1 / 49

Ocean Outfall Legislation Compliance

Ocean Outfall Legislation Compliance. City of Hollywood Department of Public Utilities LARGE USER MEETING October 2, 2008. Agenda. Regulatory Review Baseline Establishment Nutrient Reduction Options Reuse Alternatives. Regulatory Review.

macon
Télécharger la présentation

Ocean Outfall Legislation Compliance

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Ocean Outfall Legislation Compliance City of Hollywood Department of Public Utilities LARGE USER MEETING October 2, 2008

  2. Agenda • Regulatory Review • Baseline Establishment • Nutrient Reduction Options • Reuse Alternatives

  3. Regulatory Review • HB 7139 / SB 1302 effective July 1, 2008 (Ch 2008-232) • Outfall Nutrient Reduction by December 31, 2018 • “Elimination” of Ocean Outfall (except in emergency) by December 31, 2025 • > 60% of Outfall Flow to Reuse by December 31, 2025

  4. General Requirements • SFWMD may require reuse of water made available by the elimination of ocean outfalls [FS 373.250 (2) (d) Reuse of Reclaimed Water] • Construction of new outfalls and expansion of new outfalls is prohibited [FS 403.086 (9) (a)] • Existing outfalls capped at capacity as of July 1, 2008 [FS 403.086 (9) (a)] • Outfall discharge prohibited after Dec. 31, 2025 except for functioning reuse system back-up [FS 403.086 (9) (d)]

  5. Baseline Nutrients and Flows • FDEP to establish average TN and TP baseline loadings using monitoring data from 2003 to 2007 expressed as average annual daily loadings [FS 403.086 (9) (b)] • FDEP to establish Facility Actual Flows using monitoring data from 2003 to 2007 of flows throughthe outfall expressed as average annual daily flow[FS 403.086 (9) (c)]

  6. Nutrient Reduction [FS 403.086 (9)(b)] • Basic Nutrient Criterion – discharge to meet AWTas defined under FS 403.086 (4) namely 5/5/3/1 and HLD by Dec. 31, 2018 • Alternatives • Equivalent reduction in TN &TP baseline loadings • Equivalent cumulative reduction in TN & TP from2009 - 2025 to AWT levels between 2019 - 2025 • Fully operational 100% reuse by Dec. 31, 2018

  7. Reuse Requirements [FS 403.086 (9)(c)] • Basic Reuse Criterion - Facilities discharging to ocean on 7/1/2008 must have functioning reuse system by 12/31/2025 • A functioning reuse system means an environmentally, economically, and technically feasible system for ≥ 60% facility actual flow • Alternatives • Diversion of flow to other facilities counts toward the 60% if 100% is reused • Diversion of 60% of combined outfall facilities for single utility

  8. Planning Requirements [FS 403.086 (9)(e)] • Progress report and action item schedule by Dec. 31, 2009 • Updated progress report and action item schedule every 5 yrs (2014, 2019, 2024) • Detailed implementation plan to meet all requirements to be submitted by July 1, 2013 • Updated plan by July 1, 2016 • All outfall permits after July 1, 2008 will include an order with a compliance schedule

  9. Baseline Establishment • 2003 -2007 SRWWTP Outfall Data • Average Flow – 40.1 mgd • Average TN Load – 5,293 lbs/day • Concentration = 15.8 mg/L • Average TP Load – 4,247 lbs/day • Concentration = 1.3 mg/L

  10. Nutrient Reduction • Advanced Wastewater Treatment and Management Options • Meet AWT Standards (5/5/3/1) • TN and TP baseline load reduction equivalent to AWT standards (~ 7 mgd) • Cumulative 2009–2025 TN and TP reduction equivalent to cumulative reduction through AWT between 2019-2025 • 100% reuse by Dec. 31, 2018

  11. AWT Compliance Approaches • Nutrient Reduction Alternative 1 – Implement AWT • Maximize use of existing injection wells (≥30 mgd to wells) • AWT facilities for balance of flow (~30 mgd by 2025) • Estimated cost >$300M

  12. AWT Compliance Approaches • Nutrient Reduction Alternative 2 – Cumulative reduction • Maximize use of existing injection wells (≥30 mgd to wells) • Construct additional injection well (IW-3) no later than 2016 • HLD facilities required • Estimated cost ≈$45M

  13. AWT Compliance Approaches • Nutrient Reduction Alternative 3 – 100% Reuse • Construct necessary facilities by 2018 • Maximum Reuse Alternative • Salinity Barrier • Canal Recharge • Groundwater Recharge • Dual distribution • Estimated Capital Cost (60 mgd) >$1.5B

  14. AWT Compliance Approaches • Cumulative Reduction Recommended Strategy (IW-3) • Lowest probable cost option • Utilizes existing infrastructure • Defers significant treatment plant modifications • HLD facilities provide possible synergy w/ reuse strategy

  15. Cumulative Reduction Strategies

  16. Reuse Compliance Approaches • Reuse Requirement – 60% of Baseline Outfall Flow by 2025 ~ 25 mgd • Reuse Alternatives • Canal Discharge • Biscayne Aquifer Discharge • Floridan Aquifer Discharge • Dual Distribution System • Large User Pull-Out

  17. Canal Discharge • Indirect Potable Reuse Option • Considered an extension to Biscayne Aquifer (F.A.C. 62-610.555 4 (b)) • FDEP - Principal Treatment & Disinfection • HLD, TN ≤ 10 mg/L unless WQBELs est. • BCEPD – TN ≤ 1.5 mg/L, TP ≤ 0.02 mg/L • Membrane / LOT Treatment

  18. Canal Discharge Regulatory Requirements * WQBEL Limited

  19. Canal Discharge – Issues • Disposal Location? • Eventual Disposal to Tide • Direct Impact on Coral Reefs • Problem Exacerbated

  20. Biscayne Aquifer Discharge • Indirect Potable Reuse Option • Class G-I Ground Water (F.A.C. 62-610.560) • FDEP - Full Treatment & Disinfection • NPDW, NSDW Standards, HLD, TN ≤ 10 mg/L • BCEPD – PO4-P ≤ 0.01 mg/L, COD ≤ 10 mg/L, Chlorides ≤ 250 mg/L • Membrane / LOT Treatment

  21. Biscayne Aquifer Discharge Regulatory Requirements

  22. Canal / Biscayne Aquifer Discharge Treatment Alternatives • New Treatment Train to Meet LOT • MBR → RO → UV (AOP) • Fine Screens, Primary Clarifiers • BNR → UF → RO → UV (AOP) • Utilize Existing Tankage? • Secondary Effluent Side stream Process • BAF → UF → RO → UV (AOP) • BAF - Biological Aerated Filters • Biscayne Aquifer - UF → RO → UV (AOP)

  23. Reuse Alternatives 1 and 2 –Canal / Biscayne Aquifer Discharge

  24. Floridan Aquifer Discharge • Indirect Potable Reuse Option • Class G-II Ground Water (F.A.C. 62-610.560) • TDS > 3,000 mg/L below 1,100 feet • FDEP – Primary Treatment & Disinfection + NPDW Standards • BCEPD – No differentiation between Class G-I and G-II GW • Assume COD, PO4 and Cl- limits can be waived – need to confirm

  25. Floridan Aquifer Discharge Regulatory Requirements

  26. Floridan Aquifer Discharge Treatment Alternatives • New Treatment Train • Diffused Air BNR → Filters → HLD • MBR → HLD • Fine Screens, Primary Clarifiers • Utilize Existing Process? • Optimize SRT • Pure Oxygen - Partial nitrification • Convert to Diffused Air – Full nitrification • SCE → Denite Filters → HLD • Side stream Process • SCE → BAF → Filters → HLD

  27. Reuse Alternative 3 –Floridan Aquifer Discharge

  28. Expand Dual Distribution • High Chloride Influent • 21.6 mgd ≈ 3,000 mg/l Cl- • Low Chloride Influent • 41.5 mgd ≈ 150 mg/l Cl- • Plus D/CC flow @ 6 mgd; NPW use at 4 mgd • Separate Influent Streams and Treatment • High Chloride to Deep Wells • Low Chloride to Off-Site Reuse • Peak Flow/Emergency Disposal to Outfall

  29. Reuse Alternative 4 –Expand Dual Distribution System

  30. Reuse Alternative 4Dual Distribution of 25 mgd

  31. Large User Pull-Out • Hallandale Beach – 6.5 mgd AADF (2005) • 10.9 mgd AADF in 2025 • Pembroke Pines – 7.5 mgd AADF (2005) • 8.4 mgd AADF in 2025 • Combined 2025 Flow – 19.3 mgd • 100% Reuse Flow – Credit towards SRWWTP 60% Reuse Requirement • 5.7 MGD required @ SRWWTP

  32. Reuse Alternative 5 –Large User Pullout

  33. Existing Condition (2007)

  34. Year 2025 Condition

  35. Estimated Reuse Alternative Costs Alternative 1 – Canal Recharge $680-830M Alternative 2 – Biscayne Recharge $720-880M Alternative 3 – Floridan Recharge $400-510M Alternative 4 – Dual Distribution $700M Alternative 5 – Large User Pull-Out $?

  36. Compliance Schedule

  37. Recharge Pilot Test Issues • Define Regulatory Standards • COD, chlorides, phosphate, toxicity, microconstituents, etc. • Determine Limits of Technology • Determine Design Criteria • Pretreatment, Treatment, Post-treatment, mixing zones, etc. • Injection modeling, flow rates, pressures, well spacing, fate, etc. • Determine degree of recharge

  38. Reuse/Recharge Pilot Test Budget* Regulatory Discussions/Pre-design $1 - 1.5M Design/Permitting $3.5 - 4.5M Pilot Test Construction & Operation $10.5 - 14M Total Project Cost $15 - 20M *Assumes 3-yr test period

  39. Discussion

  40. Davie and Cooper City Effluent Disposal Options

  41. Background • In 1985 agreement between Davie, Cooper City, and Hollywood reserved a total of 10.5-mgd outfall capacity. • Davie: 7.0 - mgd • Cooper City: 3.5 - mgd • In 1992 effluent disposal agreement was amended to include the construction of a 4-mgd reuse system.

  42. Highlights of 1992 Amendment • This was an action that prevented a building moratorium in City’s served by the regional system. • Allowed the expansion of the WWTP by reducing effluent discharge to the outfall via reuse. • Ordered Davie and Cooper City to provide wastewater effluent to the regional system despite their objections. • Provided Davie and Cooper City a total effluent disposal capacity of 14.5 mgd (4-mgd of reuse).

  43. Davie Cooper City Effluent Disposal Options Option 1 Replace outfall capacity with new IW and HLD in the Regional System. • Proportionally share the costs with the Large Users • Continue sending 4-mgd of effluent to the plant. • Wet weather discharge of reuse flows to IW system when necessary.

  44. Davie Cooper City Effluent Disposal Options Option 2 Either Davie or Cooper City opt out of the outfall and build their own capacity for effluent disposal. • Either Davie or Cooper City proportionally shares costs to build IW and HLD with Large Users. • Continue sending 4-mgd of effluent to the plant. • Wet weather discharge of reuse flows to IW system when necessary. • Would require 100 percent reuse of diverted flow

  45. Davie Cooper City Effluent Disposal Options Option 3 Both Davie and Cooper City opt out of outfall and build their own capacity for effluent disposal. • Continue sending 4-mgd of effluent to the plant. • Wet weather discharge of reuse flows to IW system when necessary. • Would require 100 percent reuse of diverted flow

  46. Recommended Action Plan – Initial Phase • Construct additional injection well capacity with HLD to meet nutrient reduction requirements. • Initiate Biscayne / Floridan aquifer recharge pilot project to assess treatability and regulatory issues with stakeholders. • Discuss effluent disposal options with Davie and Cooper City to determine their desired course of action. • Upon completion of pilot study, evaluate approach to meet 60-percent reuse requirement (2025).

  47. Preliminary Analysis of Rate Requirements for Initial Phase (2018) Option B • Construction of two (2) IWs with HLD • Biscayne /Floridan Aquifer recharge pilot study • Preliminary rate estimate(1) : $2.70 – $2.90 per thousand gallon Option A • Construction of one (1) IW with HLD • Biscayne / Floridan Aquifer recharge pilot study • Preliminary rate estimate(1): $2.50 – $2.70 per thousand gallon Notes: 1. Preliminary rate based on capital requirement and does not include O&M costs.

  48. Where do we go from here… • Large Users to review recommended options. • Negotiations with Davie and Cooper City relative to options they wish to exercise. • Schedule a special Large User meeting to gather feedback and decide on recommended options. • Submit proposed plan of action to FDEP. • Draft amendment to Large User Agreement and Davie/Cooper City Effluent Disposal Agreement.

  49. Questions

More Related