Florida Water Resources Journal - November 2015 by Florida Water Resources Journal

Editor’s Office and Advertiser Information:

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

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

News and Features 18 24 52 54

Technical Articles

President: Richard Anderson (FSAWWA) Peace River/Manasota Regional Water Supply Authority Vice President: Greg Chomic (FWEA) Heyward Incorporated 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

WEF HQ Newsletter—Myron Bachman WEF Addresses Stormwater Issues Technology Spotlight News Beat

4 Reverse Osmosis Post-Treatment Stabilization Utilizing Liquid Lime—Vaile Feemster and Jim Smith

20 Responding to a New Year’s Day Water Treatment Crisis for a Surface Water— Joseph Downey

28 Strategies for Improving Water Quality of Florida Keys Beaches: A Case Study— Ofer Wainberg, Juan Barreto, Maria Arguelles, Maria Ruiz, Alessia Juan, Qidi Sun, Andres Halfen, and Sung Hee Joo

44 City of Sunrise Achieves Alternate Raw Water Supply With Existing Source Infrastructure—Chris Reinbold, Giovanni Batista, and Jim Dolan

Education and Training 10 25 27 40 47

FSAWWA Fall Conference FWEA Collection Systems TREEO Center Training CEU Challenge FWPCOA Training Calendar

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

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

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

Columns 26 34 38 42 50

Certification Boulevard—Roy Pelletier FSAWWA Speaking Out—Mark Lehigh FWEA Focus—Raynetta Curry Marshall Legal Briefs—Gerald Buhr C Factor—Thomas King

Departments 55 56 59 62

New Products Service Directories Classifieds Display Advertiser Index

Volume 67

ON THE COVER: The Hillsboro Beach Water Treatment Plant includes a lime silo (far left), a spiractor unit (cone-shaped structure), and a gravity filter (far right). The filter has been removed from service. (photo: Michael Gardner)

November 2015

Number 11

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 • November 2015

F W R J

Reverse Osmosis Post-Treatment Stabilization Utilizing Liquid Lime Vaile Feemster and Jim Smith he Dauphin Island Water & Sewer Authority (Authority), in Dauphin Island, Ala., owns and operates a reverse osmosis (RO) drinking water treatment facility that first came online in May 2010. The facility serves Dauphine Island’s 1,200 permanent residents, and a seasonal tourist population of more than 20,000. The barrier island is located off the coast of the state, approximately 30 mi south of Mobile. The facility treats water from a sand aquifer that is about 700 ft below the ground’s surface. The water is relatively good quality and only requires treatment for chlorides in the 1,700-parts-per-mil (ppm) range. The facility currently operates at a recovery rate of 75 to 80 percent (depending on the season) and can supply a production of up to 1.2 mil gal per day (mgd). The RO treatment of brackish water purifies and significantly changes the mineral composition of the water. Pure water is considered a reactive chemical, and water containing little to no hardness is often found to be aggressive towards distribution system components. Consequently, poststabilization of RO-treated water is required prior to storage and distribution. The Authority re-evaluated its post-treatment and stabilization treatment after failing a lead corrosion sample soon after the plant was commissioned. It looked at four primary options for improving its poststabilization treatment: Chemical addition: minerals other than lime or calcite Blending with a water containing high mineral content Carbon dioxide (CO2) addition, followed by calcite or dolomite dissolution CO2 addition, followed by lime (slurry) dosing

prepared. The evaluation narrowed the prospective treatment alternatives to two possible secondary options of the primary CO2 /lime (slurry) dosing option. The Authority pilot-tested the two selected methods and then selected the most advantageous option for poststabilization at its water treatment facility. The Authority commissioned a new RO treatment facility in May 2011. From start-up, the facility has experienced problems with corrosive water and meeting the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) requirements for lead levels. The Authority initially implemented a corrosion control program, held over from a previous iron removal plant, by treating the plant effluent with a proprietary blended zinc-orthophosphate. In August 2011, the Authority failed the ADEM lead sample limits; in January 2012, it implemented a new corrosion control plan that included changing the corrosion inhibitor to a blended orthopolyphosphate and increasing the corrosion inhibitor dosage. The new plan also included extensive testing at the water plant and in the system. The sampling plan and performance monitoring program included corrosion test coupons located at various locations in the Authority’s service area, frequent water sampling, and trending of historical data. In September 2013, the Authority again failed the ADEM lead exceedance level. Since that time, Constantine Engineering has worked with the Authority’s operators to develop, evaluate, and implement alternative water treatment processes that provide stable finish water chemistry and eliminate the permit violations.

Study Objectives Each of these four methods was reviewed and a cost evaluation for implementing each option was

The RO process removes dissolved solids from

Table 1. Common Chemicals that Add Carbonate or Shift Carbonate Species

Vaile Feemster is general manager with Dauphin Island Water & Sewer Authority in Dauphin Island, Ala., and Jim Smith, P.E., is project manager with Constantine Engineering in Fort, Payne, Ala.

feed water, including calcium and bicarbonate/carbonate ions. The resulting RO permeate will typically have low levels of calcium hardness and alkalinity and is “stabilized” to protect distribution pipelines, pump stations, and storage tanks. The Authority has attempted to provide stabilization with proprietary blended phosphates and pH adjustments using sodium hydroxide. This approach has provided adequate poststabilized water; however, the lead corrosion continues to bump the exceedance level and a new approach should be implemented. The chemical stability of potable water is typically determined by three parameters: pH buffering capacity or alkalinity Tendency of the water to precipitate calcium carbonate or scaling potential Concentration of soluble calcium ions in the water The pH is relevant in the finished water, but it is dependent on the values of the three parameters listed. Several calculated indices are used in the water industry for water stability control to determine the scaling tendency of calcium carbonate. The most commonly accepted indices are calcium carbonate scaling potential (CCSP), Ryznar Stability Index (RSI), and Langelier Saturation Index (LSI). The targeted post-treatment water quality objectives are as follows: 40<alkalinity<80 mg/L as calcium carbonate (mg/L as CaCO3) LSI>0 50<calcium (Ca)<120mg/L as CaCO3 8.0<pH<8.5 The goal for the Authority was to increase alkalinity from the current level of 10 mg/L to above 40 mg/l and increase the LSI from the current -3.5 Continued on page 6

November 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Continued from page 6 to a positive number between 0 and 1. This can be accomplished by post-treatment remineralization. Generally, post-treatment remineralization can be achieved by four treatment processes: Chemical addition: minerals other than lime or calcite Blending with a water containing high mineral content Carbon dioxide (CO2) addition, followed by calcite or dolomite dissolution CO2 addition, followed by lime (slurry) dosing

Treatment Options Chemical Additions Chemicals, such as sodium bicarbonate, calcium sulfate, or calcium chloride, can be used, but there are challenges associated with chemical cost, storage, and dosing. The addition of chemicals also introduces additional minerals in the finish water. In the case of calcium chloride, the resulting permeate chloride levels would increase to 110 to 180 mg/L above the current levels, which would put chloride levels close to or above the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) maximum contaminant level ( MCL) of 250 mg/L . Due to these undesirable results and challenges, chemical additions were not considered for post-treatment and they were eliminated from further consideration. Blending At the Authority, blending with low saline feed water from existing shallow wells is a cost-effective

option; however, undesirable constituents in the blend water, such as color-causing agents and dissolved organic matter, prevent this option, which was eliminated early in discussions with the Authority’s operators due to associated undesirable effects and operation issues. Calcite Contactor Acidification of permeate by the addition of CO2 that is followed by upflow calcite (limestone) contacting is recognized in Europe and the Caribbean to be a suitable method of post-treatment of RO permeate. Although the process is used at plants in south Florida and Texas, the design criteria used to develop these systems are not well established in other parts of the United States. Dissolution of calcite is a dynamic process, which may be enhanced or inhibited, depending on the contactor design and influent water quality. Constantine consulted with Tonka Water Treatment (Tonka) for its expertise in designing and operating calcite filters for the U.S. military. Calcite design factors include loading rate, calcite particle size and purity, contactor bed height, and bed porosity. Influent water quality parameters that affect calcite dissolution include influent calcite saturation level, pH, temperature, ionic strength, and feed water impurities. A calcite contactor was included in the cost comparison, but was eliminated from discussion due to site constraints and the capital cost of the system. Lime Feed Systems As discussed earlier, the alkalinity of water can be increased by a variety of chemicals that are com-

November 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal

mon at water treatment plants. The challenge with alkalinity is to find a chemical that can shift the carbonate species, add more carbonate to the system, and remain cost effective. All of these goals cannot be accomplished with one chemical, so treatment requires the use of multiple chemicals that can add carbonate to the system, and the chemical that can shift the carbonate species toward carbonate ion. Table 1 shows the most common water treatment plant chemicals that add carbonate or shift the carbonate species. The approach to the challenge of adding alkalinity is to use two of the chemicals (one from each column) with the lowest costs simultaneously. An advanced lime feed system utilizes dissolved CO2 dosing systems to provide the carbonate. These systems dissolve CO2 into a carrier water solution to be added to the process stream. When carbon dioxide solution is added to water with moderate pH changes, the required reaction time is approximately two minutes. The Authority is fortunate to have source water that has ample amounts of naturally occurring CO2 dissolved into the raw water, which eliminated the need for a CO2 feed system, thereby saving approximately $75,000 to $150,000 in capital costs. There are three options for feeding lime at the Dauphin Island Water Treatment Plant (WTP): Quicklime slaking Hydrated lime solution Bulk-delivered hydrated lime solution The main differences between hydrated lime and quicklime are their reactivity, feed/dosing procedures, and chemical composition. Hydrated lime and quicklime are both calcium compounds. In its hydrated state, calcium is called calcium hydroxide, and in its pure state, it is called calcium oxide, or quicklime. Calcium oxide, the “natural” state of calcium that comes out directly from the mine, has a heavy density (65lb/ft³) and is more reactive than hydrated lime. Hydrated lime is the result of adding water to powdered quicklime, putting it in a kiln or oven, and then hydrating/pulverizing it with water. The resulting lime has a density of 35lb/ft³, and is called calcium hydroxide because it has been hydrated. It is necessary for quicklime to be slaked in a controlled environment because it can create heat that reaches up to 120°F. Calcium hydroxide, or hydrated lime, is already neutralized, so it will not undergo oxidation and can be used with water, for pH control, lime slurry addition, and lime slurry mixes. Quicklime’s hydrophobic reaction with water requires a lime slaker to be used in the process. The quicklime is generally received in pebbles of about one-quarter to one-eighth of an in., or in powder form (<300µ). The slaking of the pebble lime and powdered quicklime has to be engineered in respect to their exothermic reactions.

The lime slaker mixes quicklime with water to create calcium hydroxide in a solution, which is called lime slurry. Slakers are good for high-volume consumption or high demand of calcium. However, at the Authorityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s WTP, where a smaller or medium lime solution is needed, hydrated lime is more efficient because the equipment required to use the hydrated lime is simpler and does not need to be designed to handle an exothermic reaction. In this case, the powder can be fed with screw conveyors, or manually dumped directly into the slurry tank equipped with a slurry mixer; water is then added to create the required lime slurry concentration. The lime slurry is dosed to the permeate using peristaltic hose pumps. Bulk liquid lime is simply hydrated lime that has been mixed into a slurry off-site at a chemical plant where the process is closely monitored and precisely controlled to provide a stable, consistent product delivered to the water plant.

Table 2. Reverse Osmosis Permeate Post-Lime Dosage

Table 3. Finished Water

Pilot Testing Bulk-Delivered Liquid Lime Cal-Flo bulk-delivered liquid lime supplied by Burnett Lime Company Inc., which was pilot-tested in October 2013. Burnett Lime supplied a complete liquid lime feed system that included a bulk storage tank, feed pumps, mixers, and a programmable logic control (PLC) control system. The Cal-Flo system consists of the following major items: 16,000-gal lime slurry tank Feed pump building Feed pumps Control panel and instrumentation Tank mixer The Cal-Flo system capital cost for equipment and installation is estimated to be

$330,000, and the yearly operating cost is estimated to be $12,000. Cal-Flo presented an option to purchase a used system that was approximately $100,000 less than the cost of a new system, stating that it would provide a warranty and support the used system as if it were sold as new. There could be some potential cost savings by designing and implementing a system other than that presented in the Cal-Flo proposal. The Authority can purchase an exterior tank and mixer and utilize a transfer pump-to-pump liquid lime to the existing chemical feed room; a new day tank and mixer would be required, along with an additional chemical feed pump. Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s estimated that the cost for this used liquid bulk lime alternate system would be $115,000, which would be a savings of $100,000 over a new system. A major disadvantage is that the Cal-Flo feed system is patented, and dosing its product with alternate equipment would eliminate the operation guarantee from Burnett Lime for the performance of the system. The Cal-Flo system pilot-tested very well and the operators found it to be easy to operate and maintain. When the system was running, the water quality was easy to maintain, pH was stable, and alkalinity was easily adjusted by changing the lime dosing rate (Tables 2 and 3). The following shows the pros and cons of the system, both subjective and quantitative:

Pros Precise application Low maintenance No dust Nonhazardous Predictable results Dissolves on contact

Cons Higher operation cost Requires large bulk tank Single supplier

Continued on page 8

Hydrated Lime Bag Delivery

Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ November 2015

Mixing tank with ergonomic height for dry lime filling by operators

Continued from page 7

On-Site Liquid Lime Mixing Liquid lime can be produced on-site at the water treatment facility by mixing hydrated lime and water to the required concentration percentage. For the Authority, dry hydrated lime would be delivered to the WTP on pallets with 50-lb bags; the product is delivered in 45 bags per 48-in. x 40-in. pallets. The operator would mix the product by manually dumping the bags of lime into a mixing tank and adding the appropriate amount of water to create a 30 percent solution. The lime solution would be fed to the RO permeate with a hose pump. This system would be best operated in a separate building from the existing WTP due to the heavy amount of dust that is created from filling the mixing tank. The new building would need an area for lime pallet storage, an area for the mixing tank, and a protected area for the control panel. Some of the recommended building amenities, and their pros and cons, would include: 16-ft x 24-ft brick-and-siding building to match the WTP building Space for lime pallet storage Loading dock for pallet offloading Separate PLC panel room to protect the control system from dust Roll-up doors for easy ingress/egress of equipment and pallets

Pros Lower operating cost No bulk tank Nonhazardous Dissolves on contact Multiple suppliers

Cons Dusty Increased operator attention Clumping and clogging Varying consistency Turbidity

Plant operators have pilot-tested the on-site lime mixing method and the results are extremely good. The biggest drawbacks mentioned by operators are the dusty environment created by emptying the bags of lime and stabilizing the pH. The pH may have been difficult to stabilize due to inconsistent mixing with the pilot mixer and tank; this can be improved with a full-scale system. It should be noted that operators did not experience any turbidity spikes or clogging during the pilot study. The abundant amount of CO2 in the raw water reacts to dissolve the lime almost instantaneously after injection. Another drawback that should be noted is the higher feed rate that was required to achieve the same water quality improvements. This problem could be from the same issues that caused the inconsistent pH stabilization. This disparity in the solution feed rate between liquid bulk and on-site mixed lime

Table 4. Equipment Capital Cost Comparison

On-Site Lime Mixing and Dosing System

brings the operating cost closer than it would be if the dosage were equal. From the pilot study data, the estimated operating cost for the on-site mixed liquid lime is approximately $9,000, which is about 25 percent less than liquid bulk lime. Because the CO2 is naturally occurring, it should be noted that the operators have no control over the CO2 concentration. While the concentration remains at its current level, there is plenty of CO2 to react with the lime; however, if the CO2 concentration should drop in the future, a supplemental CO2 system would be required. The CO2 levels have been high since start-up of the well in 2011, so the likelihood of a change should be small.

Pilot Study Conclusions

Table 5. Operation and Maintenance Cost Comparison

November 2015 â&#x20AC;˘ Florida Water Resources Journal

The pilot study tested two liquid lime feed options as stabilization treatment for finished water at the water plant. The study results show that both options were able to sufficiently raise alkalinity and pH, and thereby stabilizing the RO permeate to achieve the water quality targets. The RO permeate treated with liquid lime, both mixed and bulk, delivered yielded alkalinity and hardness at levels above the target 40 mg/L as CaCO3 and an LSI above -0.3. No visible turbidity was observed during the tests of either product and no increase in chlorine gas was required for proper chlorine (Cl2) residual. Operators had no problems meeting the pH, hardness, and alkalinity target levels; adjustments could be made to match any pH level desired. The mixed liquid lime did fluctuate more than the bulk product and some factors that could cause this include inadequate

mixing, inaccurate measuring the dry product, or water and/or changing consistency (i.e., changing percent solids in the mix tank). The quality of dry lime delivered to the site can fluctuate where bulk delivered liquid lime is produced in a factory, with precise formulation and quality control. Operators have continued to work with Carus Chemicals to select the appropriate corrosion inhibitor and dosage. Carus recommended targeting a pH of 8.0-8.2 and a hardness of 25-35 mg/L, and continuing to provide a 1 ppm phosphate residual in the system. The pilot study shows that both the bulk purchase liquid and the dry mix on-site product will work to stabilize finish water at the Authorityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s WTP. Tables 4 and 5 provide a cost comparison for installing and operating each system.

Table 6. 20-Year Present-Worth Analysis

Capital and Operation and Maintenance Cost Comparison The conceptual capital cost in Table 4 is based on equipment budget quotes and estimated installation cost by a contractor providing a sealed bid. There may be some cost savings for separating portions of the construction and/or self-performing portions of the project. The operation and maintenance (O&M) cost comparison in Table 5 is based on the pilotstudy lime consumption and only takes into account lime usage; it was assumed for this comparison that power cost and equipment maintenance cost differences should be negligible. Prior to the new system, the WTP used approximately $3,000 per year of sodium hydroxide solution that will no longer be required; this amount can be deducted from the cost shown on the table to achieve a net O&M value. The 20-year present-worth analysis in Table 6 is based upon the capital and O&M costs presented in Tables 4 and 5.

Improvement Summary The pilot study confirmed that liquid lime is the best solution for properly stabilizing the RO permeate water and eliminating the lead permit limit excursions. In January 2014, Burnett Lime proposed a refurbished lime feed system. A site visit was conducted to assess the condition of the proposed equipment and to allow Authority personnel to inquire about O&M procedures. From the site-visit findings and the results of the pilot study, the Authorityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s board selected Burnett Lime to provide the refurbished Cal-Flo lime feed equipment. This equipment was commissioned in June 2014. The Authority continues the sampling and monitoring program put into place in 2012. The

Figure 1. Lime Dosage Impact on pH and Alkalinity

continuation of this program includes the following: 1. Achieving a 1 mg/L of total phosphate residual in the distribution system. 2. Coupon testing in the service area and at the WTP. Coupon samples should be pulled for testing quarterly. Quarterly samples should indicate corrosion rates not greater than 10 mils/yr, with a target of 5 mils/yr or less. Coupons should include mild steel, copper, and lead. 3. The sampling and performance monitoring program. This program provides historical data that can be used to adjust chemical rates, change chemical types, and alert department personnel to changes in water quality within the distribution system; samples were taken weekly for the first quarter and monthly thereafter. Samples are taken from the same locations each time (at coupon testing sites). The following tests are recorded: Alkalinity (mg/L as CaCO3)

pH Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3) Temperature TDS Iron Polyphosphates and orthophosphates Lead and copper

The sampling and performance monitoring has shown that the original goals are being met, and the plant operators have flexibility to adjust water quality to suit their specific treatment goals. Figure 1 shows the pH and alkalinity prior to and after the lime system was placed on-line. The targeted post-treatment water quality objectives are as follows: 40<alkalinity<80 mg/L as calcium carbonate (mg/L as CaCO3) LSI>0 50<calcium (Ca)<120mg/L as CaCO3 8.0<pH<8.5

Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ November 2015

WEF Fact Sheet Summarizes Air Quality Permit Pitfalls, Resources Myron Bachman Air permitting is a challenging part of installing a combined heat and power (CHP) system. A new fact sheet, “Air Quality Permitting,” outlines the requirements and processes that utility managers will likely encounter in the air permitting process, as well as available resources. The fact sheet, which can be viewed at h t t p : / / w w w. w r r f d a t a . o r g / A i r Pe r m i t tingFS/WEFAirPermittingFactSheet2015.htm l, was produced by the Bioenergy Technology Subcommittee CHP Task Force of the Water Environment Federation Residuals and Biosolids Committee.

Challenges of Differing Requirements and Terms One of the reasons that air permitting is a challenge is that there is little consistency in how to accomplish it or what will be required. In addition, the federal Clean Air Act is one of the most complicated components of the Code of Federal Regulations. Each state is allowed discretion for air quality in its jurisdiction, as long as its regulations are as stringent as the federal ones. Some states have promulgated regulations that are substantially more stringent than the federal standards. Also, some states have not only passed such stringent state programs, but have also divided themselves into subdivisions, each with different requirements. An example of this is California, which is divided into 35 air districts, each of which has its own regulations. Such requirements are different enough from each other that they are often unrecognizable as having come from the same state.

In addition, terminology can vary among agencies. To some, the initial permit is a “permit to construct,” for others an “authority to construct,” and for still others, it’s an “approval order.” Some agencies use the term “volatile organic compounds” (VOCs) to describe the organic gases that act as precursors to ozone formation in the atmosphere, while other agencies call them “nonmethane hydrocarbons” (NMHCs), or also “precursor organic compounds” (POCs). Innumerable examples of terminology confusion exist. The fact sheet uses terms that are most commonly encountered across the United States.

Fulfilling Requirements Air quality requirements can be divided into three categories: administrative, performance standards, and permitting. Each is independently applicable, and an exemption from one is not necessarily an exemption from all. At a high level, the process of acquiring an air permit is nearly the same in all jurisdictions. Generally, after a permit application is prepared and submitted, it is reviewed by the permitting agency, and in some cases, it requires review by the public. The permit is either granted or denied. In many jurisdictions, a temporary permit is granted that authorizes construction. After construction is complete and the facility is assured to function as permitted, a final permit is issued.

Involve Regulators Early in the Process An important consideration when beginning the permitting process is a permitting strategy. This strategy should consider all aspects of the permitting process and is described in the fact sheet. One of the most

November 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal

important elements, however, is agency interaction. The ultimate goals of agency interaction are to make the permitting process move as smoothly as possible and to minimize the number of requirements imposed on the permit. It is important to consider what opportunities are available for agency interaction, the specific goals of each interaction, and how to approach the agency, both generally and specifically, at each interaction. 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 publisher of 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.

Myron Bachman is a plant superintendent at the North Davis Sewer District in Syracuse, Utah. He can be reached at MyronBachman@NDSD.org.

F W R J

Responding to a New Year’s Day Water Treatment Crisis for a Surface Water Joseph Downey ecatur Utilities in Decatur, Ala., owns and operates a potable water treatment facility that uses the Tennessee River as its sole source of raw water. The utility produces an average of 28 mil gal per day (mgd) to serve approximately 30,000 customers in all portions of the city of Decatur, and routinely provides water to the city of Hartselle, Northeast Morgan County Water District, and Limestone County. The town of Trinity and West Morgan East Lawrence Water District have the capability to buy water from Decatur Utilities upon request. The water treatment plant (WTP) has the permitted capacity to treat 68 mgd of raw water. Chemical treatment consists of using sodium permanganate for oxidation, fluoride to promote dental health, polyaluminum chloride for coagulation, lime for pH adjustment, polyorthophosphate for stabilization, and chlorine for disinfection. There are four in-ground water storage tanks and six elevated storage tanks that provide a combined capacity of approximately 24 mil gal of water.

Treatment Status Preceding the Event The WTP had been operated as a traditional treatment facility since the 1930s. Traditional treatment included raw water chlorination, coagulation, sedimentation, filtration, prelime, postlime, and chlorine disinfection. In 2009, the utility committed to

upgrading chemical processes in order to reduce disinfection byproducts (DBPs). Because the primary concern in Decatur was trihalomethanes (THMs), chemical treatment upgrades included the following strategies: Reduce or eliminate raw water chlorination Use permanganate as raw water oxidant Reduce or eliminate lime feed to keep pH low Use an alternate coagulant to aluminum sulfate (alum) that will work well without prechlorination and prelime Incorporate postphosphate to allow the depressed finished water pH The utility conducted full-scale pilot testing of sodium permanganate as the primary raw water oxidant and polyaluminum chloride (PACl) as the coagulant in October 2009, and made the switch from alum to PACl in March 2010. The change to PACl, along with the use of sodium permanganate, was directly related to anticipating compliance with the Alabama Department of Environmental Management/U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (ADEM/EPA) Disinfection Byproducts (DBP) Stage 2 Rule, which became effective Jan. 1, 2012. The pilot testing of PACl, in conjunction with sodium permanganate, lowered DBP levels on average by 50 percent on finished water leaving the WTP and 10 to 40 percent across the distribution system, as compared to DBP values using alum and chlorine.

Figure 1. Decatur Utilities Water Treatment Plant

November 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Joseph Downey Jr., P.E., is vice president with Constantine Engineering Inc. in Fort Payne, Ala.

Description of Event On Jan. 2, 2011, following a rain storm of approximately 4.8 in. over two days, the WTP recorded elevated raw water turbidities as high as 68 nephelometric turbidity units (ntu). Raw water temperature also significantly dropped due to extremely cold-air temperature during the same period. The WTP was feeding PACl in the range of 30-40 mg/L at the beginning and during the first few hours of the increased raw water turbidity event. At approximately 9 p.m., the WTP lost its filtering capabilities in all 40 filters due to high-filtered turbidities (>0.3 ntu) and high settled water turbidities (>16.0 ntu). At this point, the WTP ceased pumping finished potable water into its distribution system due to high-filter turbidities above 0.30 ntu in order to avoid violating its ADEM water supply permit. The utility also evaluated the option of pumping noncompliant potable water into the distribution system, but strongly believed this option was a last resort, as it would have caused considerable issues for the water system’s customers. This option would have also created an

Figure 2. Water Characteristics During Crisis Event

additional burden on the distribution system, pumping stations, and water storage tanks due to the need to flush the entire system with compliant potable water. The utility eventually resolved the treatment problem during the night of January 3 by increasing the coagulant (PACl) dosage rate to a feed range of 85 to 105 mg/L. The utility resumed water distribution on the morning of January 4, which required approximately 12 hours to refill the water storage tanks before system pressure was restored. Figure 2 shows the raw and settled water characteristics during the event. It was noted that the utility experienced a similar raw water event in December 2010, just one month prior to the January 2011 event, but that winter storm did not affect treatability. Therefore, the following questions were developed to try to understand why the first winter storm did not affect treatability, yet the second event greatly affected treatability: Did the two storms wash out different watersheds? Was there a difference in water quality chemistry? Did the water temperature cause problems? Was there a difference in total organic carbon (TOC) between the storm flows? Were there differences in particle-size distribution or particle surface chemistry between the storm flows? Is PACl the right coagulant? Did raw water chlorination and permanganate help or hurt?

University. Based on the findings and recommendations from the comprehensive study, the utility developed specific treatment protocols that have been implemented to avert future crises. Although similar water quality issues have occurred in the winters of 2012 through 2015, the standard operating procedures (SOPs) for treatment have allowed the WTP to continuously produce excellent finished water quality.

Comprehensive Treatability Study The most significant effort during the treatability study was to perform extensive simulation research in a laboratory, attempting to simulate the raw water conditions during the treatment crisis and assess various factors that affected treatability, as well as strategies to improve treatability. This research was completed at Auburn University, with the following objectives: Analyze the river water Test turbidity removal with 23 sediment/soil samples Explore the natural organic matter (NOM) effect on turbidity removal Examine influence of temperature on turbidity removal Test combined influences of NOM and temperature Examine influence of iron and manganese on turbidity removal Probe effects of chlorine and sodium permanganate (NaMnO4) Test turbidity removal at different dosages

Compare performance of alternate coagulants The raw water simulation was constructed by simply collecting various sediment samples in the watershed immediately adjacent to the WTP intake, then extracting NOM/TOC, as well as inorganic characteristics, that represented the Tennessee River water quality. The â&#x20AC;&#x153;syntheticâ&#x20AC;? raw water samples were then adjusted for factors that included temperature, pH, iron/manganese content, and NOM/TOC content. All treatability tests during the research were conducted using standard jar testing apparatus, with mixing and settling characteristics that simulated the WTP characteristics. Hundreds of laboratory trials were completed, which revealed very valuable information as follows: This evaluation assumed that the best simulated fit to represent the peak effluent turbidity during the January incident was achieved using native NOM at 6.14 mg/L and temperature at 7oC. Turbidity removal by PACl is significantly impacted by the amount of NOM. Lower temperature slows coagulation reactions, but is not as significant as other factors. The impact of iron and manganese on turbidity removal using PACl is negligible. The impact of pH and alkalinity on turbidity removal using PACl is negligible. Increasing PACl dosage as necessary should be the first action during future similar shock loading. Continued on page 22

After-Event Response Immediately following the crisis event, the board of directors for the utility commissioned a comprehensive study to review the cause of the treatability problems and to also determine if the management staff properly communicated during the crisis. The study included the following components: Review raw water data and plant data Review operator records and treatment tests during the crisis Perform bench-scale treatability tests to simulate the raw water conditions during the crisis and evaluate chemical treatment strategies Develop treatment protocols for similar future events Develop management protocols to communicate and make decisions during similar future crisis events The comprehensive study was started in March 2011 and completed by July 2011 using research tasks performed by Constantine Engineering, HDR Engineering, and Auburn Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ November 2015

Continued from page 21 Addition of chlorine and permanganate will further enhance the removal and should lower the coagulant demand. PACl outperformed the other two conventional coagulants, alum and ferric chloride (FeCl), for turbidity removal and TOC removal in the simulated water. TOC and color can serve as “early warning” parameters in raw water. Frequent TOC and color monitoring is highly recommended. Figures 3 through 7 demonstrate a few of the significant trial results.

Water Treatment Plant Standard Operating Procedure Changes Following the results of the treatability

study, the utility implemented the following goals and changes to the management protocol and SOPs at the WTP: Equipment was added to provide on-line monitoring of raw water TOC, preflocculant chlorine (Cl) and manganese (Mn) residuals, and finished water THMs. Operators are conducting regular jar tests and will increase the frequency of testing as raw water quality changes. All tests and operating decisions are now documented. An emergency response plan was developed to establish better protocol for communication among WTP operators, the WTP superintendent, and management during significant variations in plant performance, as well as emergency situations such as equipment failures. Water quality parameters were developed to identify “early warning” signs to help opera-

Figure 3. Effects of Low Temperature and Increasing Natural Organic Matter on Turbidity Removal

tors anticipate water quality changes that will require plant chemical changes. In the four years since implementing these changes, the WTP has experienced at least four significant events in which raw water quality rapidly changed with regard to turbidity, temperature, and TOC. With the new SOPs in place, operators easily managed chemical feed decisions and were able to successfully produce high-quality treated water throughout these potentially critical events. Furthermore, the utility has been successful at achieving the original objective of changing water treatment chemicals and treatment strategy: reduce DBPs through existing treatment technology without the need for expensive alternate technology to achieve compliance with Stage 2 DBP requirements. Distribution system DBPs have consistently remained 20 to 40 per-

Figure 4. Low Temperature Turbidity Removal with Addition of Chlorine (Cl) and Manganese (Mn)

Figure 5. Low Temperature Total Organic Carbon Removal with Addition of Chlorine (Cl) and Manganese (Mn) Figure 6. Turbidity Removal With Alternate Coagulants

November 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal

cent lower than previous results using alum as a traditional coagulant. Wholesale water customers are also able to meet their own DBP requirements because of lower TOC in the Decatur water.

Figure 7. Total Organic Carbon Removal With Alternate Coagulants

Summary and Conclusions Understanding raw water quality and the related chemistry effects can greatly assist WTP operators during routine days, as well as on critical days. The utility used the bad experience of a crisis to better understand raw water characteristics, improve treatability, develop better SOPs, and develop an emergency response plan. For the Tennessee River raw water, the utility has determined the following useful treatment strategies: PACl appears to outperform other coagulant options with regard to turbidity removal, TOC/NOM removal, and DBP control. TOC/DOM greatly affects coagulant dosage requirements for turbidity removal. Water temperature slows the chemical reaction, but is not a significant factor. Prechlorine and permanganate can assist PACl in the removal of turbidity and TOC.

Using PACl as the coagulant, followed by finished water conditioning with polyphosphate, has provided successful compliance with Stage 2 DBP requirements.

Acknowledgements The author gratefully acknowledges the engineering and management staff at Decatur

Utilities: Ray Hardin, general manager; Tom Cleveland, plants and engineering manager; and Hagler Wiley, water plant superintendent. The comprehensive treatability study was performed under the management of Peter Dâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Adamo, Ph.D., with HDR Engineering, and laboratory research was completed under the direction of Don Zhao, Ph.D., with Auburn University Department of Environmental Engineering.

Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ November 2015

WEF Addresses Stormwater Issues New Organization Created The Water Environment Federation (WEF) has established the WEF Stormwater Institute, a new venture to address the growing issue of stormwater and urban runoff. The institute will be housed within WEF to leverage the organization’s existing leadership, breadth of membership, and varied partnerships with federal, state, and local entities responsible for managing stormwater issues. “WEF has been a leader on clean water solutions for many years and has already established itself as an authority on urban runoff issues,” said George Hawkins, chief executive officer and general manager of the District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority. “The expertise and engagement of WEF’s membership will allow the Stormwater Institute to chart a new course toward a healthier and more sustainable stormwater system, not only in North America, but worldwide.” Bill Gaffi, general manager of Clean Water Services, an organization that provides environmentally sensitive management of water resources, added that “innovation is key to sustainable watersheds and communities, and better access to innovation puts a sustainable future within the grasp of more communities and can also help to inform policy makers. The institute can play a powerful role

in this regard, a role that would be smiled upon by both Mother Nature and ratepayers.” The new institute will serve as a center for excellence and a resource for stormwater practitioners and regulator communities. Stormwater is the only growing source of water pollution in many watersheds throughout North America. As urban areas grow and more severe weather occurs, the issue of stormwater management will only increase in importance. “With increasing severe-weather events and limited budgets, innovation in stormwater management and financing is becoming increasingly vital to communities everywhere,” said Ed McCormick, former WEF president. “The WEF Stormwater Institute has been created in direct response to a gap in the water re-

November 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal

source recovery sector and will offer central stormwater leadership, information, and advocacy. With more than 36,000 members across the globe, we are thrilled to have WEF apply its unique strengths to tackle these vital issues and provide effective and efficient solutions to the thousands of water communities that it serves. The Federation is very excited about connecting stormwater professionals from both our member associations and the many regional stormwater organizations that exist.” The growing issue of stormwater pollution, coupled with regulatory pressure, has created a need for national leadership that the institute aims to provide. The institute will have a strong initial focus on the development of technical tools, professional training, and networking opportunities for stormwater practitioners. Many existing stormwater initiatives within WEF will be brought under the umbrella of the new organization, and new programs in key areas, such as green infrastructure training, will be developed. The commitment to the institute will include dedicated full-time professional staff, as well as significant funding for collaborative projects.

Report Available A new comprehensive report from WEF details the challenges, opportunities, and path-

ways to improving the nation’s stormwater systems. The release of “Rainfall to Results: The Future of Stormwater” was recently announced at WEFTEC 2015 in Chicago, which coincided with the official launch of the WEF Stormwater Institute. The growing issue of stormwater pollution, coupled with regulatory pressure, is driving the need for innovative approaches, training, technology solutions, and progressive financing. The report includes the insights of top stormwater experts from across the United States who examined the challenges, opportunities, and best practices that will lead to a more resilient and effective stormwater sector. According to the report, collaborative action across all disciplines within the stormwater community will be required to achieve the envisioned future in which all stormwater will be managed through an optimized mix of affordable and sustainable green, gray, and natural infrastructure. Six critical objectives are identified to achieve this goal: Work at the watershed scale. All communities will have integrated, watershed-scale assessments of water resources needs and challenges. Transform stormwater governance. Communities will catalyze further formation of stormwater utilities and regulations to stimulate stormwater control innovation and performance improvement by focusing on program outcomes. Support innovation and best practices. A broad suite of verified stormwater controls and best practices will support confident planning and maintenance. Manage assets and resources. Stormwater systems will be maintained through robust asset management programs and supported by innovative information technology. Close the funding gap. Communities will align stormwater management efforts with broader community goals to garner funding options and have access to innovative financing opportunities. Engage the community. Customers and the public will understand and value the contribution stormwater management makes to flood risk reduction, clean and safe water, climate resiliency, and other benefits. “Improving stormwater management will be key to facing uncertain climate patterns and extreme weather events,” said Mike Beezhold, senior planner at CDM and chair of WEF’s Stormwater Committee. “We need to integrate stormwater into broader regional and community planning and ensure we are managing stormwater in a sustainable way.” For more information and to download the report, go to www.wefstormwaterinstitute.org.

Florida Water Resources Journal • November 2015

Certification Boulevard Test Your Knowledge of Water Treatment Topics 6. What is indicated in a jar test if 80 percent of the flocculation settles within one to two minutes after mixing has stopped?

Roy Pelletier 1. What is the term used to define the maximum amount of any substances allowed in water that may have an adverse effect on human health? a. b. c. d.

Secondary contaminant level (SCL) Maximum contaminant level (MCL) Federal contaminate levels (FCL) Federal contaminate counts (FCC)

2. What is a commonly used chemical to control algae in raw water reservoirs? a. b. c. d.

Copper oxide Copper hydroxide Copper chloride Copper sulfate

3. What is the term used to describe a condition where oxygen is not present? a. b. c. d.

Anaerobic Aerobic Anoxic Unaerobic

4. If a finished water sample has a temperature of 85oF, what is the conversion to oC? a. b. c. d.

17oC 61oC 29oC 45oC

5. What is the process that mixes coagulant chemicals with raw water? a. b. c. d.

Flocculation Flash mixing Sedimentation Recarbonation

a. b. c. d.

There is not enough coagulant. The flocculation is too heavy. Polymer dosage should be increased. Alkalinity is beyond the solubility limit.

7. What is the process by which smaller solids particles are gradually brought together to form larger solids particles? a. b. c. d.

Sedimentation Flash mixing Flocculation Clarification

8. What should always be in place when moving a chlorine cylinder? a. b. c. d.

Regulator Valve cover Rotometer Valve wrench

9. What is the maximum gas feed rate that can be withdrawn from a 150-lb cylinder of chlorine? a. b. c. d.

20 to 30 lb/day 30 to 40 lb/day 80 to 100 lb/day 150 lb/day

10. What chemical in lime softening is typically used in the removal of noncarbonated hardness? a. b. c. d.

Sulfuric acid Carbon oxide Soda ash Calcium sulfate

Thanks to Scott Ruland, water and wastewater manager with City of Deltona, for providing these questions.

November 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Answers on page 62

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.

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

Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ November 2015

F W R J

Strategies for Improving Water Quality of Florida Keys Beaches: A Case Study Ofer Wainberg, Juan Barreto, Maria Arguelles, Maria Ruiz, Alessia Juan, Qidi Sun, Andres Halfen, and Sung Hee Joo he Florida Keys, situated at the southernmost point of the continental United States and located in Monroe County, consist of 1700 islands, with an area of 355.6 km2 and a population of 76,351 (Florida Department of Environmental Protection [FDEP], 2012). The Keys feature the most extensive living coral reef in the U.S., making it one of the most biodiverse environments in the nation, thereby protected by the Marine Sanctuary and Protection Act (FDEP, 2012). The Keys attracted a total of 4.5 million visitors in 2013 (Long, 2014). However, in general, the Keys have been highly susceptible to wastewater pollution. Lying at an elevation of only 4 ft above sea level, and with its revenue based on tourism, any pollution could bring detrimental effects to the environment, and the consequential public health issues could damage the economy of the area. Formerly, Monroe County did not possess the kind of wastewater treatment systems observed in other similar counties, or anywhere in the state of Florida. Recently, however, 23,000 private on-site systems and 246

small wastewater treatment plants were operating in the region (Monroe County Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan [MCSWMP], 2000). Among them, only a small portion of septic systems—around 15,200—and aerobic treatment units (ATU)—about 640—were permitted to operate (MCSWMP, 2000). Effluent concentrations of 20 mg/L nitrogen (N) and 5 mg/L phosphorus (P) were released by the systems (MCSWMP, 2000). The issues surrounding the Keys have brought urgent attention to the call for the development of a wastewater treatment master plan by Monroe County, which could enable the general system to both modernize and reduce pollution levels by centralizing operations to more adequate wastewater treatment facilities (MCSWMP, 2000). While several beaches have certain amenities (bathrooms and showers) connected to the wastewater management services at their locations, and are aided in the extraction of contaminants from beaches, there are still several beaches that have not been equipped with such modernized systems. Other issues, such as a lack of appropriate stormwater management, blockage of seawater circulation at all

Ofer Wainberg, Juan Barreto, Maria Arguelles, Maria Ruiz, Alessia Juan, Qidi Sun, and Andres Halfen are undergraduate students, and Sung Hee Joo is assistant professor of environmental engineering, with the department of civil, architectural, and environmental engineering at the University of Miami in Coral Gables.

shores, and dog waste runoff, have also contributed to a significant impact on the water quality of beaches in the Keys and the overall coastal environment. Significant contamination in Keys beaches continues to be present, as is indicated by data reported since 2000 on excessive levels of enterococci and fecal coliform, which are some of the main indicators of health risks from contact with recreational waters (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [EPA], 2012). While the data shown in Figure 1 indicate a decreasing trend in most beaches until 2011, increasing levels of enterococci appear after-

Figure 1. Enterococci Levels from 2000 to 2013 at Sixteen Beaches in the Florida Keys

November 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal

wards, suggesting that existing systems and policies to eliminate contamination of the beaches may not be suitable for resolving present-day issues, and consequently, would require further revision and/or development to remedy current pollution levels. Beaches are considered to be safe if enterococci concentration levels are between 0 and 35 colonyforming units (CFU)/100 ml, and moderate if concentrations are between 36 and 104 CFU/100 ml, while poor quality is reported if the levels exceed 104 CFU/100 ml (SoloGabriele, 2015; USEPA, 2015). This article presents possible issues causing the recent increasing trends of enterococci in most beaches of the Keys, discusses current approaches and methods to remedy such issues, and suggests recommendations for protecting a healthy ocean environment.

Issues and Factors Affecting Beach Water Quality There are various issues and factors that could affect the poor quality of ocean water, including the basic amenities available at the beaches, generated waste, stormwater, circulation, and increasing numbers of visitors. First, several public beaches in Monroe County offer basic amenities to visitors, such as bathrooms, showers, and trash cans (MCSWMP, 2000). Waste generated by these amenities needs to be disposed in a proper and environmentally sound manner, such as through connections to sewer systems, septic tanks, or even compost disposal. Some of the sewer systems operated throughout the Keys are found to be inappropriate, contaminating the shorelines in the county (MCSWMP, 2000). Proper sewer systems need to be developed, since the water is later discharged into the ocean, injected into wells deep into the earth, or reused for irrigation or industrial purposes. The primary cause of the source contamination arises from the various uses of septic tanks in beachside facilities. For instance, the systems operate by diluting wastewater, mixing it with underlying groundwater, and performing a variation of primary treatments, such as gravitational forces and sedimentation. Effluents from the tanks are then released underground, discharging contaminated wastewater into groundwater, which is a significant issue for the Keys due to proximity of the groundwater table to the surface. The treatment efficiency of such a septic tank/soil absorption drain system is just 50 percent, compared to the 90 percent efficiency of wastewater treatment plants (MCSWMP,

2000). Since the effluents pass through the system without being treated, toxic organic and inorganic chemicals, bacteria, and viruses are released into the groundwater system. The composting system present in Coco Plum Beach also causes seawater contamination because water used through aerobic decomposition is left untreated (MCSWMP, 2000). Considering the current bathroom facilities at many beaches, composts of feces and other human waste could result in significant pollution of beach sand, and even groundwater and seawater. Policies that allow for the presence of pets in some of the beaches also result in water pollution issues. For instance, four beaches along the Keys (Coco Plum Beach, Higgs Beach, Simonton Beach, and Sombrero Beach) currently allow visitors to bring pets. Since these pets and their waste contribute significantly to source water pollution on beaches, stricter, more specific policies would be required to reduce contamination. Studies have indicated that approximately 20 percent of the bacteria in water can be attributed to dogs (USEPA, 2001). Pet waste causes higher levels of pollution than human waste; when left on the sand and grass, it is washed into the water without any treatment (USEPA, 2001). Organic materials consume oxygen and release ammonia, thereby creating a harmful habitat for wildlife and the surrounding environment. Such excessive nutrients allow algae to grow significantly, thereby deteriorating water quality. The biggest indicators of marine environmental pollution (enterococci and fecal coliform) come mainly from dog waste (USA TODAY, 2002). More stringent policies on this waste, such as more clearly outlined steps for disposal and stricter consequences for improper disposal, could aid in preventing such waste disposal issues. Cleanup stations that include disposal bags for owners to use and an educational sign about how to protect the environment, as well as covered trash can facilities nearby, could help to prevent pollution issues. The amount of rainfall each year in south Florida (54 in./year), as compared to the national average (30 in./year), also demands the installation of stormwater drainage systems throughout the region (USEPA, 2015). This is especially vital due to the main concern that runoff causes significant pollution. If stormwater runoff is not properly managed, it can result in adverse impacts, not only to public health, but also to the marine ecosystem. Excess sediments causing high levels of turbidity can reduce and shut down sunlight, therefore inhibiting plant growth in an ecosys-

tem that already has a fragile balance. Among the sixteen beaches studied, two of them (Higgs Beach and South Beach) have stormwater outfall pipes that discharge water into the ocean with untreated pollutants, while other beaches (Bahia Honda Bayside and Curry Hammock Park) have stormwater retention areas (SRA) to manage stormwater runoff (MCSWMP, 2000). These SRAs may not be as effective as previously believed, since the water is still not properly treated, and often (especially when heavy stormwater occurs) the system is likely to overflow, resulting in contaminated water flowing to the shoreline. Current issues with eight of the beaches investigated in this study indicate that these do not yet have a system in place to manage and control stormwater in order to avoid pollution. Two of the beaches in Monroe County (Higgs Beach and South Beach) have been subjected to the highest percent exceedance in both enterococci and fecal coliform (MCSWMP, 2000). Apart from the issues already noted in this case study, both beaches also possess physical barriers, which to some extent prevent seashore currents from flowing freely, therefore entrapping the water contents on the beach. This has caused the potential for blockage of the flow of shoreline currents and entrapment of the microbes and pollutants that the water carries within the beach area. While shores could be cleared naturally by currents introducing and extracting microorganisms to the location, having these physical barriers may actually prevent such extraction; therefore, pollution regularly increases. Increasing population growth, correlated with heavy tourism in the Keys, also adds to beach pollution. Other possible pollution sources include open defecation and other waste from a prevalent homeless population. Four beaches (South Beach, Smathers Beach, Simonton Beach, and Higgs Beach) are the only ones that have a frequent number of homeless inhabitants (MCSWMP, 2000).

Current Approaches for Controlling Beach Water Pollution Several control measures could improve beach-water quality from current pollution issues. Facilities that concentrate on the wastewater generated in the bathrooms of Monroe Countyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s beaches consist of compost, septic tanks, and a connection to sewer systems (MCSWMP, 2000). The septic tanks are used to provide temporary storage and partial Continued on page 30

Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ November 2015

Continued from page 29 treatment of black and grey waters. However, these systems are significantly unstable and, many times, inefficient in the treatment of wastewater due to the potential risk of groundwater contamination from leakage and elevated hydraulic conductivity of sand. The data from Monroe County show that only three out of the sixteen beaches (Curry Hammock Park, Founder's Park Beach, and Islamorada Public Library Beach) still use septic tanks to treat bathroom waste, and Curry Hammock Park presents the most significant environmental concerns (MCSWMP, 2000). The most improvement observed in beach bathroom facilities are seen in the connections to the sewer systems, where sewers direct the wastewater away from the beaches to the treatment plants, thereby receiving proper treatment of wastewater. Ten out of the sixteen beaches have such a sanitary sewer line connecting their bathrooms to the treatment plant; therefore, suitable control and/or modification of sewer systems in all beaches could eliminate further pollution. For reducing waste generated by pets, policies to restrict dog waste disposal to covered trash cans have shown to be effective (as seen at Coco Plum Beach, Sombrero Beach, Higgs Beach, Curry Hammock Beach, Ft. Zachary Taylor State Park, Smathers Beach, and South Beach). These results can be com-

pared to Simonton Beach, where having uncovered trash cans may result in increasing levels of enterococci and fecal coliform in the beach water (MCSWMP, 2000). In Monroe County there are two beaches (Higgs Beach and John Pennekamp State Park) where stormwater is managed by storm drains; however, at Higgs Beach, the stormwater is discharged by outfall pipes onto the beach (MCSWMP, 2000). Great improvements were implemented by the storm drain systems found at other beaches (Keysnews, 2014). Smathers Beach has three stormwater injection wells to manage stormwater, while Harry Harris County Park manages stormwater through natural percolation (MCSWMP, 2000). These two systems work by draining the water below the ground surface (USEPA, 2013). There are also water treatment plants in place that reduce the amount of contaminants in stormwater before it is discharged into the ocean, which could control a significant level of pollution. Accumulation of microbes and polluting substances due to the placement of piers or underground barriers appears not to have been as much of a detrimental issue as previously believed, and these structures would need to undergo significant modifications in order to assess the accumulation issue. To a certain extent, limiting the number of visitors to the beaches could be another solution,

Figure 2. Percent Exceedance of Pollution Indicators for Studied Beaches from 2000 to 2013

November 2015 â&#x20AC;˘ Florida Water Resources Journal

since the quantity of pollution generated by humans and their canine companions is proportional to the increase in the number of beach users.

Conclusion Factors discussed in this case study have shown considerable impacts on the overall contamination of shore water. Furthermore, the maximum permissible/recommended concentrations of enterococci and fecal coliform have reached unsafe levels. The excessive levels have the potential to endanger marine ecosystems, posing threats to beach users. The sixteen beaches illustrated in this study were analyzed in terms of the main issues and current approaches to remedy the increasing pollution. However, all of the studied beaches have some exceedance of the recommended 2.5 percent value (the percentage of samples that exceed the single maximum safety level of 104 CFU/100mL, resulting in poor quality water), as shown in Figure 2 (EPA, 2015). Given the current level of beach pollution, assessing different control measures or approaches could be valued for improving the overall seawater quality. Analyzing the most polluted beaches (Coco Plum Beach, South Beach, and Higgs Beach), the overlapping issues are the most indicative of a pollution problem. In other words, using Coco Plum as an example, the beach not only uses a compost system for its restrooms, but also allows dog visitors (even though it still provides an excellent level of waste-reduction resources), meaning that the pollution issue is compounded by many things. Moreover, there is no stormwater drainage system in place (FDEP, 2012). These combined factors may contribute to the total percent exceedance over 7 percent. Higgs Beach is another beach that allows dogs without suitable resources provided and suffers from a high exceedance percentage. Restroom facilities are connected to the sewer system, and when there is a circulation problem, the pollution accumulates. The aggregation of these issues could be named as the contributing factors as to why Higgs Beach has a total percent exceedance over 13 percent. South Beach, the final highly impacted beach, is connected to the sewer system and also has seawalls in the water. The beach is also an approved dog beach that does not have a cleanup station with disposal bags for people to use to clean up the waste from their pets. The total exceedance for South Beach is over 12 percent (EPA, 2015), which can be attributed to the combination of these issues.

Recommendations All beaches should be equipped, in place, with compost disposal, septic tanks, and connections to centralized water treatment systems. To improve water quality, it is critical to consider “technological” variations of the wastewater management at the different beaches, and improvements should be prioritized in the sequence in which they most urgently need to occur. In addition to the more strict regulation and policy changes to accommodate current possible solutions to the issues, continued assessment and regular monitoring of water quality need to be considered, along with other factors, such as economic feasibility. Existing wastewater treatment facilities are located at different distances from the beaches, which will require considering a costeffective way to transport wastewater. Ideally, all beach facilities need to be connected to centralized systems where the treatment occurs at a maximum level. If this is not feasible, a mobile wastewater package system could be considered. Package plants are small versions of water treatment plants where different processes occur, and they could be easily operated and effective in handling variable flows and organic loading (USEPA, 2000). Government policies could also contribute to alleviating the pollution level—in particular, the burden of high bacteria in the water due to animal waste. For example, methods and steps that the local government of the Keys could take include updating the beach facilities, setting specific dog beach hours that would limit the amount of waste being left, updating the trash can structures, and collecting the trash more often. Restricting the dog beach hours is a method many other beaches have taken, such as in Hollywood. Policies could also be implemented to limit the number of visitors to certain beaches. Pollution caused by stormwater also needs be well controlled. As such, the first step is developing drainage systems that would transport the untreated water away from the shoreline. Although Higgs Beach, for instance, has a storm drain system in place, it is recommended to redirect the runoff to a wastewater treatment plant before it is discharged into the ocean. Another control option could be to implement small wastewater treatment package facilities for pretreatment prior to being transported to the primary treatment plants. The current drainage system needs to be redeveloped in a way that ensures channels are located between beach trash cans and the sea, Continued on page 32 Florida Water Resources Journal • November 2015

Continued from page 30 due to the inevitable seepage of contaminants from the trash cans. The structures located at Higgs Beach and South Beach in Key West pose an issue with the littoral/shoreline circulation, polluting ocean water from accumulated contaminants near the shore with bacteria such as fecal coliform. Possible approaches could involve removing such structures and allowing for the free circulation of water along the shores of the Keys. Doing so could prevent accumulation of the contaminants, although it may not be the most appropriate measure; the structures may also provide other kinds of benefits, such as sand retainment to avoid shore erosion (Higginbotham, 2015).

Replacing existing structures with jetties placed parallel to the shore could not only prevent erosion; they could also avoid accumulation of the contaminants. Implementing parallel jetties has been done previously at the beaches of Tel Aviv, Israel, although it was for the main purpose of sand retainment (Figure 3). Nevertheless, these structures entrap sand particles that are carried in currents and settle them near the shore, but still allow shoreline currents to flow almost completely freely.

References 1. Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP, 2012). Florida Keys 5.

7. Figure 3. Tel Aviv Beaches with Jetties

Summary of Issues, Current Control Measures, and Recommendations

10.

11.

12.

November 2015 â&#x20AC;˘ Florida Water Resources Journal

National Marine Sanctuary and Associated Aquatic Preserves. http://www.dep.state.fl.us/coastal/sites/ke ys/ (accessed on April 10, 2015). Higginbotham, T. (2015) http://soils.ifas.ufl.edu/docs/pdf/academic/papers/Higginbotham_William_Tom .pdf (accessed on April 11, 2015). Keysnews (2014). Study shows improvement of beach water. http://keysnews.com/node/59484 (accessed on April 8, 2015). Long, D. (2014). Key West and Monroe County Demographics and Economy. http://www.keywestchamber.org/uploads/4/6/5/2/46520599/demographics.pd fics.pdf (accessed on April 10, 2015). Monroe County Sanitary Wastewater Master Plan (MCSWMP, 2000). http://www.monroeCounty-fl.gov/DocumentCenter/Home/View/1117 (accessed April 10, 2015). Solo-Gabriele, H. (2015). Data Collected in Monroe County on Enterococci and Fecal Coliform Levels (personal communication). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA, 2012). Fecal Bacteria http://water.epa.gov/type/rsl/monitoing/vms511.cfm. (accessed on April 10, 2015). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA, 2015). Questions and Answers: New England Beach Monitoring and Notification Program. http://www.epa.gov/region1/eco/beaches/ qa.html (accessed on April 10, 2015). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA, 2001). Source Water Protection Practices Bulletin: Managing Pet and Wildlife Waste to Prevent Contamination of Drinking Water. http://www.epa.gov/safewater/sourcewater/pubs/fs_swpp_petwaste.pdf (accessed on April 10, 2015). USA TODAY (2002). Dog waste poses threat to water. http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/science/2002-06-07-dogusat.htm (accessed on April 10, 2015). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA, 2000) Wastewater Technology Fact Sheet Package Plants. http://water.epa.gov/scitech/wastetech/upl oad/2002_06_28_mtb_package_plant.pdf (accessed on April 10, 2015). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA, 2013). Storm Water Drainage Wells. http://water.epa.gov/type/groundwater/uic/class5/types_stormwater.cfm (accessed on April 10, 2015).

Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ November 2015

FSAWWA SPEAKING OUT

It’s Right Around The Corner:

FSAWWA FALL CONFERENCE – November 29-December 3 –

Mark Lehigh Chair, FSAWWA t’s time to start getting excited about the FSAWWA Fall Conference. I want to take this opportunity to highlight some interesting, entertaining, and new events, as well as the technical program and committee activities, for this year’s conference. I believe we have something for everyone—with value built in throughout the conference schedule. With more than 1,300 attendees expected, and over 180 exhibitors, this conference is shaping up to be one of the biggest and best gatherings of water professionals in the state.

Opening General Session Our keynote speaker this year will be Chad Pregracke, founder and president of Living Lands & Waters. Chad began with a crusade to

clean up the Mississippi River, which has now evolved into a cultural movement that has resulted in the removal of over 8 million pounds of garbage from America’s rivers. Come to the opening session on Monday afternoon, November 30, and be inspired by Chad and his enthusiasm. I’m definitely going to be there.

Come on out and help us welcome Kim Kunihiro as the new FSAWWA chair, watch some BBQ masters at work, and enjoy some great food with your fellow conference attendees and FSAWWA members .

Incoming Chair’s Reception and Barbecue Challenge

The seventh annual Florida 2030 Water Summit is back and as strong as ever, with plans to rebrand and re-energize the event at this conference. I look forward to being a part of this very successful program and moving it forward. The FL2030 is looking to partner this year with Florida 2030 some additional stake- Water Summit logo. holders to discuss statewide topics on conservation, funding, and climate. The summit always brings in some of the best speakers to address key topics that are of interest to water

The second annual Incoming Chair’s Reception and Barbeque Challenge will be on Monday, November 30, at 6:30 p.m. This year’s event promises to be bigger and better than last year. We have 10 teams competing for awards in chicken, pork, ribs, and brisket, as well as overall “grand champion.” Last year’s defending champion, Haskell, will have its hands full competing against challengers from Garney Construction, Stanley Hydraulic Tools, Orange County Utilities, Peace River Manasota Regional Water Supply Authority, HDR, Hillsborough County Utilities, GHD Engineers, and Insituform.

Florida 2030 Water Summit

Above: Much dexterity is needed to win the Backhoe Rodeo. At left: Conferencegoers attending the Backhoe Rodeo.

November 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Last year’s Barbeque Challenge winners from Haskell display their trophies.

Meter Madness means a bucket of parts and a race against the clock.

stakeholders throughout Florida. I can’t wait to see the lineup this year.

Operators and Maintenance Council Activities The Operators and Maintenance Council Scholarship Committee is proud to announce three operator scholarship winners for 2015: Larry George Edmonds, Florida Gateway College John Holdman, Florida Gateway College Jacqueline Torres, Florida Gateway College If you are not aware of the scholarships offered specifically for operators, make sure you check out our home page at www.fsawwa.org. The Palm Coast Water Buoys were the firstplace winners of the Top Ops competition held earlier this year at the Florida Water Resources Conference. The competition allows team members to show their knowledge of system operations. Come join the Top Ops Brainstorming Committee meeting on Tuesday, December 1, at 11 a.m., and get in on the fun. There will also be a council meeting on Monday, November 30, at 9 a.m. Operators and maintenance members will discuss training, awards, scholarships, and ideas to bring value to both of these critical trades in our industry.

A conference attendee samples water from one of the regions for the water taste test.

Competitions If you are not already a competitor in these events, then be sure to come out and watch some of the most skilled and knowledgeable professionals show off their talents. It’s impressive! “Best of the Best” People’s Choice Water Tasting Contest – Make sure you are part of the audience at this event so you can taste the water of all of the regions from across the state and get your vote in. Water stations will be located in the exhibit hall starting at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, DeContinued on page 36

Some of the trash collected from rivers by members of Living Lands & Waters.

Florida Water Resources Journal • November 2015

Conference attendees view some of the poster presentations.

More posters, more attendees.

Continued from page 35 cember 1. Be sure to visit the hall and cast your vote to determine who has the best-tasting water in Florida. Ductile Iron Pipe Tapping Competition – This competition is always fun to watch. It’s fast and furious! Backhoe Rodeo – If you want to be astonished at the skill level of some of the backhoe operators out there, be sure to check this out. It will leave you amazed. Fun Tap Competition – They call this the “fun” tap competition. I’m sure these teams are having fun, but it’s all about the competition— and they want to win. Meter Madness – In this competition, participants receive a bucket of meter parts for a specific water meter as they race against the clock to re-assemble it in working order. Tapping Contest team members working together.

Young Professionals/Students Contests Water Bowl – This is a “Jeopardy”-like competition for students from Florida universities. Teams compete against each other to see who can answer the most questions correctly in the least amount of time. "Fresh Ideas" Poster Session – This effort of the Young Professionals Committee encourages YP participation in the technical program at the conference through presentation of a poster. The competition is open to any student or YP with less than three years of work experience. Any poster topic related to the water industry is encouraged.

Rates and Finance Committee Activities The chair of the committee, Tony Hairston, and Robert Ryall, vice chair, have put together a

Tapping the pipe.

November 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal

much-needed conference workshop on rates and finance that is a must for all utilities needing to keep up to date on infrastructure funding options. The workshop will be held on Monday, November 30, from 9 to 11 a.m. John Shearer, with Shearer Consulting, will be moderating the workshop and plans to give an update on committee activities. The scheduled speakers and topics for the workshop are: Tommy Holmes, legislative director, AWWA WIFIA and Developments in the State Revolving Fund (SRF) Shanin Speas-Frost, Florida Department of Environmental Protection - SRF Drinking Water New Rule Development Don Berryhill, The Berryhill Group - Infrastructure and Capital Funding July Santamaria, RBC Capital Markets - Municipal Market Update Ed de la Parte, de la Parte & Gilbert, P.A. Legal Update on Tiered Water Rates

And Let’s Not Forget the Really Fun Stuff! What would any conference be without a great Poker Tournament? Come out on Monday at 9:30 p.m. and try your luck. Be sure to also check out the Golf Tournament on Thursday, December 3. This year it will

There will also be a Rates and Finance Committee meeting on Monday November 30, at 1 p.m., and anyone can attend.

be at Falcon’s Fire Golf Club, which is one of the finest golf courses in all of Orlando and a great way to end your conference experience. I am really looking forward to this year’s conference and the opportunity to meet new people, learn new things, discover new products, and help move the section forward. Come join me!

Water Bowl teams show their water-industry knowledge.

PS Form 3526: Statement of Ownership, Management and Circulation (Required by 39 U.S.C. 3685) (1) Publication Title: Florida Water Resources Journal. (2) Publication Number 0896-1794. (3) Filing Date: 09/30/15. (4) Issue Frequency: Monthly. (5) No. of Issues Published Annually: 12. (6) Annual Subscription Price: $6/members, $24/non-members. (7) Complete Mailing Address of Known Office of Publication: 1402 Emerald Lakes Dr., Clermont, FL 34711. Contact Person: Michael Delaney. Telephone: 352-241-6006. (8) Complete Mailing address of Headquarters or General Business Office: 1402 Emerald Lakes Dr., Clermont, FL 34711. (9) Publisher: Florida Water Resources Journal, Inc. 1402 Emerald Lakes Dr., Clermont, FL 34711. Editor: Rick Harmon, 1402 Emerald Lakes Dr., Clermont, FL 34711. Managing Editor: Michael Delaney. (10) Owner: Florida Water Resources Journal, Inc. 1402 Emerald Lakes Dr., Clermont, FL 34711. Stockholders: (33 1/3% each) Florida Water and Pollution Control Operators Association, P.O. Box 109602, Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410-9602; Florida Section/American Water Works Association, 769 Allendale Rd., Key Biscayne, FL 33149; Florida Water Environment Association, 4350 W. Cypress St. #600, Tampa, FL 33607. (11) Known Bondholders, Mortgages, and Other Security Holders Owning or Holding 1 Percent or More of Total Amount of Bonds, Mortgages, or Other Securities: None. (12) The purpose, function, and nonprofit status of this organization and the exempt status of federal income tax purposes: Has not changed during preceding 12 months. (13) Publication Name: Florida Water Resources Journal. (14) Issue Date for Circulation Data Below: October 2015.

(15) Extent and Nature of Circulation a. Total No. of Copies (Net Press Run)

Average No. Copies Each Issue During Preceding 12 Months

Actual No. Copies of Single Issue Published Nearest to Filing Date

7,201

7,246

b. Paid and/or Requested Circulation (1) Sales through dealers and carriers, street vendors and counter sales (not mailed) (2) Paid or requested Mail Subscriptions (Include advertisers proof copies/exchange copies)

7,125

7,169

7,125

7,169

d. Free distribution by Mail (Samples, complimentary, and other free)

e. Free Distribution Outside the Mail (carriers or other means)

7,125

7,169

c. Total Paid and/or Requested Circulation (Sum of 15b(1) and 15b(2)

f. Total Distribution (Sum of 15c and 15f) g. Copies Not Distributed h. Total (Sum of 15g and 15g) i. Percent Paid and/or Requested Circulation (15c/15gx100)

7,201

7,246

98.94%

98.93%

(16) This Statement of Ownership will be printed in the November 2015 issue of this publication. (17) Signature and Title Editor, Publisher, Business Manager, or Owner. I certify that all information furnished on this form is true and complete: I understand that anyone who furnishes false or misleading information on this form or who omits material or information requested on the form may be subject to criminal sanctions (including fines and imprisonment) and/or civil sanctions (including multiple damages and civil penalties). Date: 9/30/15

Florida Water Resources Journal • November 2015

FWEA FOCUS

FWEA in Chicago: WEFTEC 2015 Raynetta Curry Marshall President, FWEA

t the end of September I attended the Water Environment Federation Technical Exhibition and Conference (WEFTEC) in Chicago. It was a great event! In addition to the excellent technical program, the conference provided attendees with

information on new industry initiatives. While I was there, I made sure to see our Florida teams compete in the Student Design Competition (SDC) and in the Operations Challenge. It was quite impressive to witness the talent and dedication exhibited from all of the participants—they did Florida proud! Florida Gulf Coast University and the University of South Florida placed second and third, respectively, in the SDC. Way to go! While our two Operations Challenge teams, Methane Madness from the City of St. Cloud and True Grit from Gainesville Regional Utility, didn’t fare quite as well, they represented Florida with distinction and we should be

very proud of them. Congratulations to all of the teams! Lisa Prieto, the FWEA president-elect, attended the Annual Leadership Day at WEFTEC. Leadership Day provides an opportunity to give updates on WEF initiatives to representatives from WEF’s member associations (MAs). It also provides a means for MA leaders to interact and engage in topics of mutual interest. A couple of takeaways from Leadership Day were the Leaders Innovation Forum for Technology (LIFT) program and an update on the progress WEF has made in the stormwater arena. The LIFT program is a combined effort between WEF and the Water Environment Research Foundation (WERF) and was created to accelerate innovation through collaboration. Out of the LIFT program, WEF has created LIFT Link, which is an online platform to discover, connect, and collaborate with industry professionals, such as technol-

Attendees at the conference included, from left to right: Mike Sweeney, Toho Water Authority; Raynetta Marshall, JEA; Marcus Jadotte, Department of Commerce; Scott Kelly, City of West Palm Beach; and Brian Wheeler, Toho Water Authority.

Team Methane Madness from City of St. Cloud competing in the Operations Challenge.

November 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Also competing in the Operations Challenge was Team True Grit from Gainesville Regional Utilities.

ogy providers, universities, utilities, government officials, consultants, and investors (http://www.werf.org/lift/LIFT_Link.aspx). Currently, LIFT is focusing on seven areas: 1. Shortcut Nitrogen Removal 2. P-Recovery 3. Digestion Enhancements 4. Biosolids to Energy 5. Energy from Wastewater 6. Collection Systems 7. Green Infrastructure The LIFT working groups and volunteers review technology, conduct pilot testing, provide technology forums and presentations, offer operation and design guidance, and collaborate on testing, technology usage, and more. To learn more about how you or your organization can get involved in LIFT, either in a working group or as a volunteer, please contact Jeff Moeller at jmoeller@werf.org. Also during the conference, WEF launched its Stormwater Institute, and for the first time, there were national awards for Phase I and II municipal separate storm sewer

system (MS4) programs. The Stormwater Institute will serve as a hub for members to access information on stormwater issues, as well as a platform to develop best practices and share approaches to stormwater management. More information can be found at www.wefstormwaterinstitute.org. During a special session at the conference for utility executives, “The Water Resources Utility of the Future 2015 Annual Report” was released. The report is an update of the collaborative effort among WEF, WERF, and the National Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA), which led to the development of another report, “The Water Resources Utility of the Future: A Blueprint for Action.” This report coined the phrase “Utility of the Future” (UOTF) to recognize the fundamental shift in the way clean water utilities were beginning to redefine their role in society— transforming from treatment facilities into full-resource recovery facilities that capture valuable and reusable products for society. The annual report updates UOTF accomplishments since 2013, including several case studies from utilities across the United States

that have successfully implemented programs that address watershedwide challenges. Finally, I had the opportunity, along with Brian Wheeler and Mike Sweeney from Toho Water Authority and Scott Kelly from City of West Palm Beach, to have an impromptu discussion with Marcus Jadotte, the assistant secretary for industry and analysis for the U.S. Department of Commerce, on various issues important to Florida utilities, such as infrastructure, water supply, and development of new technologies. Jadotte was engaged and receptive to hearing about these issues, and we had a good, interactive dialogue. Overall, WEFTEC 2015 was a great conference and FWEA was well represented in all aspects, including our students, operators, members, and leadership.

Florida Water Resources Journal • November 2015

Operators: Take the CEU Challenge! 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.

___________________________________________ SUBSCRIBER NAME (please print)

Article 1 ________________________________________ LICENSE NUMBER for Which CEUs Should Be Awarded

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 Water Treatment. 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!

Article 2 ________________________________________ LICENSE NUMBER for Which CEUs Should Be Awarded

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

___________________________________________ (Expiration Date)

City of Sunrise Achieves Alternate Raw Water Supply with Existing Source Infrastructure

Case Study: Reverse Osmosis Post-Treatment Stabilization Utilizing Liquid Lime

Chris Reinbold, Giovanni Batista, and Jim Dolan

Vaile Feemster and Jim Smith

(Article 1: CEU = 0.1 DW/DS)

(Article 2: CEU = 0.1 DW/DS}

1. The City’s Springtree facility was selected as the site for a new reverse osmosis facility primarily because a. there were reverse osmosis water treatment facilities already on site. b. there was an existing aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) Floridan aquifer well on site. c. existing lime softening facilities were failing and in need of replacement. d. existing water supply wells were showing signs of saline water intrusion.

2. The lime slaking process produces heat and is therefore known as a/an________ reaction. a. exothermic b. endothermic c. intrathermic d. cryogenic

2. To address air quality concerns related to hydrogen sulfide removal from the Floridan aquifer raw water supply, the plant design included a. single-stage odor control. b. two-stage odor control c. three-stage odor control. d. an activated carbon filter.

3. The authors theorize that difficulty stabilizing pH during on-site testing of liquid lime mixing was related to a. inconsistent lime quality. b. operator error. c. faulty instruments. d. inconsistent mixing.

3. It was assumed that the reverse osmosis _____________ system could not be operated until nearly all of the less saline water had been withdrawn from the well. a. degasification b. membrane skid interstage pumping c. energy recovery d. concentrate disposal

4. Naturally occurring raw water concentrations of _____ made it unnecessary to install equipment to feed that chemical/compound. a. calcium b. carbon dioxide c. sodium carbonate d. calcite

4. Blending with lime-softened water allowed the staff to forego adding __________ to reverse osmosis permeate a. sodium hypochlorite b. carbon dioxide c. sulfuric acid d. sodium hydroxide

5. From the owner’s perspective, the major disadvantage of the bulk-delivered liquid lime alternative tested is a. the extraordinarily high feed rate required to produce the required pH. b. its instability. c. the safety risk associated with handling. d. that it is patented and therefore proprietary.

5. Which of the following water sources was used to prepare the wastewater plant biomass for processing reverse osmosis concentrate? a. Lime-softened water b. Nanofiltration concentrate c. Floridan aquifer d. Reverse osmosis permeate

November 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal

1. Which of the following is the “natural” state of lime as it is mined? a. Calcium oxide b. Calcium hydroxide c. Calcium bicarbonate d. Calcium carbonate

LEGAL BRIEFS

Do Government Utilities Need a Bright-Line Rule on Forgiveness of High Bills? Pasco County Struggles With the Issue Gerald Buhr s a former utility executive, my first impression is that the above question is purely rhetorical, because handling it otherwise begs the question of which person on your staff makes the fact-based decisions on each compelling, tear-jerking story? If you are a public service commission (PSC) utility, then the matter will land there, and generally be done. But when politics is in the mix, you will inevitably have some level of pontification, posturing, and grandstanding for the cameras or audience; some by the politicians themselves, some by the “injured” customer, and some by the local officious in-

termeddler who, being a union shop foreman for 20 years, knows the law “as well as an attorney.” But the real answer is far more complicated, and not without some questions of liability. Unfortunately, Pasco County Utilities is now dealing with establishing a brightline rule for utility staff to apply when customers comes in with a high-usage water bill. From a utility manager’s perspective, the answer is quite simple: if you have an abnormally high bill, you used an abnormally high amount of water. You either left the hose on to fill your pool, for instance (and perhaps forgot to turn it off), or it could be a myriad of other unfortunate circumstances on your side of the meter. In order to placate a customer, which is always a very good idea, we will agree to fieldtest the meter for free, even though we know that meters, as with all mechanical equipment, very, very, rarely go defective and run fast,1 but

instead run slower, much to the chagrin of our bookkeeper, and that unregistered water becomes a part of “lost water” when we report it to the local water management district. Not satisfied with the field test? Then you can agree to have the meter bench-tested by an outside company, which is usually the meter manufacturer. In the unlikely event it tests fast, we will change out the meter and adjust past bills, reflecting the error with our deepest regrets. If it tests slow, then the customer pays the substantial cost to have it shipped and tested, and we can either adjust the past bills upward—retroactively—by the percent it is slow, or the more likely and politically palatable response is that the government will, in its infinite charity, simply forgive the under-billing and change out the meter. Whether the meter tests slow or accurate, will the customer be satisfied? It’s unlikely. But from a utility manager’s point of view, nothing more needs to be done. It was recently reported that the Pasco County commission is struggling with customer complaints of excessively high bills,

November 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal

By “slow” or “fast” of course I mean outside the generally accepted standards (AWWA, as I recall) for water meters, which can be very slightly above or below “100 percent accurate” and still be an “accurate” meter and legally enforceable.

having received a less-than-favorable audit result from an inspector general (IG) of the county’s controller. Reportedly, the IG was retained to investigate over 300 high-bill complaints, and especially a high-bill complaint by a residential consumer who had been billed for 614,000 gal of water for about three weeks usage; that usage rendered a utility bill of $3,385. The house was claimed to be vacant during that time, which to me, actually supports the “your side of the meter” argument more than it weakens it, because it would be hard to believe that domestic use could be that high. A bathtub, sink, or hose left on might create such huge usage; I have not calculated the maximum flow possible through the service line at the Pasco County water pressure, 24 hours a day, every day, for three weeks, but presumably somebody has. The customer said a plumber was hired to look into the situation and found no leak. The IG said the meter checked out okay, but the IG found “multiple issues with the meter-reading and billing processes . . . regarding data accuracy and internal controls.” Apparently, the utility believes that these problems are separate, and steadfastly stands behind its conclusion that the water went through the meter. And, as no surprise, the customer steadfastly stands behind her opinion that the billing is wrong, and wants the whole bill written off. The county commission recently met on Sept. 22, 2015, and heard numerous complaints about high bills (welcome to the private, PSC-regulated utility world). Some commissioners wanted to write off the enormous bill, but an ordinance to allow writes-offs of up to half of the very high bills was offered, and apparently is being instituted. In my humble opinion, to write off a water bill based on political expediency, or even sympathy, when the meter has been bench-tested and the software and other radio-read issues and office practices checked out, would be monumental folly. Who else gets a write-off? Why not me, or everyone else who complains about a high bill? If your bill

is ever extremely high, just go to the commission and stamp your feet long enough and hard enough and it will get taken care of. Furthermore, since Pasco County rates are presumably set at or near “break even” because they are not supposed to be profit-motivated, whenever a policy like that is implemented, the rest of the customers actually subsidize the person getting the adjustment because future utility rates will be affected by the expense of giveaways by the utility. I actually like one of Pasco County’s policies for adjusting water bills for “verified leaks and the first-time filling, or filling due to repair of a pool” where the County charges only the “current Tampa Bay Water’s unitary rate,” which I presume is either the wholesale rate at which it purchases water from the regional water supplier, or something similar, meaning that you pay only the cost paid by the county of what passed through the meter. It does not take into consideration the costs of additional treatment, if any, pumping costs, etc., but it is better than rewarding someone because they complained long enough and hard enough.

Get ready for more! Good luck to Pasco County in dealing with the issue with which all water utilities have to contend, especially government utilities, because of the political component. If you Google “water meter lawsuit” you will note numerous entries with “faulty radioread” water meters sprouting up. That trend is growing rapidly. Can you prove that your bills sent out for the past five years were based on good meter readings? Make sure your water meter acquisitions are good ones, and that you do not indemnify or hold manufacturers harmless for valid claims due to faulty equipment, or that the warranties are unduly restrictive. Perhaps a policy of periodic manual reading would be in order? Gerald Buhr is a utilities attorney who holds a Class A license in backwater and wastewater treatment. A Florida Bar-certified specialist in city, county, and local government law, he is the city attorney for Mulberry, Zolfo Springs, Bowling Green, and Avon Park and represents Lake Wales on water and wastewater legal issues.

Florida Water Resources Journal • November 2015

F W R J

City of Sunrise Achieves Alternate Raw Water Supply With Existing Source Infrastructure Chris Reinbold, Giovanni Batista, and Jim Dolan onsumptive water use regulations in southeast Florida have forced many utilities looking to expand their potable water production capacity to consider alternative water supplies (AWS). The City of Sunrise was required by its 2008 consumptive use permit to obtain AWS to meet current and projected future demands. Estimates from the 2008 master plan documents indicated that the City needs to secure an additional 11 mil gal per day (mgd) by 2030. This master plan also identified numerous alternatives that were evaluated and considered for implementation by the City. The alternatives included: sourcing water from the Floridan aquifer, implementing water reclamation for irrigation and recharge, concentrate recovery at its existing nanofiltration (NF) water treatment facility, use of aquifer storage and recovery, and demand management. The Floridan aquifer was selected as a potential AWS, which the City elected to evaluate further. The City has existing Floridan aquifer wells with total dissolved solids (TDS) concentrations ranging from 5,000 to 8,500 mg/L. Due to the high TDS, and brackish nature of this source water (chlorides being a significant contributor to the high TDS), reverse osmosis (RO) treatment is typically used to produce potable water. In order to make the decision as to how and where the City should best treat Floridan aquifer water, Carollo Engineers Inc. (Carollo) performed several study efforts for the City. The City has three potable water treatment facilities, two of which—the Saw-

grass Water Treatment Plant (WTP) and the Springtree WTP—were considered as potential sites for implementation of this new source and treatment process. At the time of the studies, the Sawgrass WTP was rated for 18 mgd of potable water production utilizing the NF process. Conversion of a portion of the NF facility to RO, as well as the construction of an independent RO treatment facility adjacent to the existing NF WTP, was evaluated. Separately, the addition of an independent RO treatment facility was also considered at the 24-mgd Springtree WTP, to be constructed adjacent to the existing lime softening and filtration processes. The Springtree WTP was unique in this evaluation as it contained an upper Floridan well that was constructed in the late 1990s for the purposes of aquifer storage and recovery. The expectation at the time was that treated Biscayne aquifer water from the lime softening and filtration processes would be pumped into the upper Floridan aquifer during the wet season. Then, during periods of increased demand during the dry season, this fresh water would be recovered from the aquifer and retreated through the existing water treatment process to increase the City’s total water production capability. Historical cycle tests, as well as permitting regulations affecting this practice, did not result in sufficient recovery of fresh water to deem the well practical for use. During these periods, however, a sustained pumping rate of approximately 3 mgd was confirmed.

Figure 1. Key Water Quality Parameters for Springtree Floridan Aquifer

November 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Chris Reinbold, P.E., is an associate and project manager with Carollo Engineers Inc. in Lake Worth and Hollywood; Giovanni Batista, P.E., C.G.C., is the assistant utility director for City of Sunrise; and Jim Dolan is the chief operator for the City of Sunrise’s Springtree Water Treatment Plant.

As a result of the City already having this asset and related infrastructure, it was decided to repurpose it into a Floridan aquifer production well to provide the source water to the first of two RO treatment units, with an initial permeate production capacity of 1.5 mgd. This required a total raw water delivery capacity of 2 mgd of Floridan water, with the system operating at 75 percent recovery. Water quality data from the original construction of the well and historical cycle tests was utilized as the basis of design for the RO treatment system; some of the key water quality parameters are identified in Figure 1. Design and construction of a 3mgd RO WTP was determined to be the most cost-effective alternative and was selected for implementation at the Springtree WTP.

Design of Alternative Water Supply Treatment System In an effort to meet a regulatory compliance date identified in the City’s consumptive use permit (CUP), Carollo was retained to perform the design on a fast-paced schedule for the 3-mgd RO treatment facility. In order to accelerate the construction of this facility, Carollo prepared a procurement set of bidding documents for the City to purchase modular skid-mounted RO equipment, while the detailed design and bidding of the overall facility was completed. It was decided to use a system supplier approach for the procurement package so that all of the specified equipment and systems were competitively bid and sourced through a single reverse osmosis system (ROMS) supplier. This system-supplier approach was developed so that there was one source of responsibility for meeting the contractual requirements of the procurement bidding documents, and for providing warranties for the treatment system components. The purchase order to the RO system

supplier was issued by the City in May 2012. The unit processes, which comprised the RO treatment facilities, included raw water pumping, which was a repurposing of the existing aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) well to a Floridan production well; pretreatment (with sand strainers, followed by cartridge filters and addition of sulfuric acid and antiscalant); RO feed pumping; twostage RO treatment, with an interstage boost pump with energy recovery; degasification; chlorination and sodium hydroxide addition for pH control; concentrate disposal; and the associated membrane clean-in-place system and scavenger tanks (for waste blending, neutralization, and disposal). A schematic of this treatment scheme is shown in Figure 2. Another unique project challenge encountered due to the implementation of RO treatment at the Springtree WTP was associated with concentrate disposal. A deep injection well was identified as necessary, and was to be constructed on a parallel, but not converging, schedule with the RO treatment plant. The City needed the plant to be in operation to meet the CUP regulatory requirement, but the construction of the well was estimated to follow the RO treatment system construction completion by one to two years. During the time frame between RO system completion and the completion of the injection wells, it was determined that the treatment of the concentrate would be through the nearby Springtree Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP).

Unique Features of New Reverse Osmosis Treatment System The Springtree Complex has been in continuous operation, producing potable water and treating wastewater since the 1970s. Limited land was available within the existing property for construction of this new RO treatment system. In ad-

dition, the existing facility is located near a high school, day care center, assisted living center, and other strip commercial businesses. This resulted in the addition of neighbor-friendly features to the design documents. The Floridan aquifer in the Springtree areas has levels of dissolved hydrogen sulfide of up to 3 mg/L; the potential odor from removing this from the membrane treated water was considered. To address this concern, two stage air quality control units were designed in conjunction with the degasification process. The local community development department also recommended working with the nearby high school to cooperate on ways to minimize the visual impact of the new structures, and City of

Sunrise and Carollo personnel met with high school staff to facilitate ideas on how to accomplish this. It was decided that a mural with student- designed artwork would be applied to the wall of the RO facility facing the high schoolâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s football stadium. Several concepts were developed as to how this mural would be installed. It was decided that a digitally printed adhesive wall mural would be applied to the kynar-coated metal building exterior. This type of banner is ultraviolet (UV) resistant and removable if the City chooses to replace it with refreshed artwork in the future. In addition to the wall mural, it was decided, with the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s urban forester, that the landscaping Continued on page 46

Figure 2. Reverse Osmosis Treatment Process Schematic

Figure 3. Wall Mural and Photo Rendering

Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ November 2015

Continued on page 45 facing the adjacent high school should be visually appealing. A landscape architect was retained and an alternating height row of sabal palm trees was added to the landscaped area at the property boundary to accomplish this. Figure 3 shows a conceptual rendering of the wall mural with landscaping in the area, as well as a photo of the actual installation.

Construction and Related Activities Once the design was complete for the RO treatment facility and the ROMS supplier’s bid was accepted, advertisement and bidding was performed for the construction of the overall facility. The approach used in the design documents was that the equipment to be furnished by the ROMS supplier was identified through-

out as owner-furnished and contractor-installed. Dates were provided in the contract documents for the contractor to include in his schedule when he was responsible for accepting delivery of these items. It was also described that if the contractor’s progress on the RO facility was not to a level of completeness that the equipment could be offloaded and directly installed; then, the contractor was responsible for properly storing this equipment. The purchase order to the construction contractor was issued by the City in August 2012. A brief timeline of the construction activities is identified in Figure 4.

Raw Water Quality Considerations It was known during the design period that Biscayne aquifer water treated by the lime softening and filtration facility had been placed into the

Figure 4. Timeline for Construction, Startup, and Commissioning

ASR well over the period of several years. Analytical testing was performed during design, and again during construction, to determine the water quality parameters that would be encountered at startup. As anticipated, the water more closely resembled the “fresh water” from the lime treatment facility, rather than the background brackish water originally encountered in the well, due to significantly lower chlorides, higher total organic carbon (TOC), and other water quality parameters. Evaluations were conducted in cooperation with the ROMS supplier to evaluate the RO system performance with these differing water quality parameters. The scenario encountered was challenging to evaluate because the water at the time of start-up would continually increase in TDS until background conditions were realized. This time period was estimated to be anywhere from three months to a year, based on records of the water previously injected into the well for aquifer storage, and anticipated well flushing impacts; ASR well flushing was initiated during the design and construction phases of the project. A “worst case” scenario was established, which provided the recommended acid and antiscalant doses, as well as energy recovery device settings. Because the TDS were so low, it was assumed that the energy recovery device would be required to operate in a bypass mode until such time as the TDS increased to a point that second-stage membrane feed pressure would allow its use. Fortunately for the commissioning team, the water quality at the time of start-up had changed slightly due to the well-flushing activities, and the use of the energy recovery device was deemed possible. Figure 5 shows a few of the key water quality parameters of the well water quality as tested during the construction period and compared to the background documented conditions and resulting permeate conditions.

Start-Up and Commissioning

Figure 5. Key Water Quality Parameters as Tested During Construction

November 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Start-up and commissioning of the Springtree RO WTP occurred in January 2014. A combination of on-line instrumentation data, as well as manual measurements, were collected and analyzed during the continuous seven-day performance test. As discussed previously, because the RO concentrate was disposed into the Springtree WWTP, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) required the development of a specific operating procedure to achieve the regulatory approval necessary to perform this action. This operating procedure required that the City’s wastewater consultant determine a conditioning period recommended for the existing WWTP biological process. Based on literature reviews and the consultant’s experience with other Continued on page 48

FWPCOA TRAINING CALENDAR SCHEDULE YOUR CLASS TODAY! November 16-18 ........Backflow Repair ......................................Deltona ..........$275/305 16-20 ........Wastewater Collection C ........................St. Petersburg ..$225/255 20 ........Backflow Tester Recert*** ......................Deltona ..........$85/115 30- Dec. 2....Backflow Repair* ....................................St. Petersburg ..$275/305 30 – Dec.3 ..Backflow Tester* ....................................Belleview ........$375/405

December 7-10 ........Reclaimed Water Field Site Inspector ..Deltona ..........$350/380

Upcoming 2016 Classes January 4-8 11-14 22 25-29 25-29

........Reclaimed Water Field Site Inspector ..Deltona ..........$350/380 ........Backflow Tester* ......................................St. Petersburg ..$375/405 ........Backflow Tester Recert*** ......................Deltona ..........$85/115 ........Water Distribution 3, 2 ..........................Deltona ..........$225/255 ........Reclaimed Water Distribution C ............Deltona ..........$225/255

February 15-19 ........Wastewater Collection C, B....................Deltona ..........$225/255 8-11 ........Backflow Tester ........................................Deltona ..........$375/405 26 ........Backflow Tester recert*** ......................Deltona ..........$85/115 Course registration forms are available at http://www.fwpcoa.org/forms.asp. For additional information on these courses or other training programs offered by the FWPCOA, please contact the FW&PCOA Training Office at (321) 383-9690 or training@fwpcoa.org. * Backflow recertification is also available the last day of Backflow Tester or Backflow Repair Classes with the exception of Deltona ** Evening classes

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

*** any retest given also Florida Water Resources Journal • November 2015

Continued from page 47 facilities, a period of 24 hours was established to gradually increase the TDS (particularly chlorides) from the RO plant into the WWTP. Since the turndown of the RO treatment unit does not have sufficient flexibility to go from zero to maximum concentrate flow (rather, the unit is better operated at design flux and permeate production capacity within a specific range), WWTP seeding with raw Floridan water through the start-up bypass was utilized. The control system was set up so

that the concentrate valve could be manually modulated to increase the raw water flow through the start-up bypass, which accomplished the conditioning process. After the 24hour conditioning period, the start-up procedure allowed for the RO unit to be operated at design conditions. A 24-hour conditioning period was also instituted for periods when the RO unit would be shut down for an extended period of time. This shutdown process was essentially the reverse of the startup conditioning process. Following a successful commissioning period, the regulatory compliance documents were submitted to the Broward County Health Department. After completion of the comment and response period, the Springtree RO WTP was cleared for continuous operation and blending of the treated RO effluent with the lime softening and filtered water. The plant was placed in continuous operation in late April 2014.

Lessons Learned Start-up and commissioning for this facility occurred without any major interruption or significant delays. The lessons learned from this project are briefly described as follows: Thorough planning and good design allowed the Cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s existing ASR well to be transformed into a Floridan aquifer production well. Utilizing this existing infrastructure allowed the City to proceed at a rapid schedule, since the permitting efforts associated with this item were minimal. This repurposing also saved the City significant cost by not having to drill and/or install new production wells. It was demonstrated through this project that RO concentrate can successfully be treated through a conventional biological-activated sludge WWTP. There was hesitation by the regulatory agencies when this concept was first presented as to how the bacteria would react. With the operating strategy that was developed for seeding, the biology, and the additional monitoring that was performed, there were no significant detrimental changes observed by the WWTP operators. The blending of higher hardness and alkalinity water from the lime plant was beneficial with the low-mineral and low-alkalinity RO permeate. Plant staff elected not to add sodium hydroxide to the permeate so that the near neutral pH of the permeate slightly lowers the pH of the lime-softened and filtered water. This was an added water quality benefit of utilizing these two treatment processes in parallel. The average annual flow for the Springtree WTP is around 11 mgd, and the RO permeate blend represents

November 2015 â&#x20AC;˘ Florida Water Resources Journal

about 14 percent of the total when operating. By working collaboratively with the community development department and the neighborhood stakeholders, it was demonstrated that the cooperation led to an improvement in the community. This collaborative approach is recommended for projects where there are community concerns and/or a significant number of active community stakeholders. Although standard for the industry, the normalization routines for the RO unit are also something that could be streamlined. Numerous calculations are performed to compare the current operating conditions to the baseline operating conditions, and minor time delays in readings of instruments resulted in significant fluctuations. At one point, several months after start-up, the normalized salt passage began increasing significantly. Throughout extensive troubleshooting, and even removing an element for controlled performance testing, it was determined that minor fluctuations in raw water quality and changes in the TDS to conductivity ratio used in the calculations were the source. Once the TDS-to-conductivity ratio was adjusted to better match actual conditions, the system has remained in a stable state of operation.

Conclusions Through the utilization of existing infrastructure, the City was able to address several goals. Some of these goals were driven by regulatory requirements, while others were cost-focused. The implementation of an RO treatment system at the Springtree WTP has effectively increased the potable water production of the facility from 24 to 25.5 mgd. The total construction cost for this project was $8,760,669, which was comprised of an owner-purchased RO system for $928,634, plus the construction contract to build the facility and install the equipment for $7,832,035. It is important to note that many of the common facilities were sized to accommodate an expansion to a total facility capacity of 3 mgd, although only the first 1.5-mgd phase was commissioned. Although the alternative water supply is only needed during periods of high water use (typically during the dry season), plant staff operate the facility year-round. To optimize potable water production costs while exercising the equipment, the facility was not operating every day at the time of this original writing; however, it now operates continuously. The successful implementation of RO treatment at the Springtree WTP resulted in CUP compliance through AWS utilization, provided more capacity, improved water conditioning, improved community integration, and is viewed as a successful project by all of the entities involved.

Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ November 2015

C FACTOR

A Reasonable Expectation of Effort Thomas King President, FWPCOA

ost of us have been on one side or the other of an interview process, hoping to land the perfect job or find that much-needed employee who will make us look better than we deserve. Books have been written on the subject of the process itself and how to evaluate people during the interview; the same people also wrote another guide on being a good candidate. The harder part of the process is many times lost because it is difficult, if not impossible, to tell how much effort candidates will put into the job after they are hired. Remember: great on paper does not always mean great in action. I have always struggled with what is a “reasonable expectation of effort.” Regretfully, at most organizations, showing up for work and doing just enough to keep from being fired meets the expectation. How do we pick out people who do their best and give a reasonable eight hours of effort on behalf of their employers? First, you have to apply good management principles and lead by example. I have stated in management training that “nervous hens have nervous chicks,” which means if you fall apart during a crisis your people will fall apart with you and the result will be failure. It can also be said that “lazy hens have lazy chicks.” My grandfather would say, “On this farm lazy chickens are lunch; they either lay eggs or they make a lifetime commitment on mom’s table.” I am sure that during the interview process all applicants say that they’re a self-motivated, hard-working individual with a strong work ethic. I have never sat across from a candidate who said, “I will try hard until I make it past my probation period; then, I will become lethargic and you will only know I’m here when I’m missed on the overtime list.“ Even a lie detector would not work on most of the worst of these offenders because they truly believe what they are saying when they say it. When “just enough” becomes the standard, then how do you measure good effort? I have had employees who have excelled—and con-

tinue to do so—even when there is no reward other than the thanks I give them as often as I can. A company’s success is directly dependent on the effort given by its employees. I meet young professionals who want to be part of a dynamic organization that has measurable goals—from management down to the operations personnel—that help to ensure a well-run facility. Most of the time, just when you think this is occurring and you have found the perfect job, you wake up and there you are, feeling like you’re stuck between the dog and the fire hydrant. You’re saddled with a supervisor who is so busy looking for a promotion that he or she doesn’t do the job. They wind up treating people in their crew who do try as competition. If you’re a supervisor who doesn’t give his or her best effort, how do you expect your crew do be motivated to do their best? Having said that, I have seen supervisors who did everything right and still had less-than-acceptable effort from some members of the crew. This can be devastating during a project where you are up against the clock or have budget issues, or when one or more members of a crew are not trying. This has a negative effect on all of the other employees. Just stop and think about construction cost estimates that are based on an expectation that people can complete a certain task in a time frame that can be repeated under similar circumstances. Construction companies bid jobs based on these estimates and other assumptions (as well as hitting the change-order lottery). When they’re correct, they make a good profit, and when they’re wrong—well, they can always declare bankruptcy and change their name. The door swings both ways, however, and employees should have an expectation of the effort from their employer and their supervisor. We need to lead by example and expect the same dedication from our team. You should never get to a position of leadership and believe you can relax. Teams that are successful need an example to follow. Don’t think for a minute that your crew will put out more than you put in. I remember a course on communication that I took in the early 1980s where the instructor said he had never been as disappointed as when he bought his first Mustang. He had seen the television commercial where the young good-looking driver had stopped the car at a red light and had to fight off the girls who were trying to jump in. He said he bought the car and

November 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal

drove all over town stopping at red lights and stop signs and not one girl had even looked his way. He took the car back to the dealer thinking it must be the color. He told the salesman, “This one doesn’t work.” Expectations of this type may be a little over the top, but I have seen people who believe commercials, only to be disappointed. It’s also important to deliver a positive message whenever possible. When trying to get more from a crew that has gone flat on its productivity, try saying what is going well. I will admit I have taken the low road on several occasions. The best example was when I was reviewing a design that had seemed to take forever (six months) for a simple pump modification. I lost it and asked the engineers involved what they had been doing. When I did not get a response, I then asked them how they had earned their dollar that day. I was not to be denied; I went on to ask each of them to stand and tell us exactly “how they earned just one damn dollar.” When I realized I had been shouting, I stopped and tried a different approach. Using “shock jock” methods are only effective on a radio show, never in a management setting. To be successful, it takes all members of the team having reasonable expectations spelled out clearly and continually measured. Goal setting is an art: you have to know the people you are working with to do it well. No matter how hard you try, you cannot change a mule into a race horse; it is much easier to evaluate your crew and put them in positions where they can be successful. Don’t forget to follow up with guidance and support to help them. The success of your team is proof of the type of leader you are. It has been said that one out of every three supervisors is in over his or her head. If you know two who are doing a great job, then take a hard look in the mirror. I believe it’s okay to stop one of your employees at the end of the day and ask, “How did you earn your dollar today?” I would warn you, however, to be ready to answer the same question if they ask it of you.

Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ November 2015

T E C H N O L O G Y

S P O T L I G H T

City of Bunnell Selects Innovative Process for Disinfection Byproduct Compliance and Hardness Reduction Phil Locke and Fernand J. "Tib" Tiblier Jr. The City of Bunnell Water operates a 1mil-gal-per-day (mgd) water treatment plant and hired McKim and Creed to select and implement treatment technologies to bring its water treatment plant into compliance with the Stage 2 Disinfection Byproducts (DBPs) Regulations. The first goal was to reduce the natural organic matter from the source groundwater supply to minimize the formation of DBPs that occur when chlorine is added to water containing organic material. By reducing the organics in the water, the DBPs will be reduced to levels that comply with drinking water regulations. A

second goal was to reduce the hardness to levels acceptable to the City and to meet secondary drinking water requirements for total hardness. A weighted treatment option decision matrix was developed for these potential alternatives and included: • Capital and Annual Operation and Maintenance Costs • Technical Feasibility • Ability to Meet DBP Requirements • Ability to Meet City Hardness Goals and Hardness Requirements • Proven Implementation • Consumptive Use Permit Compatibility/Water Loss • Minimization of Treatment Waste • Footprint

Based on results from the evaluation, ion exchange was selected for implementation to remove organics and reduce DBP formation potential as specified by the consent order. In addition to organics removal, the City also chose to include hardness reduction as part of the project. Once ion exchange was selected, systems from Ixom and a competitor were evaluated for their cost-effectiveness. The competitor’s system uses a fixed-bed ion exchange system using anion resin for total organic carbon (TOC) removal and a cation exchange system for softening. The Ixom MagnaPakTM fluidized bed co-removal system (MICo® SOF) utilizes both anionic and cationic resins within the same reactor vessel. Results from the evaluation indicated that the Ixom system had both lower capital and operational costs and the Ixom system was selected for pilot testing. The results from the pilot test showed a 78 percent reduction in TOC, 46 percent reduction in hardness, 91 percent reduction in color units, and 98 percent reduction in hydrogen sulfide. The facility has been constructed and the demonstration testing that was required for substantial completion shows the new Ixom MICo® SOF system meets all TOC and hardness removal levels. The facility is in the final phase of construction closeout and is anticipated to be on-line in November 2015. Phil Locke, P.E., is senior project manager with McKim & Creed in Clearwater and Fernand J. "Tib" Tiblier, Jr., P.E., is director of engineering with City of Bunnell.

Technology Spotlight is a paid feature sponsored by the advertisement on the facing page. The Journal and its publisher do not endorse any product that appears in this column. If you would like to have your technology featured, contact Mike Delaney at 352-241-6006 or at mike@fwrj.com.

November 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Florida Water Resources Journal â&#x20AC;˘ November 2015

News Beat Tampa Electric has received the Edison Electric Institute (EEI) 2015 Edison Award, the electric power industry's highest honor, for its innovative design and construction of a cuttingedge reclaimed water system at its Polk Power Station in Polk County. "Tampa Electric demonstrated tremendous ingenuity by designing and building an innovative wastewater treatment system that protects the local environment while streamlining operations," said EEI President Tom Kuhn. "The company also exhibited distinguished leadership by forging important regional partnerships to address the needs of all stakeholders." A panel of former electric company chief executives selected Tampa Electric for the 88th annual award from a group of distinguished finalists. Tampa Electric planned the expansion of its Polk Power Station and its need for increased cooling water in an innovative manner that is friendly to consumers, the local community, and the environment. The company forged creative regional partnerships with the Southwest Florida Water Management District, Polk County, and the cities of Lakeland and Mulberry. These communities use treated wastewater for irrigation; however, much of this water was surplus that was discharged into local waterways without being used. Tampa Electric partnered with these communities to obtain and use the reclaimed wastewater as coolant, resulting in significant environmental benefits. In conjunction with these partnerships, the company designed and built an innovative reclaimed water treatment project that offers dramatic environmental benefits to Hillsborough and Tampa bays. It is the first power plant in the United States to combine the use of reclaimed water and reverse-osmosis technology with deep-well disposal of wastewater, and it will benefit local wetlands and the surrounding communities. The project will advance the cleanup of local waterways and will improve local ecosystems.

Jones Edmunds and Associates Inc. and its construction engineering and inspection subsidiary JEAces, have promoted three employees to vice president. Greg Perrine, P.E., is now a vice president with Jones Edmunds, and David Weintraub, Ph.D., P.E., and Stephen Haney, P.E., serve as vice presidents with Greg Perrine

JEAces. “The contributions of these three men to these companies have been numerous and invaluable,” said Rick Ferreira, president and chief executive officer of Jones Edmunds. “Their leadership and dedication to our core values and our clients will continue to be a catalyst for the firm’s expansion in the Jacksonville and Gainesville regions.” In addition to serving as Jones Edmunds utilities director, as vice president, Perrine will continue to provide quality assurance and quality control on projects for local government and utilities throughout the state. Perrine has been a Jacksonville resident for more than 18 years, and before joining Jones Edmunds he served as a vice president of facilities and logistics services at the Jacksonville Electric Authority. Weintraub is a veteran with over 12 years of service in the United States Air Force. He holds a Ph.D. in civil engineering from the University of Florida, with expertise in geotechnical and pavement engineering. As vice president, he will continue to lead construction engineering and inspection for several of the firm’s FDOT District 2 projects. Haney has worked for JEAces for the past David Weintraub 14 years as senior project engineer. As vice president, he will continue to lead the firm’s efforts on numerous bridge rehabilitation projects for the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) through Northeast and Central Florida, such as the Mathews Bridge Emergency Repair project in Jacksonville, which gained national and statewide recognition, as well as numerous Stephen Haney awards. Jones Edmunds has also hired Stephen A. Berry as a senior project manager. In his new position, Berry will help to build and maintain strong relationships and partnerships with government officials, industrial leaders, technical staff, regulators, utilities, and other stakeholders to support growth and development in and around Jacksonville. “Steve is a distinguished professional with deep roots in the Jacksonville community and northeast Florida,” said Ferreira. “His expertise and knowledge of local needs will be a tremen-

November 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal

dous asset in developing creative solutions and collaborative partnerships to address the environmental and infrastructure challenges in this region, as well as throughout the state.” Stephen Berry Berry brings more than 35 years of extensive environmental and project management experience to the firm, including experience with the Department of Defense (DOD), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and several other business sectors such as ports, aerospace, commercial, and industrial clients. He has addressed a broad spectrum of issues for these entities in the areas of planning, permitting and compliance, ranging from water resources and air quality to mitigation of wetland impacts and protected species, and has also worked on numerous high-profile projects that include complex alternatives analysis for a new ethanol plant, a 20,000-acre new major airport hub, and the preliminary reviews of new aerospace launch complexes. Berry received a B.S. in ecology from Birmingham-Southern College and a B.S. in environmental engineering from the University of Florida. He is an active member of the American Association of Port Authorities and the American Institute for Aeronautics and Astronautics. Previously, Berry served as a chair and board member of the Jacksonville International Airport Community Redevelopment Agency, and is a past president and board member of the Rotary Club of North Jacksonville.

The South Florida Water Management District has approved construction of canal upgrades to enhance the flexibility of moving stormwater from the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA) into wetlands, which will improve the quality of water before it reaches the Everglades. Improvements on the Bolles East Canal, which runs from east to west in the EAA south of Lake Okeechobee, will help to reduce the potential need for emergency pumping of excess stormwater into the lake. Work that includes expanding the canal’s bottom width to 40 ft will also improve water flow across the EAA; this will provide increased flexibility for moving water into stormwater treatment areas, which use aquatic vegetation to remove excess nutrients in the water before it reaches the Everglades. The work is expected to be completed in early 2017.

New Products The EasiDrive portable valve actuator from Smith Flow Control USA allows valves to be operated without dedicated valve actuators. One person can efficiently drive multiple valves with a single tool, reducing fatigue and injury risk, and saving time and money. Its reaction kit prevents torque kickback, ensuring that valve movement is always fully controlled. The variable torque output feature, which prevents excessive torque being applied, ensures proper and safe valve operation. No permanent power supply is required and it’s suitable for all climates. It has wide-band torque capability and can be powered by air, electricity, or battery. (www.smithflowcontrol.com)

The Sonic-Pro® S4 from Blue-White is an inline ultrasonic flowmeter featuring flow measurement technology with no moving parts and no internal liners to wear out. The S4 inline pipe fittings facilitate installation of the meter and are capable of measuring water flow using the transit time method. Optional advanced data communication protocols include industrial Ethernet, Modbus RTU, Modbus TCP, PROFIBUS TPV1, and PROFINET. Downloading datalogging files directly to a flash drive via USB is possible, and dual relays for rate alarms, total alarms, or proportional feed control are available. (www.blue-white.com)

Sludge Mate container filters from Flo Trend Systems can dewater a variety of materials, such as alum, ferric, lagoon, and digested sludge; septic tank, grease trap, and slaughterhouse waste; wastewater residuals; and sump bottoms. The closed-system design provides total odor control, weather protection, and no spillage. The units have 10-gauge reinforced walls and a seven-gauge carbon steel floor. Options include peaked roofs with gasketed bolted-down access hatches, drainage ports, inlet manifolds, floor filters, and side-to-side rolling tarps. Units are available as roll-offs or trailer, and tipping-stand-mounted. Capacities range from 5 to 40 cu yd. (www.flotrend.com)

The Vac-A-Tee from Perma-Liner Industries allows access to the lateral pipe for cleaning inspection and lateral lining through a clean-out. It can also be used to establish a new service connection at the mainline pipe. It is compatible with all pipe types, such as clay, cast iron, concrete, PVC,

and HDPE, and is available in diameters from 4 to 24 in. The unit is homeownerfriendly, with minimal disruption; utilityfriendly, eliminating the hazard of digging up water and gas lines; environmentallyfriendly, saving trees and landscaping; and installer-friendly, requiring no large equipment or shoring. (www.perma-liner.com)

Summit Software from Ritam Technologies allows users to start simple with printed route sheets, or go high-tech with scanning of units serviced (customer proof of service and driver efficiency audit) and integration of smartphone routing capabilities. It uses advanced mapping technologies to optimize route efficiencies with considerations for tank capacity, target schedules, and driver’s working hours. Digital signatures can be obtained on-site, while sites serviced instantly drop from the pending dispatch log. Information is instantly accessible for office personnel, while tracking drivers dynamically on street-level maps as they progress through their routes. (www.ritam.com)

The X02 low-pressure spray-on polyurethane coating system from Scorpion Protective Coatings is designed to withstand nearly any environment. It offers corrosion prevention, non-skid abuse protection, chemical resistance, and UV stability. Dents and dings are hazards that waste haulers want to avoid, along with the corrosive effects that liquids, salt, and sand can have on the inside of tanks and painted surfaces. Other applications include saltwater and oil equipment, storage tanks, showers and restrooms, crane platforms, and wheelchair ramps. (www.scorpioncoatings.com)

The Dura-Plate 6100 high-build, highphysical-strength epoxy lining for manholes and other severe wastewater and sewer collection applications from SherwinWilliams is suitable for use on ductile iron pipe, steel, and concrete substrates. It offers a dry time of 30 minutes, with a return to total immersion service in 12 hours. This speed decreases the potential pinholes in the applied film due to outgassing, ensuring monolithic film coverage to increase service life. It is applied using plural component equipment. (www.sherwin-williams.com)

PipeOptix field-based data management software from Aries Industries integrates with leading camera inspection systems, and is easy to learn, set up, and use. It’s ideal for small municipalities without extensive needs for ongoing data management, and offers a low-cost option for contractors with basic requirements. The software provides automatic transfer of data from the field to the office for further assessment. It’s PACP- and LACP-certified, and offers direct data migration into more robust systems for future flexibility. It can be used on a laptop or full-sized PC and is fully supported for use with Windows 7 and 8, 64-bit only. (www.ariesindustries.com)

The Model 3560 industrial-grade highpressure triplex pump from Cat Pumps is engineered to maximize uptime and has lubricated and cooled seals for maximum life. Concentric, high-density, polished solid ceramic plungers provide a true wear surface that extends seal life. Pump manifolds are available in 316 and 304 stainless steel, brass, and nickel aluminum bronze designed for strength and corrosion resistance. Drive options include hydraulic motor and other direct drives. It’s rated for 20 gpm at 4,000 psi and 25 gpm at 3,000 psi. (wwwcatpumps.com)

The high-resolution, digital CCTV, side-scanning Digital Universal Camera (DUC) from CUES is designed for rapid and detailed condition assessment. It can inspect and assess 5,000 ft or more per day, producing a high-resolution digital video scan of internal pipe conditions in 6- to 60-in. pipe, and a flat unfolded view of the pipe to facilitate rapid assignment of observations and for measurement. This low-maintenance camera has no moving parts and is driven through the pipe without the need to stop, pan, or tilt. Drive the unit on cruise control to the remote manhole, or through multiple manholes, for maximum efficiency. (www.cuesinc.com)

Florida Water Resources Journal • November 2015

ENGINEERING DIRECTORY

Tank Engineering And Management Consultants, Inc.

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

863-354-9010 www.tankteam.com

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 Available

Utilities Field Superintendent

CGA Employment Opportunities CGA is an innovative multidisciplinary Engineering Firm ranked as a Top Ten Engineering Firm by South Florida Business Journal, and in the top 100 fastest growing United States architecture, engineering, and environmental consulting firms; with main offices in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. CGA is hiring engineers with expertise in water, wastewater, roadway, traffic, and/or storm water design. Candidates must have a PE license or EI certification and 5 to 10 years of experience. Apply at jobs@cgasolutions.com

$74,311 - $104,562/yr.

Utilities Treatment Plant Operations Supervisor $55,452 - $78,026/yr.

Reuse Outreach Water Conservation Coord. $45,620 - $64,193/yr.

Utilities System Operator II $37,152 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 52,279/yr. Apply Online At: http://pompanobeachfl.gov Open until filled.

Water Plant Operator The Utilities Commission, City of New Smyrna Beach is seeking qualified applicants for a WTP Operator 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, B, or A License in Water Treatment. Starting Salary: C - $18.27/hr; B - $19.80/hr; A - $21.35/hr 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

Synagro - Plant Operator This position will inspect, maintain, and control process equipment and perform mechanical maintenance throughout the plant. Adhere to all applicable regulations to provide, safe, reliable, and cost effective operation of the plant to meet processing, permit, and other applicable requirements. The position may require nights, weekends or overtime as needed. Email for more information careers@synagr.com

City of Coral Springs UTILITIES MECHANIC Knowledge of mechanical repair and maintenance work of the Utilities facilities. Vocational training/certification with major coursework in mechanical and/or plumbing. Two to three years responsible experience in the skilled labor of utilities maintenance and repair. Possession of Water Distribution Level 3 and/or Wastewater Collection Level C. Florida driver's license, Class B preferred. Apply online at Http://www1.coralsprings.org/jobs/

ELECTRICIAN/INSTRUMENTATION TECHNICIAN Salary: $23.08 Minimum (DOQ) Bonita Springs Utilities is seeking an experienced Electrician/Instrumentation Technician. This positions provides technical instrumentation and control repair skills to ensure the efficient installation, maintenance, repair, and calibration of mechanical and electromechanical instruments and controls required to operate the treatment plant and associated equipment. Applicants must have considerable knowledge of PLC's, PLC programming, Industrial Control Systems and SCADA servers, and how to troubleshoot errors associated with them, as well as the ability to read and interpret electrical schematics, diagrams, plans and / or pneumatic drawings. We would prefer 5 years of progressive experience with electrical/mechanical systems, maintenance and repair. Submit application to www.bsu.us/employment or send resume to Bonita Springs Utilities, Inc., 11900 East Terry Street, Bonita Springs, FL 34135; fax resume to (239) 390-4903.

Wastewater Plant Operator Salary: A Minimum $20.54 (DOQ) B Minimum $18.78 (DOQ) C Minimum $17.21 (DOQ) BSU currently has an opening for a Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator. Salary is based upon experience and license held. Shift work may be required. Must have valid FL Driver License. Bonita Springs Utilities, Inc. is an EOE, offers a great benefit package and provides a Drug Free Workplace. Submit application at www.bsu.us/employment or send resume to Bonita Springs Utilities, Inc., 11900 East Terry Street, Bonita Springs, FL 34135; fax resume to (239) 390-4903 .

Water Plant Maintenance Mechanic Seacoast Utility Authority has an immediate opening for a

EVERGLADES CITY WATER / WASTEWATER OPERATOR CONTRACT EMPLOYEE 5 days/week 10 hours/day $40/hr $8,000 per month

Minimum Requirements: Duel license: Class C water and Class C wastewater. 5 years experience Membrane filtration experience preferred. dsmallwood@cityofeverglades.org 239-695-3781

Send

resume:

Utilities, Inc.

Water Plant Maintenance Mechanic Responsibilities are maintenance and repair of membrane plant equipment, machinery and facilities. Checks and maintains pumps, motors, filters, belts, compressors, piping and piping connections at plant and pumping facilities. Monitors operational status and performance of plant equipment, coordinates maintenance and repair with system plant staff. Other duties include troubleshoot individual pieces of mechanical equipment, evaluate and diagnose system deterioration or failure and performs repairs on gas, chemical feed systems, odor control systems, screens, filers, and related equipment. Utilizes testing equipment and instrumentation to troubleshoot. Program and setup process equipment including calibration. Candidate is required to have knowledge of water plant operations, membrane treatment systems, hydraulic, pneumatic and electrical systems as well as knowledge of membrane cleaning, train maintenance/troubleshooting and the ability to instruct and tech others in the work group. Minimum qualifications are graduation from high school with two (2) years of trade's formal training with emphasis in mathematics, physics, and five (5) years industrial instrumentation and controls experience, valid Florida driver's license, possess good interpersonal skills, communications skills, and have the ability to read and understand drawings and technical papers. Safety is paramount Salary range is $38,417.60 - $64,043.20 annually plus excellent benefits to include employer paid employee medical, dental, life, disabilities insurance, FLEX account, retirement plans, and more. Position is open until filled. Please submit application and resume to: Seacoast Utility Authority Human Resources Departments 4200 Hood Rd Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 (561) 627-2900 ext. 395 www.suaemployee.com

November 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal

WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT OPERATOR Utilities, Inc. is seeking a Wastewater Operator in the Dunedin/Pinellas County area. Applicant must have a minimum Class C FDEP Wastewater license. Applicant must have a HS Diploma or GED & a valid Florida driver’s license with a clean record. To view complete job description & apply for the position please visit our web site, www.uiwater.com, select the Employment Opportunities tab. The job is listed under Operations – FLDunedin.

WATER PLANT OPERATOR CITY OF TEMPLE TERRACE Technical work in the operation of a water treatment plant and auxiliary facilities on an assigned shift. Performs quality control lab tests and other analyses, monthly regulatory reports, and minor adjustments and repairs to plant equipment. Applicant must have State of Florida D.E.P. Class “A”, “B”, or “C’ Drinking Water Certification at time of application. Salary Ranges – “A”-$17.33 – 26.01; “B”-$15.76-23.65; “C”-$14.33-21.50. Excellent benefits package. To apply and/or obtain more details contact City of Temple Terrace, Chief Plant Operator at (813) 506-6593 or Human Resources at (813) 506-6430 or visit www.templeterrace.com. EOE/DFWP.

Pinellas County Director of Utilities, Clearwater, FL $110,246-$167,023/yr. This is highly responsible professional, administrative and management work directing the water, wastewater, and reclaimed water operations of the Utilities Department. This position works closely with the County Administrator on critical issues and organizational policies. Send resume and cover letter to jloring@pinellascounty.org Additional information and applications are available at h t t p : / / w w w. p i n e l l a s c o u n t y. o r g / P D F / E xe c u t i v e _ Po s i t i o n Director_of_Utilities.pdf

Equipment For Sale Vulcan Mensch Crawler Bar Screen for Sale Reiss Engineering, Inc. Are you looking for an opportunity with a company that is poised for growth? Reiss Engineering stands as one of the most prominent Civil and Environmental engineering firms in the State of Florida and the Bahamas. Our main focus is water and wastewater, serving both public and private sector clients with integrity, technical excellence and a commitment to performance. At Reiss Engineering, we are committed to making success happen for our clients, our employees and our firm. Reiss Engineering offers a competitive compensation and benefits package, as well as a stimulating and fast paced work environment. Reiss Engineering is continuously searching for highly talented individuals and welcomes resumes from those with an interest in joining our team. For a list of our current openings, or to submit a resume for a potential opportunity, please visit our website at www.reisseng.com.

Coral Springs Improvement District has a 2003 Vulcan bar screen for sale in excellent condition. Bar screen is made of stainless steel and rated to handle peak flow of 18.0 MGD. The channel width is 3’-0” and depth of 9’-4 3/8” with a 3/8” spacing between bars. The Bar Screen is 22’ 21/2” long and 3’ 83/4” wide. Control panel and spare parts are available. Price: Negotiable Please contact Tim Martin, Chief Operator at (954) 796-6677 for more details.

Seminole County - Utilities Operations Division Manager $58,635.20 - $112,153.60

Classified Advertising Rates

This is a highly responsible, administrative, supervisory and technical position overseeing the operation, maintenance, safety and regulatory compliance programs for the County-owned water, wastewater and reuse utility systems. Manages supervisory staff engaged in the operation, repair, preventative maintenance and upgrade of all utility facilities, systems assets and equipment.

Classified ads are $20 per line for a 60 character line (including spaces and punctuation), $60 minimum. The price includes publication in both the magazine and our Web site. Short positions wanted ads are run one time for no charge and are subject to editing. ads@fwrj.com

To view the full job description and to apply, please visit our website at: http://agency.governmentjobs.com/seminolecountyfl/default.cfm

Wastewater Operators Positions available with the City of Haines City, Florida. Class B: High School Diploma or GED, 3 to 5 years experience, Class B Wastewater Operator License required. Class C: High School Diploma or GED, 2 to 3 years experience, Class C Wastewater Operator License required. Starting: $16.10 Class B, $14.64 Class C (DOQ). Apply at www.hainescity.com

Looking For a Job? The FWPCOA Job Placement Committee Can Help! Contact Joan E. Stokes at 407-293-9465 or fax 407-293-9943 for more information. Florida Water Resources Journal • November 2015

Certification Boulevard Answer Key From page 26 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..................................63 Carollo ........................................48 CEU Challenge ............................40 Constatine................................6,21 Crom ..........................................31 CS ..............................................49 Data Flow....................................33 FSAWWA CONFERENCE Registration ............................10 Calendar of Events ..................11 Conference Overview ..............12 Water Summit ........................13 Taste Test................................14 Student/YP Events ..................15

Poker Night ............................16 Golf Tournament......................17 FWEA Collections Sytems ............25 FWPCOA Training ........................47 Garney ..........................................5 GML Coatings ........................23,39 Hudson Pumps............................51 Ixom............................................53 Medora ......................................19 Polston........................................41 Stacon ..........................................2 Treeo......................................27,42 Wade Trim ..................................43 Xylem..........................................64

November 2015 • Florida Water Resources Journal

1. B) Maximum contaminant level (MCL) Maximum contaminant level (MCL) is the term used for the safe levels that are considered to be many times less than the concentrations that are known or anticipated to cause adverse health effects. 2. D) Copper sulfate Copper sulfate can be used in reservoirs to prevent algae blooms. The effectiveness is based on the water’s alkalinity. 3. A) Anaerobic Anaerobic is a condition where no oxygen is present in the water. This condition can lead to the formation of hydrogen sulfide or the release of iron and manganese. 4. C) 29oC o F - 32 ÷ 1.8 = oC 84oF - 32 ÷ 1.8 = 29.4 oC 5. B) Flash mixing Flash mixing rapidly mixes and distributes coagulant chemicals into the water. Flash mixing occurs within seconds. 6. B) The flocculation is too heavy. The flocculation is too heavy and will settle in the flocculation basin and not in the sedimentation basin. The coagulant dosage should be reduced. 7. C) Flocculation Flocculation is the process of gently and gradually bringing smaller solids particles together to form larger particles (floc). The purpose of flocculation is to create a floc of a suitable size, density, and toughness for later removal in the sedimentation and filtration processes. 8. B) Valve cover The valve cover should always be over the valves. The cylinder could be dropped and cause the valve to break releasing chlorine gas. 9. C) 80 to 100 lb/day The old rule of thumb for the maximum withdrawal rate from a 150-lb cylinder was about 40 lb/day. However, it has since been determined that the maximum feed rate for gas drawn from a 150-lb cylinder can be about 80 to 100 lb/day. The maximum withdrawal rate is temperature-dependent. At these high withdrawal rates, the cylinder may sweat, but the chlorinator should still function to withdraw the chlorine gas. If these feed rates are exceeded, the tank will frost over and freeze because heat can’t pass through the tank as fast to evaporate the chlorine from a liquid to a gas. 10. C) Soda ash The removal of noncarbonated hardness requires lime with the addition of soda ash. When soda ash is used to remove noncarbonate hardness, the pH required is 10 to 10.5 for calcium compounds and 11 to 11.5 for magnesium compounds.