david w. sloan p.e. , bcee

Potable Reuse in the Permian BasinDAVID W. SLOAN, P.E., BCEE, ,

July 28, 2011

TAWWA/WEAT San Antonio Summer Seminar

Colorado River Municipal Water District

MEMBER CITIES:OdessaBig Spring Snyder

28 County CRMWDOperational AreaCONTRACT

CITIES:CITIES:MidlandSan AngeloAbil

Robert LeePyoteG df ll


AbileneStanton

Grandfalls

Project Background• Drought – 15 years . . .

– Lake Thomas – 2.62% full– Lake Spence – 0.69% full– Lake Ivie – 23.61% full

• Seeking new sustainable sources• Much treated WW effluent unusedS d i d b i i• System dominated by transmission costs– high lift & long distance– high lift & long distance

• Reuse Goal: 100 % of water, 100% of the timeof the time


Colorado River Municipal Water District Transmission System

Snyder

Big Spring

Odessa

Big Spring

Odessa

Midland


Unplanned Indirect Potable ReuseP

City B

Reclaim

WTPWWTP

ReclaimTreatmentWTP

City A

WWTP

y


CRMWD Raw Water Production Concept

Reclaim WTPTreatment

WTPReclaimTreatment

Cit A

City BWWTP

WWTP

City A

WWTP


Why Direct Blending ?

• Year‐round Production & Usage

• Few large customers for non‐potable reuse

• Low‐density developmenty p

– Blending uses existing pipelines

• Arid conditions limited landscapingArid conditions, limited landscaping

• High dissolved solids; desalination required for reuse

– Blending maximizes benefit of desalination

• Evaporation losses diminish stored waterp

– Inline blending minimizes evaporationTAWWA/WEAT San Antonio Summer Seminar

Project Development

• Feasibility Study – 2005

• Member City Agreement Negotiated

• Preliminary Design Report 2007• Preliminary Design Report – 2007

• Membrane Prequalification

• Membrane Pilot Testing – 2009

• Membrane Selection & Final Design ‐ 2010


Wastewater TreatmentTreatment Sequence

D hl i tiWastewater Treatment

Screening

Primary Clarifiers

Final Clarifiers

Aeration Basins

FiltersDechlorination

Chlorination

Thom

Spen

Reverse Membrane

mas Pipeline

ce Pipeline

H2O2

Reverse Osmosis

Membrane Filtration

O id i

e e

Raw Water Reservoir Reclaim Treatment

UV Oxidation

Water Treatment

Rapid

Sedimentation Basins

Filters

Rapid Mix

Flocculators


Proposed Big Spring Reclamation Project


Water Quality Results (Pilot Study)

Conc.(mg/l)

Source Water(WWTP Effluent)

Membrane Filtrate (1st Stage)

RO Permeate(2nd Stage)

Spence Pipeline (RawWater)(mg/l) Effluent) (1st Stage) (2nd Stage) (Raw Water)

TDS 3400 57 2540

Chlorides 1370 17 928Chlorides 1370 17 928

Sulfates 776 0.7 592

Nitrate 10 7 0 84 <0 05

(as N)10.7 0.84 <0.05

TOC 11.9 12.5 <0.9 12

TTHMs 0.087

Hardness (as CaCO )

915 <5 700(as CaCO3)


Concentrate Disposal

• General Disposal Alternatives– Evaporationp

– Discharge

– Disposal WellDisposal Well

– Conjunctive Use: Oil/Gas Operations

– Zero Liquid DischargeZero Liquid Discharge


Regulatory Consultations/Approval

• Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)– Supportive of project

– Protective of Finished Water Quality

• Reclaimed Water Use Authorization (Big Spring/TCEQ)– Transfer of Effluent from WWTP

– Not “reclaimed” after membrane treatment

h ( / )• Concentrate Discharge Permit (CRMWD/TCEQ)

• Industrial Pretreatment Permit (CRMWD/Big Spring)

• Membrane Pilot Study (TCEQ)

• Plans & Specs Review (TCEQ)


TCEQ Conditions

• Alternate Source Water Approval

N tifi ti f R i i W t S t– Notification of Receiving Water Systems

– Source Description included in CCR

A d M b Fl Pil d R• Approved Membrane Flux at Piloted Rate

– Effluent Quality Monitored Continuously

– Turbidity and Chlorine Residual Req’ts

– Direct and Indirect Integrity Monitoring

• Inspection and Monitoring as Public Water Source (Drinking Water)

• Clarification of criteria applicability


Sustainability & Energy Use

• Reclamation Processes are energy‐intensive– Membrane Filtration

– RO Desalination

– UV Disinfection & OxidationUV Disinfection & Oxidation

• Existing Sources also energy‐intensiveLake Spence to Big Spring: 56 miles– Lake Spence to Big Spring: 56 miles

– Vertical Lift: 692 feet

R l i ill id• Reclamation will avoid:– Raw water lift from Lake Spence

– Effluent diversion to Red Draw Reservoir


Pumping Distance and Vertical Lift

Elevation, ft.

166 mi. @ 1405 ft.

92 mi. @ 696 ft.i @ 3 6 f

120 mi. @ 1068 ft.

3000Odessa

56 mi. @ 692 ft.

45 mi. @ 356 ft.

2600Big SpringWard Co.

Wells

@

2200Lake J.B. Thomas

Snyder

1800E.V. Spence Reservoir

1500O.H. Ivie Reservoir


Energy Comparison

Big Spring Reclamation

Operation kWh/

Current Operation

Operation kWh/Operation kWh/1000 gal.

Membrane Treatment 3.55

Operation kWh/1000 gal.

RawWater Pumping 4.2UV Oxidation 0.39

Source Water & Product Water Pumping

1.4

p g(Spence to Big Spring)

Beals Creek Diversion 0.84

b dCombined 5.34 Combined 5.04


Public Information & Acceptance

• District’s approach – Direct & Simple

M lti l t iti f i f ti• Multiple opportunities for information

– 2 Public Meetings

– Radio interviews with call‐in

– Newspaper articles

– Internet

• Water scarcity and high chlorides apparent

Muted response – positive to neutralTAWWA/WEAT San Antonio Summer Seminar

Project Facts

• Facility Capacity: – 2.5 MGD in → 1.85 MGD out→

• Spence pipeline – up to 15% reclaimed water

Product Tank

– up to 15% reclaimed water

• Construction Cost: $12 illi– $12 million

SourceTank

Break Tank


Conclusions

• Required technology reliable and mature

M lti l b i i l• Multiple barriers crucial

• Regulatory and stakeholder hurdles take time

– start early!

• Public not always opposedy pp

• Result can be high utilization of effluent


Coming Soon!

Raw Water Production Facility –Big Spring Plant

Construction began June 2011Construction began June 2011w/Startup Fall 2012TAWWA/WEAT San Antonio Summer Seminar

david w. sloan p.e. , bcee

Documents