State Water Resources Control BoardRecycled Water Research Needs Workshop
O b 29 2014 C M NV
Th i T i 2
October 29, 2014 Costa Mesa, NV
Thematic Topic 2:
Performance Reliability (Treatment, y ( ,
Operations, and Training)
Jeff Mosher, NWRI Executive DirectorFountain Valley, CAy
jmosher@nwri‐usa.org
Thematic Topic #2Performance ReliabilityPerformance Reliability
(Treatment, Operations, and Training)
• Fundamental to Indirect or Direct Potable Reuse:– Reliability of treatment performance– Goal: Ensure protection of public health from chemical and pathogen risks
• Reliability:– Treatment effectiveness– Appropriate operations– Appropriate monitoring schemes
2
– Appropriate staff and staff training
Multiple Barrier Conceptp p
• Foundation for treatment performance– Drinking water concept– Diversity of independent barriers
• Involves:– Multiple treatment barriers– Technical, operational, and managerial barriers
• Goals:– Prevent contaminants at the source– Enhance treatment performance
3
– Ensure protection of public health
Potable Reuse
• Indirect Potable Reuse (use of Environmental Barrier)Groundwater Recharge– Groundwater Recharge
• Spreading of tertiary treated wastewater• Spreading or injection of Full Advanced Treatment (FAT) water (MF/RO/AOP)
S f W A i– Surface Water Augmentation• FAT for Reservoir Augmentation (e.g., City of San Diego)
– Both must meet stringent chemical and pathogen criteria – Plus many other monitoring and operational requirements
• Direct Potable Reuse– Eliminates the environmental barrier (no aquifer or reservoir)– Two options:
• Advanced treatment (FAT) plus conventional drinking water treatment plant
4
( ) p g p• Advanced treatment (FAT) and into a potable distribution system
Direct Potable Reuse
Wastewater Treatment
Urban Water Use
Plus “Engineered
Jeff Mosher, NWRI Executive DirectorFountain Valley CA
Water Treatment
Environmental
gBuffer”
Fountain Valley, CAjmosher@nwri‐usa.org
Environmental Buffer
Advanced WaterAdvanced Water Treatment
Big Spring (TX) Reclamation Project
8/29/2012 NWRI Workshop ‐ Criteria for Direct Potable Reuse
Potable Reuse: “Full Advanced Treatment”
Ad d O id ti
Micro/Ultrafiltration
Advanced Oxidation
TreatedWastewater
ReverseOsmosis(RO)
UltravioletLight(UV)
H2O2
Ultrafiltration(MF/UF)
Wastewater (RO) (UV)
Backwash
Advanced Treated RecycledWaterConcentrate
Backwash Water(ATRW)
Direct Potable Reuse
• Eliminate the environmental buffer:– Is an “engineered storage buffer” needed?– What performance monitoring requirements are needed to ensure water quality?
– What is the role of redundancy and robustness in a t t t t i ith t i t l b ff ?treatment train without an environmental buffer?
Thi ki• Thinking:– Treatments are provenB t d d t id “ti t t”
8
– But measures are needed to provide a “time to react” to address lapses
DPR: Types of Barriers (1)yp ( )
• Significant protection provided by:– Management, operational, and technological barriers
• Examples:p– Source control (collection system)– Wastewater treatment optimization (equalization, denitrification, monitoring)
– Use of advanced treatment and monitoring– Use of drinking water treatment plant as a barrier– Engineered storage and/or additional monitoring
9
DPR: Types of Barriers (2)yp ( )
• Water quality:– Treatment strategies (e.g., FAT)– Technical controls (alarms, procedures, etc.)O li d th it i– Online and other monitoring
– Operational controls (“react to upsets”)– Monitoring and operational plans (procedures for– Monitoring and operational plans (procedures for operators)
• Monitoring (similar to drinking water):g ( g )– Bulk parameters (surrogates) and indicators– Ensure proper treatment performance
10
– Online devices (turbidity, TOC, etc.)– Grab or composite samples
DPR Design Topicsg p• Source Control Programs
– Control of constituents not compatible with DPR• Design features
– Treatment optimization, performance monitoring• Incorporate reliability and resilience
– Variability of processes, treatment lapses, other errors• Apply “4R” approach to ensure protection of public health
– Reliability: resilience, robustness, redundancy• New technologies (monitoring and treatment)
– Demonstration and validation• Surrogates and indicators for performance monitoring
– Real‐time monitoring– Use of “Critical Control Points”
• Operations, Monitoring, and Maintenance Plans
11
– Address variability, lapses, and errors• Operator Training
– For advanced treatment technologies; appropriate response times
Definition of 4 R’sTerm Definition as Pertaining to DPR Notes
Reliability A measure of the ability of a system to distribute water that meets all requirements protective of public
Reliability includes design, operation, maintenance, and
source control health
Redundancy The use of multiple unit processes to attenuate the same type of
More unit processes in series, even with reduced individualto attenuate the same type of
contaminanteven with reduced individual performance, can result in
improved overall performance
b h b f h l dRobustness The combination of technologies that address a broad variety of
contaminants
Broad spectrum treatment is required due to the original water
source (wastewater)
Resilience The capacity of a DPR system to adapt successfully in the face of
threats or disaster
Resilience can be the ability to simply shut off, or the ability to adjust the level of treatment in
12
response to single or multiple process performance failures
GWRS Microfiltration GWRS Microfiltration OperationOperationOperationOperation
Microfiltration Effluent (MFE)
2012 2013( )
MFE Turbidity 0.07 NTU 0.08 NTUMFE Turbidity Removal 97.70% 97%MFE Suspended Solids <1 mg/L <1 mg/L
► Continue to operate at 89-90% recovery► Performed 380 MF cleanings up from 366
MF cleans in 2012 across 26 cells► Operations continued to optimize
cleanings► Use clean water flux (CWF) to help monitor
cleaning effectiveness
13
GWRS: MF Operations (cont.)GWRS: MF Operations (cont.)p ( )p ( )
► Overall good MF integrity observed: ~249 million individual fibers ► 1,286 fiber pins in 2013 compared to 499 fiber repairs in 2012
– 2,828 total fiber repairs since 2008 startup– Critical control point (CCP)
► Pin repairs:Faulty fibers blocked off
The sub module is placed in a Module Test Vessel.
Test vessel pressurized to 7 psi.
Faulty fibers blocked off using stainless steel pins tapped into top hole of fiber.
Water forced to top of module, integrity leaks identified by bubbles from the faulty fiber.
This is repeated until no more bubbles observed.
GWRS: Reverse GWRS: Reverse Osmosis OperationOsmosis Operationpp
RO Product 2012 2013TOC 0.14 mg/L 0.17 mg/L
TOC Removal % 98.30% 97.8%Electrical Conductivity 57
umhos/cm58
umhos/cmElectrical Conductivity Removal %
► System recovery = 84.5% - 85%► Pressure range = 130 - 230 psi
Electrical Conductivity Removal % 96.2% 96.2%
g p► Minimum specific flux = 0.07 gfd/psi► No O-ring issues during normal operation
15
GWRS: UV/Advanced GWRS: UV/Advanced Oxidation OperationOxidation Operationpp
► UV transmittance averaged = 98%
► Operates well above the minimum required disinfection dose of 101 mJ/cm²
► 3,021 UV lamp replacements in 2013
► 2014 lamp failure summary12% before 9 000 hrs 12% before 9,000 hrs,
51% between 9,000 – 12,000 hrs and 37% reached 12,000 hrs vs. 24% in 2012
16
GWRS: “Critical Control Points”
Flow Streamor Process Target Operating Rangeor Process
1. Chlorine Residual MF Feed 3 to 5 mg/L
2. Chlorine Residual RO Feed < 5 mg/L
<5 NTU optimum
3. Turbidity MF Feed
5 NTU optimum< 20 NTU for membrane warranty> 20 NTU for no more than 4 hours
< 50 NTU at all times
4 T bidit MF Effl t < 0 15 NTU4. Turbidity MF Effluent < 0.15 NTU
5. Turbidity RO Product 0.1 to 0.15 NTU
6. Transmembrane Pressure (TMP)
MF 3 to 12.5 psi(TMP)
7. Pressure Decay Test (PDT) based on daily testing MF < 0.25 psi/minute
< 0.5 psi/minute per manufacturer
RO P d t < 60 h /8. Electrical Conductivity RO Product < 60 µmhos/cm (< 80 for individual units)
9. Total Organic Carbon RO Product 0.1 mg/L upper control limit
10 UV Transmittance UV/AOP 95% minimum (at 254 nanometers)
17
10. UV Transmittance UV/AOP 95% minimum (at 254 nanometers)
11. Average UV Train Power UV/AOP Minimum 74 kW per train
12. Calculated UV Dose per Train
UV/AOP 101 mJ/cm2 minimum
MF Performance MF Performance –– Influent Turbidity Influent Turbidity (Critical Control Point)(Critical Control Point)(Critical Control Point)(Critical Control Point)
20
25
15
dity
(NTU
)
5
10Turb
id
0 1/1/201/15/21/29/22/12/22/26/23/12/23/26/24/9/204/23/25/7/205/21/26/4/206/18/27/2/207/16/27/30/28/13/28/27/29/10/29/24/210/8/210/22/11/5/211/19/12/3/212/17/12/31/1/14/21/28/22/11/22/25/23/11/23/25/24/8/204/22/25/6/205/20/26/3/2013 013
01301301301301313 01313 01313 01313 013013013013013013013
/2013013
/2013013
/2013/201301401401401401401414 01414 01414
MFF Turbidity MFF Turbidity Target < 20 ntu18
MF Performance MF Performance –– Effluent Turbidity Effluent Turbidity (Critical Control Point)(Critical Control Point)(Critical Control Point)(Critical Control Point)
0.12
0.14
0.16
0.08
0.10
bidi
ty (N
TU)
0.04
0.06Turb
0.00
0.02
1/20
135/
2013
9/20
132/
2013
6/20
132/
2013
6/20
139/
2013
3/20
137/
2013
1/20
134/
2013
8/20
132/
2013
6/20
130/
2013
3/20
137/
2013
0/20
134/
2013
8/20
132/
2013
5/20
139/
2013
3/20
137/
2013
1/20
134/
2014
8/20
141/
2014
5/20
141/
2014
5/20
148/
2014
2/20
146/
2014
0/20
143/
2014
1/1
1/15
1/29
2/12
2/26
3/12
3/26 4/9
4/23 5/7
5/21 6/4
6/18 7/2
7/16
7/30
8/13
8/27
9/10
9/24
10/8
10/2
211
/511
/19
12/3
12/1
712
/31
1/14
1/28
2/11
2/25
3/11
3/25 4/8
4/22 5/6
5/20 6/3
MFE Turbidity MFE Turbidity Target < 0.15 ntu
19
High Level of MF High Level of MF Integrity (Pressure Decay Testing) Integrity (Pressure Decay Testing) EnsuresEnsures Proper OperationProper OperationEnsures Ensures Proper OperationProper Operation
0.55Siemens recommended PDT value = 0.5 psi/min
0.40
0.45
0.50
alue
(psi
/min
)
0.30
0.35
ure
Dec
ay T
est V
a
0.15
0.20
0.25
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Pres
su
1/1/
201
1/15
/201
1/29
/201
2/12
/201
2/26
/201
3/12
/201
3/26
/201
4/9/
201
4/23
/201
5/7/
201
5/21
/201
6/4/
201
6/18
/201
7/2/
201
7/16
/201
7/30
/201
8/13
/201
8/27
/201
9/10
/201
9/24
/201
10/8
/201
10/2
2/20
111
/5/2
0111
/19/
201
12/3
/201
12/1
7/20
112
/31/
201
1/14
/201
1/28
/201
2/11
/201
2/25
/201
3/11
/201
3/25
/201
4/8/
201
4/22
/201
5/6/
201
5/20
/201
6/3/
201
Avg PDT all 26 cells Target 0.25 psi/min (new membranes) 20
RO Performance RO Performance –– Product TOC Product TOC (Critical Control Point)(Critical Control Point)(Critical Control Point)(Critical Control Point)
Acetone Spike Event
0 500
0.600
0.400
0.500
/L)
0.200
0.300
TOC
(mg/
0.100
Proposed Target Limit (0.1 mg/L)
0.000
1/1/
2013
1/15
/201
31/
29/2
013
2/12
/201
32/
26/2
013
3/12
/201
33/
26/2
013
4/9/
2013
4/23
/201
35/
7/20
135/
21/2
013
6/4/
2013
6/18
/201
37/
2/20
137/
16/2
013
7/30
/201
38/
13/2
013
8/27
/201
39/
10/2
013
9/24
/201
310
/8/2
013
10/2
2/20
1311
/5/2
013
11/1
9/20
1312
/3/2
013
12/1
7/20
1312
/31/
2013
1/14
/201
41/
28/2
014
2/11
/201
42/
25/2
014
3/11
/201
43/
25/2
014
4/8/
2014
4/22
/201
45/
6/20
145/
20/2
014
6/3/
2014
ROP TOC Target (max 0.45)21
UV/AOP Performance UV/AOP Performance –– UV TransmittanceUV Transmittance((Critical Control Point)Critical Control Point)((Critical Control Point)Critical Control Point)
98.0
100.0
94.0
96.0
mitt
ance
(%)
92.0
94.0
UV
Tran
sm
88.0
90.0
013
013
013
013
013
013
013
013
013
013
013
013
013
013
013
013
013
013
013
013
013
013
013
013
013
013
013
014
014
014
014
014
014
014
014
014
014
014
1/1/
201/
15/2
01/
29/2
02/
12/2
02/
26/2
03/
12/2
03/
26/2
04/
9/20
4/23
/20
5/7/
205/
21/2
06/
4/20
6/18
/20
7/2/
207/
16/2
07/
30/2
08/
13/2
08/
27/2
09/
10/2
09/
24/2
010
/8/2
010
/22/
2011
/5/2
011
/19/
2012
/3/2
012
/17/
2012
/31/
201/
14/2
01/
28/2
02/
11/2
02/
25/2
03/
11/2
03/
25/2
04/
8/20
4/22
/20
5/6/
205/
20/2
06/
3/20
UV/AOP UVT Target >95% 22
UV/AOP Performance UV/AOP Performance -- Power Power ((Critical Control Point)Critical Control Point)((Critical Control Point)Critical Control Point)
100
120
Train A Train B Train C Train D Train E Train F Train G Train H
80
(kW)
60
ower Con
sumption
20
40
Po
0Jan‐13 Feb‐13 Mar‐13 Apr‐13 May‐13 Jun‐13 Jul‐13 Aug‐13 Sep‐13 Oct‐13 Nov‐13 Dec‐13
DATE
23
Dissolved Organic Matter: Dissolved Organic Matter: Excitation/Emission Matrix (EEM) AnalysisExcitation/Emission Matrix (EEM) AnalysisExcitation/Emission Matrix (EEM) AnalysisExcitation/Emission Matrix (EEM) Analysis
40000
60000
80000
nce Units
0
20000
40000
Fluo
rescen
TFE ASE MFF ROF ROP
24
DPR Research Needs (1)( )
• Assess reliability of overall treatment and resiliencyof unit treatment processesof unit treatment processes– Methods to assess treatment performance– Define consistency of treatmentDefine consistency of treatment– Better indicators and surrogates (performance monitoring)– Use of Critical Control Points for operationsp
• Process to validate new technologies– Treatment trains equivalent to FAT?
• Characterize pathogen and chemical risks– Removal of precursors of disinfection byproducts
25
– Document removal of pathogens and chemicals– Better understand microbial communities
DPR Research Needs (2)( )
• Preparation for failures (resiliency)– Evaluate out‐of‐spec behavior– Development of plans and protocols
• Operations– Use of Operation and Monitoring Plans– Develop training for operators– Certification for “advance treatment plant” operators
• Transition research to application– Interpretation of results
26
– Assist in the implementation of projects
Top Related