Advancing Industry Towards Profitable and Sustainable Water Utility Operations

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) finalized the long-anticipated Clean Water Act §316(b) rule for existing facilities on May 19 this year. The rule applies to existing facilities that withdraw more than 2 million gallons per day (MGD) and use at least 25 percent of that water exclusively for cooling purposes. The new rule supersedes the Phase II rule and Phase III rule.

The EPA estimates that roughly 1,065 existing facilities will be captured by the rule, including 521 manufacturing facilities from a number of sectors. The rule grants National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit directors significant authority, including the ultimate determination of best technology available (BTA) at each facility. This, in turn, places a large responsibility back on facility owners

who will be required to develop information that will be used by the director to make a BTA determination for their facility.

All facilities captured by the rule will be required to develop and submit technical material to the director. The specific material required to be submitted is dependent on actual intake flow rates at the facility, with larger flow rate facilities providing more information, and a schedule for submittal based on permit renewal date. The rule also contains a new requirement that the director submit all material to either the National Marine Fisheries Service or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for their review and comment. This is expected to complicate compliance projects at many facilities.

After our review of the EPA’s 500+ page rule, here are 10 Things You Need to Know to prepare for what this means at your existing facilities. Our team is working with clients impacted by this ruling to develop strategies and programs to achieve compliance in a cost-effective manner.

10 Things You Need to KnowAbout the Clean Water Act §316(b)

For more information, contact John Burnett at (435) 640-9147 or by email at john.burnett@hdrinc.com .

and implementing recycle and re-use and operational planning alternatives. The paper also highlights several case studies on the implementation of water management plans and recycle and re-use evaluations at power generating facilities.

You can download a copy of Josh’s paper below or contact him directly at josh.prusakiewicz@hdrinc.com

Not only is our own Colleen Layman serving as chairperson for the conference this year, we are also a corporate sponsor and honored to have a number of presentations and workshops included in their technical program.

PAPERS

Recycled Water: The Growing Trend in Power Plant Water Supply JOSH PRUSAKIEWICZ Monday, Nov. 17, 2014

Water Reuse Application in Cooling Tower Circulation Water in the Power Industry JOHN VAN GEHUCHTEN Wednesday, Nov. 19, 2014

WORKSHOPS

W7 Arsenic and Selenium in Wastewater Treatment JOHN SCHUBERT Wednesday, Nov. 19, 2014

Changes in regulations in the coal-fired power industry and existing standards in the mining industry are but two examples of increased regulatory focus on arsenic and selenium. These ions have not been the focus of emphasis for widespread industrial treatment in the past. Numerous new technologies have been promoted for use in the treatment of arsenic and selenium. However, it is difficult for the environmental

Re-examining Your Plant’s Water FootprintOptimizing Water Use and Minimizing

Wastewater Generation in your Power Plant

Changing environmental regulations, limited availability of fresh water resources, and shifting power plant operational requirements have brought water-related challenges to the forefront of many power plants today. These growing concerns are forcing power generating stations to re-examine their water footprint and assess how they can best utilize their resources while balancing the requirements of new environmental regulations with economic and operational priorities.

Our own Josh Prusakiewicz recently authored a paper exploring the impact that these water-related challenges can have on the operation and design of power generating facilities. It discusses a practical plan for analyzing and optimizing a plant’s water usage and minimizing its wastewater production by investigating

Visit Us at IWC!International Water Conference | Nov. 16-20, 2014 | Riverfront Marriott, San Antonio, TX

personnel responsible for making intelligent decisions in this area to assess the real potential of treatment technologies to cost-effectively achieve the desired goals. This course will provide the background necessary for those concerned with arsenic, selenium or both to make sound decisions about the technical direction of treatment options.

Water and Wastewater Treatment for Natural Gas Development JOHN SCHUBERT Thursday, Nov. 20, 2014

Hydrofracturing requires large volumes of water, processing of that water to use in hydrofracturing, and handling of the return water from the well after completion of hydrofracturing. As hydrofracturing water comes in contact with shale, some of the soluble shale constituents dissolve into the hydrofracturing water. Current options for handling of hydrofracturing water include treatment for reuse, treatment for discharge, and deep well disposal. The focus of this course is to provide a foundational understanding of the use of water in hydrofracturing, and the disposition of return water (flowback and produced water) from hydrofractured wells.

Areas of emphasis include hydrofracturing water preparation, treatment of flowback water for reuse, evaporation-crystallization of hydrofracturing water, andoverall economics of water management. The course serves as a sound introduction to the area for those wishing to learn about shale gas development, and provides detailed information for professionals who may be working with shale gas water.

For more information on our modeling capabilities, contact Paul Paquin at (201) 529-5151 or paul.paquin@hdrinc.com .

For more information on treatment capabilities, contact John Schubert at (941) 342-2727 or john.schubert@hdrinc.com .

New Selenium Limits Could be on the WayState-specific selenium criteria could have broad reaching

impact on industry

The debate surrounding the US EPA water quality criteria for selenium has taken place in environmental circles since its inception in 1987. The controversy has centered on the science behind the EPA’s recommended limits for selenium. These guidelines have significant impacts on a number of industrial activities including agriculture, coal-fired power generation, coal mining and oil refining. Traditionally, state environmental agencies have followed the water quality criteria set forth by the EPA, but states, like Kentucky and West Virginia, are proposing less restrictive selenium limits. These developments are being closely followed by industry, state governments and environmental groups alike. In 2012, the Energy and Environment Cabinet of Kentucky (EEC) conducted a triennial review of Kentucky’s water quality standards. Among the initial proposed amendments, the EEC proposed to withdraw the acute water quality criterion for selenium, based on the concern that the EPA guidance on the acute criterion is not scientifically sound or defensible.

In February 2013, the EEC proposed Water Quality Chronic Criteria for Warm Water Aquatic Habitat for Selenium of 8.6 µg/g or 19.2 µg/g. The first value is the dry weight of whole fish tissue, while

the second value is dry weight of fish egg and ovary tissue. A concentration of 5 µg/L selenium in the water column will trigger fish tissue sampling and analysis. In November of 2013, the EPA issued a decision approving Kentucky’s fish tissue-based chronic criterion, but disapproved the revised acute criterion, which will stay at the EPA-specified 20 µg/L.

In July of 2013 the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection proposed West Virginia House Bill 2579, calling for the new criteria for aquatic selenium concentrations for legislative approval within two years. In January of 2014, the WVDEP issued a plan for conducting the testing required to assess the impact of selenium in the state. The plan is being implemented through sampling and fish studies at sampling points across the state. Sample locations are watersheds where streams have demonstrated elevated selenium concentrations.

The plan includes sample locations, sampling protocols for water chemistry, biological tissue, and early life stage deformities analyses. The study will produce sound scientific data on which to base aquatic selenium criteria that protect aquatic life, without excessive conservatism.

It’s interesting to consider the potential broad reaching impact these new state-specific selenium criteria could have on industry. We have helped clients navigate the complexities associated with selenium toxicity and a number of other related areas. Our water quality modeling team has significant experience in developing approaches for considering bioavailability and building and using bioaccumulation models for trace elements including selenium. While our industrial wastewater treatment specialists have performed environmental assessment studies and designed facilities for selenium removal in the mining, metals and power industries.

Naturally, things tend to change a bit over the course of three decades. Television shows, fashion, and technology – virtually everything in life is subject to change over time. That’s what makes our 28 years worth of experience at the Cargill Meat Solutions beef plant in Wyalusing, Pennsylvania so remarkable.

It all started with an opportunity to design a new wastewater treatment plant for the Taylor Packing Company. The firm doing the design work at the time was Wells Engineers, a Nebraska-based engineering firm with a history of developing treatment solutions for the meat industry. The group joined us in 1997 and quickly enhanced our range of capabilities in wastewater treatment. Likewise, Cargill acquired the Wyalusing plant from the Taylor Packing Company in 2001. Despite these significant events, stability has served as a key ingredient for the plant’s wastewater treatment facilities.

As the plant has evolved to its current state, we have assisted with the design of numerous treatment systems including two anaerobic lagoons with flow equalization provisions, a final clarifier, sludge pumping facilities, and chlorination and dechlorination facilities. More recently, spurred by new legislation, we have assisted with an initiative to reduce the plant’s total nitrogen and phosphorus loads impacting the Chesapeake Bay watershed.

We developed plans and specifications to reduce effluent total nitrogen from concentrations as high as 315 mg/L to an annual limit of 8 mg/L - 97.5 percent removal. These new facilities consist of a rectangular pretreatment clarifier and associated pump station and an aerobic four stage Bardenpho treatment train consisting of: 1) an initial anoxic basin with submersible mixer and nitrate sensor;

2) an aeration basin with perforated-membrane disk diffusers, dissolved oxygen and pH sensors, and submersible mixed liquor return pumps; 3) a post-anoxic basin with submersible mixer and nitrate sensor; and 4) a reaeration basin with perforated-membrane disk diffusers. After this treatment train was constructed, the existing aeration basin was subdivided into the same treatment cells and equipped with the same equipment as provided in the new treatment train. To ensure sufficient denitrification in the four anoxic cells, artificial carbon source feed facilities were added.

In the Spring of 2010, we learned it was necessary to remove phosphorus from concentrations of 35 mg/L to an annual average limit of 0.5 mg/L - 98.6 percent removal. In the Summer of 2010, we begun preparation of plans and specifications for improvements to meet that limit. The new phosphorus removal facilities consist of alum and polymer feed facilities, conversion of the existing disinfection contact tank into rapid mix and flocculation facilities, two tertiary clarifiers for phosphorus removal, tertiary clarifier sludge and scum pumps, and chlorination and dechlorination contact tanks.

In order to meet the client’s objectives, our team merged the two design projects so they could be constructed at the same time. The installation of these upgrades significantly reduced the plant’s nitrogen and phosphorus loads, exceeding intended levels. We continue to support the Wyalusing plant and other Cargill facilities across North America with environmental and engineering consulting services.

Realize the Benefits of A Long-term Partnership

For more information, contact Brian Mulinix at (402) 399-1289 or brian.mulinix@hdrinc.com .

The word ultraviolet (UV) tends to spark an image of a clear, sunny day, but did you know ultraviolet light is one of the most effective ways to sanitize the water we drink and use in our industrial processes?

We operate the UV Validation and Research Center of New York, a facility created to test equipment used to disinfect drinking and reuse water around the world. The facility is one of only four worldwide designed to handle testing full-scale UV equipment. And evolving technology is opening the door for the application of UV disinfection in the in the food, beverage and pharmaceutical industries.

The UV Center is protecting public health on a global stage – the validation process is meant to assure the performance of UV reactors installed to treat waters used by hundreds of millions of people. Since opening in 2003, we’ve tested more than 80 reactors for clients around the world. The UV validation process uses pathogen surrogates to measure disinfection efficiency and capacity across multidimensional operating conditions for each reactor. Methods have rapidly progressed over the past 10 years. When the UV Center opened, only one challenge organism was used for validation. The facility is now able to validate disinfection technology with multiple surrogates including, bacteria, bacterial phage, viruses, and fungus. Our lab in Nanuet, New York provides the UV Center with the microbiological surrogates used to challenge the reactors, and analyze the thousands of samples generated during the validation process.

The UV Center’s flexible design allows equipment to be adjusted to replicate conditions in our client’s facilities without having to disrupt operations, saving customers time and money. This is a major benefit for clients in other consumer product industries as alternate

applications for UV validation are developed. Regardless of industry, we can customize the configuration of the UV Center to match their research needs and validate the effectiveness of their equipment.

“Ensuring product safety is top priority for the food and beverage industry,” adds Jim Jensen, industrial practice leader. “Product and package disinfection and sterilization systems are essential to delivering microbially safe products to consumers. I am excited about the opportunity to lend our expertise to the food and beverage industry, much like we have done for the drinking water and water reuse industries.”

The City of New York has been one of the facility’s most significant clients in support of the New York City Department of Environmental Protection (NYCDEP) Catskill/Delaware Ultraviolet Disinfection Facility (Cat/Del), which has a capacity of 2.2 billion gallons per day, and is currently undergoing commissioning. The NYCDEP supported expansion of the UV Center in 2005 to test its prototype UV units at flows up to 65 million gallons per day (MGD). We have since conducted additional testing of the Cat/Del reactor to add flexibility to its operating algorithm, and to optimize the system’s operation, saving millions in operating expenses. Similar large-scale validations have been conducted in support of commissioned systems in Australia, Canada and the U.S.

Our team’s extensive experience and creative thinking paves the way for opportunities to apply UV outside of the municipal sector to complex industrial processes. Fueled with in-house expertise and a passion for pushing the limits, we offer an unparalleled array of UV

Validating Water Treatment TechnologiesA proving ground for the latest advancements in water treatment

To learn more about the UV Validation and Research Center of New York, contact Chengyue Shen at chengyue.shen@hdrinc.com

Let’s face it, industrial water and wastewater utilities are very rarely, if ever, credited with boosting demand for your products or increasing profit margins. So it’s understandable that these facilities fly under the radar in the daily grind of production activities. However, as businesses continue to look for ways reduce operational expenses, your water and wastewater utilities may be just the place to turn. We recently completed studies for two leading industrial clients where we uncovered significant opportunities to realize efficiencies and reduce operating costs with simple upgrades or process changes in their water supply and wastewater treatment systems.

We were engaged by one client to evaluate the condition and operation of the water and wastewater facilities at their metals manufacturing facility. After initial observations, a number of areas were identified for their potential to reduce operating costs. These included optimizing existing wastewater treatment facilities to reduce chemical costs, improving plant water supply to reduce chemical costs at multiple injection points in the plant, improving the plant water balance to reduce the discharge of treated water, and reusing the applied treatment chemicals in cooling system blowdown streams more efficiently through more effective water reuse. The overall budget reductions from our analysis were significant, and we are working with the client to implement the facility modifications.

For a chemical production client, we proposed a modification to an existing water treatment facility in place of the plant’s current practice of purchasing water from a municipality. This approach

will achieve substantial cost savings while providing a more reliable, higher quality water supply. Minor modifications to the wastewater treatment facility were also identified. These upgrades would eliminate failing operating units with minimal capital expense.

With material prices increasing and margins under constant pressure, industrial facilities face the continual challenge of identifying savings opportunities. Traditionally, businesses have used a quick fix approach when solving problems in their utility areas. While these solutions may fix the problem initially, in the long-run they can become a drain on resources.

How do you know if your water utilities might be a source for cost savings? Well, there is no magic formula to answer this. One of the simplest ways to determine if your operating costs are excessive is to benchmark them against other similar facilities within your company or industry. This can give you a valuable reference point for grading your utility’s performance.

Our treatment and operations experts can help you identify where money is being spent, where opportunities are for reducing operating costs, and how to lower overall operating cost for industrial facilities.

For more information, contact John Schubert at (941) 342-2727 or john.schubert@hdrinc.com .

Find Savings in Your UtilitiesHow we’re helping clients realize efficiencies through expert analysis

hdrinc.com

We practice increased use of sustainable materials and reduction of material use.

© 2014 HDR, all rights reserved.