000 over the term of the lease. Among the benefits offered to the County was a supply of compost needed for landfill cover. Guaranteed Performance – Complete performance responsibility is guaranteed. For example, if some compost doesn’t meet Class AA standards or if the facility temporarily does not have enough capacity to meet demand, there will be alternative disposal outlets available to manage such materials and/or put in the overtime necessary to recompost those materials at no additional cost to the generators. Product Marketing – An internal product marketing group and a strong presence in Florida. The company is active in the groves and other agricultural enterprises in the region and can distribute products to those entities while building a more consumer-oriented market. Reduction in Risk – An inherent aspect of the product marketing responsibility is acceptance of product liability. Experience in product marketing allows for routine testing to confirm suitability of the compost for distribution, while carrying the appropriate insurance coverage to insulate Charlotte County from product liability issues. Complete Regulatory Compliance – Responsibility for regulatory compliance and reporting responsibilities for all generators. Work is carried out to assure compliance with Class AA standards, all sampling and analytical work is conducted with myriad reporting provided, and record keeping is done for both the compost process as well as the product that would serve multiple regional generators. Responsibility for all billing, collection, coordination of delivery, and associated paperwork. After several rounds of negotiations, Charlotte County and Synagro entered into two agreements: a site lease agreement and a biosolids management and recycling agreement. The former document was fairly standard in that it provided a term (concurrent with the biosolids Continued on page 42 Florida Water Resources Journal • June 2015
41
Continued from page 41 management and recycling agreement), the lease payments and schedules, and confirmed Synagro’s ownership of the equipment and improvements made to facilitate composting. The biosolids management and recycling agreement was tailored to the project and provided for a number of key components. Some generic or commonly incorporated provisions included: Force majeure/change-in-law/uncontrollable circumstances: These clauses describe how the parties may interact during these events, which are largely out of the control of either party. Term: The agreement provides for a 20-year base term with potential extensions and allows the County to purchase the facility at termination. Design-Build-Own-and-Operate: Responsibility for all aspects of the project belong to the company including: • Permits to construct, operate, and market the compost are in its name • Payment for external utilities • Obligation to produce Class AA compost • First right-of-refusal on adjacent land if expansion desired • All contracts and associated services/requirement for out-of-county biosolids are entered into by the company In addition, the biosolids management and recycling agreement contains some project specific aspects, such as: Provides for County benefits including: • Below market rates for processing CCU biosolids • Host fee on out-of-county biosolids • Allows elimination of certain County costs (e.g., purchasing “enzyme” that represents an approximate $70,000-per-year savings) • Compost available for landfill cover The company enjoys certain infrastructure benefits, such as: • Roadways are maintained by the County • CCU biosolids and county-generated green waste are delivered by the County to the site • Stormwater system is maintained by the County • County accepts wastewater generated by the composting facility In order to minimize the impact to this latter benefit, covers on the active composting area were required in the RFP and were incorporated into the proposal. Immediately after entering into the agreements with the County, the company sales and
42
development staff began the process of filling the facility’s capacity. Some of that capacity was filled by the existing dewatering and solids management clients, but a substantial portion was also available for new customers. In reaching out to regional generators, two very surprising phenomena occurred: 1. For years, regional utilities and publicly owned treatment works had been solicited to sign commitment letters to support the “next big thing” that would solve all their biosolids management woes. These entities stated that they would consider sending their solids to the facility only after it was built. 2. Some generators just don’t care about saving money. Transportation and composting capacities were offered to several generators with demonstrations on how they could save as much as 30 percent of current costs for landfill disposal, but surprisingly those generators weren’t interested. Nevertheless, the company responded to an RFP developed by the Englewood Water District (EWD) and entered into a 20-year contract that provided for delivery of its biosolids to the CCBRC. Several other clients were subsequently able to piggyback on the EWD contract. The company’s design-build contractor, Mills-Gilbane, initiated the construction of the facility in September 2013 and the Charlotte County Bio-Recycling Center began accepting biosolids for processing in February 2014. This very short construction period highlights one of the advantages of a publicprivate partnership—the private developer can expedite commercialization of the facility and the public partner enjoys services at the earliest possible date.
To remedy this, side walls were installed for the canopies and, last summer, some changes were made to the grading and stormwater management system. As a result, there is dryer product coming from the canopies and into curing. Operations were planned for the seasonal impacts of increasing biosolids production during the November to March period. Based on some local records, it was extrapolated that the facility might receive 1,100-1,200 wet tons per week during peak production. However, because some customers had put off cleaning out tanks or disposing of excess biosolids knowing that the CCBRC would be on-line in early 2014, there were a few weeks with as much as a 50 to 60 percent increase over the average. Even though CCBRC was capable of processing these large slugs of biosolids, diversion of solids to other outlets could be done if necessary. A guarantee was provided to customers stating that even if the facility is unable to handle the load, the biosolids would be managed in other acceptable ways at no additional costs to the generator. While work continues on some of the challenges that are always encountered with a facility start-up, the facility is producing quality compost, the product is moving to end-users, and the generators are being well-served. Charlotte County has seen continued benefits through increased revenues (host fees on out-of-county solids), a reliable outlet for the CCU biosolids, and adequate cover to meet the landfill’s needs. A first-anniversary meeting was held in February 2015, with issues discussed and other areas of cooperation explored. Going forward, these meetings will be regularly scheduled in order for both parties to best support each other and the partnership.
Conclusions
References
The first full year of operations has brought with it some challenges, along with the benefits of the P3. A primary attribute of a true P3 project is the capacity of the private partner to make changes on the fly. Composting facilities are operated in other parts of the country, but few of those have the rainfall intensity in southwest Florida during the rainy season. The common afternoon thunderstorms last only a short time, but they produce prodigious amounts of rainfall. Much of the time, the rain will appear to fall almost horizontally; as a result, the windrows under the canopies were getting wet and the water was ponding within the canopies. While the temperatures necessary to meet Class A and vector attraction reduction (VAR) were never lost, trying to screen wet compost was difficult.
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
1
2
3
Biosolids in Florida: 2012 Summary, Domestic Wastewater Section, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, December 2013. Gulf Coast No. 2 Diesel Ultra Low Sulfur (015 ppm) Retail Prices, 2007-2014, U.S. Energy Information Administration. Northern Everglades and Estuaries Protection Program, 373.4595, F.S, from “Overview of DEP’s New Biosolids Rule Chapter 62-640, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.)” Presented by Maurice Barker, Biosolids Coordinator and Cheryl Minskey, Biosolids Specialist, Division of Water Resource Management, Florida Department of Environmental Protection.
FWRJ COMMITTEE PROFILE This column highlights a committee, division, council, or other volunteer group of FSAWWA, FWEA, and FWPCOA.
Utilities Maintenance Committee Affiliation: FWPCOA Current chair: David Pachucki, Pinellas County Utilities (retired) Year group was formed: 2011 Scope of work: The Committee prepares and oversees the FWPCOA utility maintenance voluntary certification courses designed for water utility industry operators and maintenance personnel. Industry surveys conducted in the past have indicated a need for training courses for these groups and this committee, comprised of experienced maintenance personnel, has stepped up to create courses that fill the need.
Current projects: The committee is presently finalizing the Utilities Maintenance Level I course, which is the last course in the voluntary certification series. Future work: The committee will respond to industry demand and student input to continually improve and expand the utilities maintenance courses. The plan is to offer the courses throughout the state of Florida at the regional level. The FWPCOA Education Committee and
Utilities Maintenance Committee have the instructors and the commitment to do so. Besides adding additional shaft alignment training for our students, the committee will design any maintenance or safety course that any of the students (customers) wish. Committee members: • Bob Case, City of St. Petersburg • Tim McVeigh, former FWPCOA executive director • Walt Symser, FWPCOA webmaster
Recent accomplishments: The committee launched the 30-hour Utilities Maintenance Level II course, with the addition of shaft alignment, at the March 2015 FWPCOA State Short School. This is the intermediate-level course that follows the entrylevel Utilities Maintenance Level III course, which was first offered in March 2012. Committee member Bob Case designed and fabricated the shaft alignment rig (see photos).
Shaft alignment rig designed and fabricated by committee member Bob Case.
Florida Water Resources Journal • June 2015
43
FWRJ READER PROFILE Yanni Polematidis CDM Smith Jacksonville, Florida Work title and years of service. I have been a project engineer/project manager-in-training for eight years.
Engineers Without Borders in Honduras.
With Florida Department of Environmental Protection director (center) at FWEA luncheon.
What does your job entail? My job constitutes an array of different activities pertaining to environmental consulting in every part of the project life cycle. Work activities include planning, scoping, design, permitting construction services, and project management for the water, wastewater, and solid waste municipal markets. When you boil it down, I am a daily problem solver. What training have you taken? Training I’ve taken throughout my career at CDM Smith includes various software tools to aid in solving various engineering projects, execute work, and manage projects accordingly. To name a few: Visual Hydraulics Water Gems Bentley Projectwise Navisworks (3D Design Imaging) Approach to Design (Complete Life-Cycle Process) Project Management Training (CDM Smith) Hydraulic Evaluation of Landfill Performance (HELP) model FWEA Leadership Training (2012, 2014, and 2015) FWEA YP of the Year Training (2015) What do you like best about your job? I mostly enjoy the exchange of ideas through the interaction with our clients, internal team, and industry professionals. Communication is the tool most used in my engineering shed. What organizations do you belong to? Florida Water Environment Association, American Water Works Association, and Engineers Without Borders–Jacksonville Professional Chapter.
FWEA/FSAWWA holiday luncheon.
44
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
How have the organizations helped your career? Through both FWEA and FSAWWA, I
have had the opportunity to meet and interact with a wide range of professionals that touch this industry, received mentoring, allowed to participate and contribute, and always encouraged to share my vision on improving the water environment at the local, state, and national levels. All of this effort has helped me gain visibility among my fellow
professionals and allowed me to interact on multiple levels. What do you like best about the industry? The common goal to improve the health and quality of the life of citizens and doing it with the preservation of our resources and environment.
What do you do when you’re not working? In my spare time, my wife Amanda and I dedicate our efforts to the care and rearing of our new daughter, Aurelia, who celebrated her first birthday in March. Aside from that, I try to always find the time to get together with close friends, dabble in cooking, play golf and tennis, and plan the next travel destination with Amanda.
Above: Yanni with his wife, Amanda, and their daughter, Aurelia. At left: FWEA Golf Subcommittee.
Florida Water Resources Journal • June 2015
45
Volunteers help to clean the river.
FSAWWA Participates in 19th Annual St. Johns River Cleanup Amy Hunter Florida Section AWWA Region III participated in National River Cleanup Day, in conjunction with Volusia County, on Saturday, April 18. All around the country, similar efforts were made to raise awareness about the importance of keeping rivers free of hazardous and unsightly debris. Over 60 volunteers came out in support and canoed along the St. Johns River, picking up trash in the water and on the banks, making this the largest group participating within the county. Volunteers launched their canoes from Blue Springs State Park and traversed several miles to clean up trash from the river (see accompanying map). Approximately 3,500 pounds of trash were extracted by volunteers from the rivers in Lake, Seminole, and Volusia Counties. After the cleanup, the volunteers were treated to a barbeque, provided by the event sponsors: AMERICAN, Atkins, Black & Veatch, Carollo Engineers, CH2M HILL, Garney Construction, Hazen & Sawyer, HDR, Reiss Engineering, Tetra Tech, and Wharton-Smith Inc. Amy Hunter is an environmental technician for Greenman-Pedersen Inc. in Orlando.
FloridaSection 46
December 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal
Volunteers getting ready to ride the canoes.
Volunteers help to clean the river.
Peggy Guingona and Kunal Nayee in charge of the barbeque.
Another volunteer getting ready to assist with the cleanup.
Trash from the river cleanup.
Blake Bennett, Bryan Martin, and Amy Hunter assist with the barbeque.
Florida Water Resources Journal • June 2015
47
New Products Fluid Conservation Systems has added secondary validation to its HWM PermaNet leak detection system. Once a leak has been identified, the new PermaNet+ gives water operators three secondary options to check for false positives prior to team deployment: remote correlation, a detailed Aqualog noise graphic, or the audio file transferred to the host personal computer. Every component of the PermNet+ system is installed in the chamber, removing the need for expensive and disruptive aboveground installations. With multiple secondary validation options, false positives are reduced and efficiency increased as teams are sent only to validated leak locations. (www.fluidconservation.com)
The TITAN MBR™ from Smith & Loveless is a pre-engineered wastewater treatment system for municipal applications. With a membrane biological reactor (MBR), the system provides end users with high-quality treatment performance, minimal operational requirements, and a robust design. The systems come in standard and custom designs and result in smaller footprints than conventional systems. The submerged membrane eliminates the need
48
for clarifiers and sand filters, and produces significantly better effluent quality. Integral zones can be added to meet particular effluent goals, including nutrient removal, disinfection, sludge holding, and post-aeration. (www.smithandloveless.com)
The OdorCap 5700 from Novozymes Biologicals Inc. contains patented biological wastewater odor control technology and can degrade hydrogen sulfide, mercaptans, and volatile fatty acids. Novozyme’s system offers superior odor prevention because it works in the same environments where odors are generated and it has no unintended negative impact on the biological treatment system. The product works within the existing plant infrastructure. (www.novozymes.com)
Prinsco Inc. and Lane Enterprises have two new stormwater chamber lines that are built from a high-performance engineered injection molded chamber design for civil engineers looking for high-efficiency stormwater storage and retention products to meet or ex-
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
ceed ASTM F2418. Prinsco will sell the HydroStor™ line and Lane will sell the StormKeeper™ line. The larger chamber will store 180 cu ft of stormwater per chamber, or 25 cu ft per lin ft, for high-volume projects The smaller chamber will store 75 cu ft of stormwater per chamber, or 11cu ft per lin ft , for limited burial projects. (www.rpinsco.com)
Innovyze has announced Generation V10 of InfoWaterUDF, a geocentric 125 solution for unidirectional flushing of drinking water distribution systems. By removing stagnant water, along with mineral and sediments deposits that accumulate over time, the new process effectively restores hydraulic capacity and improves water quality. The product can also help utilities improve water quality by restoring the disinfectant residual, reducing bacterial regrowth, dislodging biofilms, removing sediments and deposits, controlling corrosion, restoring flows and pressures, eliminating taste and odor issues, and reducing disinfectant demand throughout the system. All of these benefits prolong the life expectancy of the distribution system and reduce the potential for waterborne disease outbreaks. (www.innovyze.com)
ENGINEERING DIRECTORY
Tank Engineering And Management Consultants, Inc.
Engineering • Inspection Aboveground Storage Tank Specialists Mulberry, Florida • Since 1983
863-354-9010 www.tankteam.com
ENGINEERING DIRECTORY
EQUIPMENT & SERVICES DIRECTORY
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
w w w. c e nt r a l f lor i d a c ont rol s . c om
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
EQUIPMENT & SERVICES DIRECTORY Showcase Your Company in the Engineering or Equipment & Services Directory Contact Mike Delaney at
352-241-6006 ads@fwrj.com
CLASSIFIEDS Positions Av ailable
Lift Station/Collection System Operators If there is a right place in all of the Orlando metropolitan area, Altamonte Springs is it. Positioned in the geographic heart of central Florida, Altamonte Springs provides a solid base of services with the convenience of a location that virtually eliminates the daily challenge of commuting to work. Recently recognized as the Outstanding Public Organization of the Year during the Central Florida Engineers’ Week, the Altamonte Springs Public Works & Utilities Department is seeking a lift station operator to serve our residents and utility customers. Qualifications: Six (6) months experience working with lift stations, pumps, and electrical meters. HS diploma or G.E.D. and valid driver’s license. Valid Class C Wastewater Collection Technician certification preferred. For additional information and to apply, please visit www.Altamonte.org. Hiring range D.O.Q.: $28,245- $43,780 Compensation and Benefits: A competitive salary based on the selected candidate’s qualifications and experience. Employee health insurance and life insurance coverage, a retirement system with pension/investment plan options, paid leave time, paid holidays, a comprehensive wellness program, Employee Assistance Program, etc.
Wastewater Treatment Plant Chief Operator The City of Winter Haven is seeking a Chief Wastewater Plant Operator. Salary is commensurate upon experience. The Chief Operator performs responsible work in supervising wastewater treatment/disposal operations and personnel and ensures compliance with FDEP regulations. Requires a high school diploma or equivalent, five years of experience in the operation of wastewater treatment facilities; supervisory experience preferred. Possession of a FDEP Class A Wastewater Certificate. Position may close without notice. Please find other details and application online at http://www.egovlink.com/winterhaven
52
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
PEACE RIVER MANASOTA REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY AUTHORITY Applications are currently being accepted for the following position located at the Authority’s Peace River Water Treatment Facility on Kings Highway in DeSoto County, Florida. Laboratory Coordinator / Chemist Work in start-up, operation and state accreditation of an analytical laboratory for a regional drinking water treatment facility. Minimum requirements include Associates Degree from accredited institution with supporting coursework in analytical discipline such as chemistry, biology, or microbiology, and six (6) years of experience as a chemist/laboratory technician in an analytical laboratory accredited in drinking water and/or wastewater analysis. Advanced degrees may substitute for up to three years of experience. Starting salary range $45K-$58K depending on experience and education. Visit http://www.regionalwater.org/ for employment application and job description. Submit completed application and resume to 9415 Town Center Parkway, Lakewood Ranch, FL 34202 no later than June 18, 2015. For further information call (941) 316-1776 or email peaceriver@regionalwater.org. The Authority is an Equal Opportunity Employer and drug free work place. Preference in initial appointment to certain positions will be extended to eligible veterans and spouses of veterans. To receive veterans’ preference, documentation must be submitted at the time of application.
Utility Engineer - Sarasota County Government Project Management including modeling/technical support $47486$68161 May Exceed. www.scgov.net/careers
City of New Smyrna Beach Water Plant Operator The Utilities Commission, City of New Smyrna Beach is seeking qualified applicants for a WTP Operator C within the Water Resources Department. This is highly specialized work in the operations of a Class A Water Treatment Plant. Visit www.ucnsb.org for a full job description. Education/Experience: Valid Florida Class C License in Water Treatment. Starting Salary: $18.27/hour. Qualified applicants may apply online at www.ucnsb.org or email resume to jobs@ucnsb.org or mail resume to Human Resources, PO Box 689 New Smyrna Beach, FL 32170. EOE/DFWP
Assistant County Administrator - Utility Services Pasco County, FL Salary Negotiable Closing Date: continuous Graduation from an accredited college or university with a Bachelor's degree in Civil or Environmental Engineering, or related field. A Master's degree in Management, Business Administration, Public Administration or a related field is required. Ten years experience in progressively responsible supervisory positions with a minimum of five years experience in public utility system management administration in an agency of comparable size or responsibility. Experience in the above referenced utilities services departments preferred.
City of St. Petersburg Water Treatment Distribution Manager (IRC31358) $73,817 - $109,647 DOQ – Open Until Filled Supervisory, technical work directing 24/7 potable water plant operations; high school diploma/GED equivalency, including math/science courses; State of FL DL; State of Florida Class "A" Water Operator Certificate (out of state appointee may receive 6 month grace period to achieve cert.) See detailed requirements at www.stpete.org/jobs EEO-AA-Employer-VetDisabled-DFWP-Vets' Pref
Must possess a valid driver's license. Must become a Pasco County resident within twelve (12) months after employment date. EOE/MF/ADA Apply online at www.pascocountyfl.net
Utilities Treatment Plant Operations Supervisor
Water/Wastewater positions – City of Deltona Water/Wastewater Operator start at $16.16 - $25.15/hour, DOQ. Utility maintenance technician - $13.95 - $18.23/hour, DOQ. Submit City App to: City of Deltona, HRD, 2345 Providence Blvd, Deltona FL. For more info and to download City App visit www.deltonafl.gov. EOE
$54,099 - $76,123/yr. Assists in the admin & technical work in the mgmt, ops, & maint of the treatment plants. Class “A” Water lic. & a class “C” Wastewater lic. req. with 5 yrs supervisory exp. Apply Online At: http://pompanobeachfl.gov Open until filled.
Looking For a Job? The FWPCOA Job Placement Committee Can Help! Contact Joan E. Stokes for more information at 407-293-9465 or fax 407-293-9943 .
News Beat The South Florida Water Management District governing board has passed a resolution supporting Gov. Rick Scott’s 20-year funding request for Everglades restoration. In his 2015-16 budget, Gov. Scott proposed $5 billion in state funding. This dedicated, ongoing source of revenue will eliminate the “stops and starts” that have repeatedly impeded Everglades restoration progress in the past. Implementation of the funding plan will provide significant environmental benefits through construction of water storage reservoirs, aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) systems, stormwater treatment areas, wetland restoration, and infrastructure improvements. When completed, these projects will deliver critical benefits across the entire South Florida ecosystem, including: • Creation of water storage to capture and store 1 million acre-ft (330 bil gal) of fresh water during wet periods. This will significantly decrease the frequency and intensity of harmful freshwater discharges to the estuaries. • Reduction of nutrients, including a significant reduction in phosphorus and nitrogen loads to Lake Okeechobee, the Caloosahatchee Estuary, the St. Lucie Estuary, and into the Everglades.
• Restoration of more natural water flows from the northern Everglades through Lake Okeechobee and to the southern Everglades, with more natural sheetflow of
water into Florida Bay, Biscayne Bay, and the Ten Thousand Islands National Wildlife Area.
Florida Water Resources Journal • June 2015
53
Certification Boulevard Answer Key From page 18 February 2014
Editorial Calendar January ......Wastewater Treatment February ....Water Supply; Alternative Sources March ........Energy Efficiency; Environmental Stewardship April............Conservation and Reuse May ............Operations and Utilities Management; Florida Water Resources Conference June ..........Biosolids Management and Bioenergy Production July ............Stormwater Management; Emerging Technologies; FWRC Review 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.
Display Advertiser Index Blue Planet........................55
FWPCOA Training ................7
CEU Challenge ..................32
Garney ................................5
Crom ................................41
GML Coatings ..............36,48
Data Flow ........................29
Hudson Pumps..................65
Fluid Control......................43
McKim & Creed ................45
FSAWWA Call For Papers ..25
Medora ............................11
FSAWWA Conference
Polston..............................37
Exhibits ............................27
Stacon ................................2
FSAWWA Conference
Treeo ................................33
Overview ..........................26
Xylem ..............................56
FWPCOA Fall Short School 19
54
June 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal
1. C) 50 to 100 mg/L Typically, TSS levels in the liquid effluent sidestream of a gravity thickener, or gravity belt thickener, below 50 to 100 mg/L is considered acceptable. When the TSS is much above 100 mg/L, this may indicate that too many solids are leaving the thickener in the liquid effluent stream.
2. C) Decrease the top skimmer speed. Decreasing the top skimmer speed on a DAF unit will typically decrease the removal rate of the float sludge, allowing the float sludge concentration to become thicker. It’s the same concept as decreasing the return activated sludge (RAS) removal rate from a secondary clarifier to thicken the return sludge concentration.
3. B) Close the venturi mixer. An in-line (or in-pipe) venturi mixer is designed to impart energy on the two streams being mixed: sludge feed and polymer solution. As the mixer is closed, more energy is imparted and the size of the resultant floc particles will be smaller. Conversely, as the mixer is opened, less energy is imparted and the size of the resultant floc particles will be larger.
4. B) 291 lbs/day Pounds per day centrate solids: = Centrate flow, mgd x centrate TSS concentration, mg/L x 8.34 lbs/gal Centrate flow, mgd: = Sludge feed rate, gpm x 1,400 mins/day ÷ 1,000,000 x 0.97 = 250 gpm x 1,440 mins/day ÷ 1,000,000 x 0.97 = 0.3492 mgd centrate flow Pounds per day centrate: = Centrate flow 0.3492 mgd x centrate TSS concentration 100 mg/L x 8.34 lbs/gal = 291.2 lbs/day
5. D) 36.2 days Aerobic digester HRT, days = Volume of tank, gal ÷ feed sludge, gpd Volume of tank, gal = πr2 x depth, ft. x 7.48 gal/ft3 x percent full = 3.14 x 37.5 x 37.5 x 20 ft x 7.48 gal/ft3 x 0.85 = 561,490.9 gal Sludge feed, gpd = 15,500 Aerobic digester HRT, days = 561,491 gal ÷ 15,500 gpd = 36.2 days
6. B) Secondary digester Typically, the secondary digester in a two-stage anaerobic digestion process is not mixed or heated. This tank is typically used as a gas and sludge holding tank.
7. B) Specific Oxygen Utilization Rate (SOUR) The SOUR is calculated by dividing the oxygen uptake rate (OUR) test results by the total solids content of the sample in grams per liter. The SOUR is used to determine potential for additional volatile solids reduction that is remaining in a sample. Typically, the SOUR results of aerobically digested sludge should be no greater than 1.5 mg/hr/gm TS to meet Class B standards for vector attraction reduction, provided the sample is no greater than 2.0 percent TS.
8. D) Decrease the air supply and decrease the dissolved oxygen (DO). Typically, white foam produced in an aerobic digester can be the result of overaeration. Reducing the air supply, and the resultant DO levels, can many times decrease the production of white foam. Shutting off the air altogether for several hours at a time can actually make white foam disappear. Also, this activity (shutting off the air supply) typically will result in increased destruction of volatile solids in the aerobic digester as an end result of denitrification. Another side benefit of decreasing or periodically stopping air supply to an aerobic digester is the natural addition of alkalinity that takes place through denitrification, which helps to increase and balance pH in the digester.
9. C) 11 to 20 ft3 per lb VS reduced Typically, gas produced in an anaerobic digester that is close to about 11 to 20 cu ft per lb of volatile solids destroyed is considered acceptable.
10. C) Not enough data to answer this question. Actually, there is not enough information to properly answer this question. At first glance, you might answer no, because the minimum volatile solids reduction to meet EPA's vector attraction reduction regulation for Class B residuals is 38 percent. However, if the results of an extended 40-day bench test are less than 17 percent volatile solids reduction, then the standard for Class B vector attraction reduction has been satisfied.