florida water resources journal - september 2014

Editor’s Office and Advertiser Information:Florida Water Resources Journal

1402 Emerald Lakes DriveClermont, FL 34711

Phone: 352-241-6006 • Fax: 352-241-6007Email: Editorial, [email protected]

Display and Classified Advertising, [email protected] Office:

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

General Manager: Michael DelaneyEditor: Rick HarmonGraphic Design Manager: Patrick DelaneyMailing Coordinator: Buena Vista Publishing

Published byBUENA VISTA PUBLISHING for

Florida Water Resources Journal, Inc.

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 notcount on getting the Journal unless you notify us directly ofaddress changes by the 15th of the month preceding themonth of issue. Please do not telephone address changes.Email changes to [email protected], fax to 352-241-6007, ormail to Florida Water Resources Journal, 1402 Emerald LakesDrive, Clermont, FL 34711

Membership QuestionsFSAWWA: Casey Cumiskey – 407-957-8447 or

[email protected]: Karen Wallace, Executive Manager – 407-574-3318FWPCOA: Darin Bishop – 561-840-0340

Training QuestionsFSAWWA: Donna Metherall – 407-957-8443 or

[email protected]: Shirley Reaves – 321-383-9690

For Other InformationDEP Operator Certification: Ron McCulley – 850-245-7500FSAWWA: Peggy Guingona – 407-957-8448Florida Water Resources Conference: 888-328-8448FWPCOA Operators Helping Operators:

John Lang – 772-559-0722, e-mail – [email protected]: Karen Wallace, Executive Manager – 407-574-3318

WebsitesFlorida Water Resources Journal: www.fwrj.comFWPCOA: www.fwpcoa.orgFSAWWA: www.fsawwa.orgFWEA: www.fwea.org and www.fweauc.orgFlorida Water Resources Conference: www.fwrc.org

Throughout this issue trademark names are used. Rather than place a trademarksymbol in every occurrence of a trademarked name, we state we are using the namesonly in an editorial fashion, and to the benefit of the trademark owner, with no in-tention of infringement of the trademark. None of the material in this publicationnecessarily reflects the opinions of the sponsoring organizations. All correspon-dence received is the property of the Florida Water Resources Journal and is subjectto editing. Names are withheld in published letters only for extraordinary reasons.

Authors agree to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Florida Water Re-sources Journal Inc. (FWRJ), its officers, affiliates, directors, advisors, members,representatives, and agents from any and all losses, expenses, third-party claims, li-ability, damages and costs (including, but not limited to, attorneys’ fees) arising fromauthors’ infringement of any intellectual property, copyright or trademark, or otherright of any person, as applicable under the laws of the State of Florida.

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; andthe Florida Water Environment Association. Members of all three associations receive the publication as a service of their association; $6 of membership duessupport 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

Volume 66 September 2014 Number 9

Florida Water Resources Journal • September 2014 3

News and Features4 Sarasota County Stormwater Project Wins Outstanding Achievement Award

22 FSAWWA Water Conservation Awards Call for Entries36 In Memoriam48 Florida Student is a 2014 Stockholm Junior Water Prize Runner-Up58 News Beat

Technical Articles6 City of Daytona Beach Utilizes Glycerol in a Unique Application for Enhanced

Biological Phosphorus Removal—Gary R. Johnson, Christopher J. Wall, Robert Terpstra,

Tami Minigh, and Michael Saunders

12 Innovative Methods to Assess Water Main Risk and Improve ReplacementPlanning Decisions—Celine Hyer

24 Developing a Surface Water Resiliency Model for the 21st Century—Kevin Morris,

Mike Coates, and Mike Heyl

40 Lake Marden Augmentation Capacity Rerating: A Water Resources Success!—Brian J. Megic, Mark C. Ikeler, Mark L. Johnston, and Jackie Martin

Education and Training17 FSAWWA Conference23 FWEA Innovation and Energy Savings in Wastewater Treatment Seminar32 TREEO Center Training33 CEU Challenge37 FWEA Biosolids Seminar47 FWPCOA Training Calendar59 Florida Water Resources Conference

Call for Papers

Columns22 Reader Profile—Jacqueline W. Torbert

32 FSAWWA Speaking Out—Carl R. Larrabee Jr.

38 C Factor—Jeff Poteet

34 Process Page—Kevin Vickers and Ted Long

46 Certification Boulevard—Roy Pelletier

Departments59 New Products61 Service Directories64 Classifieds66 Display Advertiser Index

ON THE COVER: Photo taken at theOrlando Eastern Wetlands. Thesewetlands were created as a wastewatereffluent treatment system to removeremaining nutrients (nitrogen andphosphorus) and return the water tonature. (Photo: Jim Peters)

Sarasota County has won the 2014 Out-standing Achievement Award from the FloridaStormwater Association for its Celery FieldsRegional Stormwater Facility project toachieve flood projection goals. The award rec-ognizes outstanding stormwater projects andthe benefits they provide to the environment

and local communities.The goal of the $7.2 million project was

to reduce downstream historical floodingalong Phillippi Creek in Sarasota, improve thewater quality of stormwater entering RobertsBay North and Sarasota Bay, and provide amultifaceted stormwater park that promotesecotourism.

The project would also help to reducepollutants and excess nutrients, restore naturalwetland areas, provide diverse recreational andeducational opportunities, and provide addi-tional flood plain storage and treatment formore than 3,600 acres of stormwater runoff.

Up until the late 1980s, the area of Sara-sota County known as “The Celery Fields” wasused for just that—growing celery and otherrow crops. For decades, farmers stimulatedcrops with fertilizers, which eventually causedthe soil’s arsenic levels to increase. Althougharsenic is naturally occurring, it is poisonousto people, and when the county decided to re-store the fields area, it was discovered that thelevels of arsenic exceeded the maximum-al-lowed limit.

The environmental consulting firm, VHB,with offices in Orlando and Sarasota, was thelead environmental consultant for the projectand developed the two-year best managementpractices (BMP) water quality evaluationstudy. The firm’s responsibilities included en-vironmental services for the restoration, plant-ing inspection and oversight, exotic andnuisance plant management, hydrologic de-sign recommendations, environmental per-mitting, mitigation monitoring for five years,storm event and base flow water quality mon-itoring and reporting to document the BMPpollutant removal efficiencies for the CeleryFields education program, and a managementplan for the entire stormwater facility.

The evaluation study documented thatthe facility achieved pollutant removal rates of53 percent, 50 percent, and 82 percent for ni-trogen, phosphorus, and suspended solids, re-spectively. The project included wildlifeamenities such as osprey platforms, woodduck boxes, tree snags for bird perches, and anupland preserve island designed to provide fora future wading bird rookery for the area.Walking trails for bird watching, and a diverseterrain for sightseeing, exercising, and biking,with educational signage along the trails, werealso created as an element of the stormwaterpark. ��

4 September 2014 • Florida Water Resources Journal

Sarasota County StormwaterProject Wins Outstanding

Achievement Award

Photos from www.kimley-horn.com.


The City of Daytona Beach owns and op-erates two water reclamation facilitieswith a combined capacity of 106,000

m3/day (28 mgd). Both the Westside RegionalWater Reclamation Facility (WRWRF), with arated capacity of 56,782 m3/day (15 mgd) an-nual average daily flow (AADF), and BethunePoint Water Reclamation Facility (BPWRF),with a rated capacity of 49,210 m3/d (13 mgd)AADF, are five-stage Bardenpho systems andare designed to achieve advanced treatmentstandards for: biochemical oxygen demand(BOD5), 5 mg/L; total suspended solids (TSS),5 mg/L; total nitrogen (TN), 3 mg/L; and totalphosphorus (TP), 1 mg/L (5/5/3/1). The re-claimed water is discharged to the Halifax River(D-001) or to the public access reuse distribu-tion system (R-001). The WRWRF reclaimedwater not sent to the reuse distribution systemis conveyed to the BPWRF (R-002) and is com-bined with the reclaimed water from theBRWRF for discharge to the Halifax River.

The WRWRF was upgraded in 2000 to atwo-process train, five-stage Bardenpho systemthat includes the following processes: anaerobiczone and primary anoxic zone, followed bymechanical aeration with internal nitrate recy-cle, second anoxic zone, reaeration, clarifica-

tion, sand bed filtration, and ultraviolet light(UV) disinfection. Biosolids processing con-sists of three sludge holding tanks (that are notpresently in service) and four two-meter beltpresses. Waste activated sludge (WAS) ispresently pumped to the belt presses directlyfor dewatering. Solids dewatering is conductedcontinuously, and belt press filtrate and the ef-fluent sand filter backwash water are dis-charged to the flow distribution box No. 1immediately upstream of the anaerobic zone.In addition, biosolids from the BPWRF are alsodischarged to the WRWRF collection systemwhere they are treated and processed. Dewa-tered solids are trucked from the WRWRF toan off-site facility.

Historically, both Daytona Beach waterreclamation facilities have tried to achieve bio-logical nitrogen removal without the additionof supplemental carbon. Reclaimed water TNlevels from both facilities have not consistentlymet the National Pollutant Discharge Elimina-tion System (NPDES) permit limit for TN of3mg/L. The WRWRF, in addition to not meet-ing TN effluent compliance, had not been ableto meet the 1.0 mg/L TP limit consistently.

As a result of these discharge permit vio-lations, in 2008, the Florida Department of En-

vironmental Protection (FDEP) issued a con-sent order to the City of Daytona Beach to eval-uate alternatives to achieve compliance withthe phosphorus and nitrogen discharge permitlimits.

The phosphorus removal study recom-mended the addition of alum for phosphoruscontrol. The study recommended alum addi-tion at two points in the process train at the in-fluent distribution box before the anaerobiczone, and at the reaeration distribution boxjust prior to final clarification. Alum storageand feed tanks were installed and the facilitybegan feeding alum in October 2009.

The effluent performance during the alumaddition time frame (December 2009 to March2011) was inconsistent and did not achievepermit compliance (Figure 1). Effluent TP av-eraged greater than 2.0 mg/L, which was abovethe 1.0 mg/L monthly average TP per theNPDES permit limit. Figure 1 also shows TPremoval for the alum addition during the De-cember 2009 to March 2011 time period. Dur-ing this period, alum was fed to variouscombinations of distribution box No. 1 influ-ent and after reaeration. The feed rate was alsovaried from 200 to 300 ml/min to each feedpoint.

Glycerol Evaluation

Beginning in March 2011, the WRWRFbegan feeding MicroC2000TM (a glycerol-based

City of Daytona Beach Utilizes Glycerol in a Unique Application for Enhanced

Biological Phosphorus Removal Gary R. Johnson, Christopher J. Wall, Robert Terpstra, Tami Minigh, and Michael Saunders

Gary R. Johnson, P.E., BCEE, is anenvironmental engineering consultant.Christopher J. Wall, MPA, is plantsuperintendent and Robert Terpstra is achemist in the utilities department at City ofDaytona Beach. Tami Minigh is a chemistin the utilities department environmentallaboratory at City of Daytona Beach.Michael Saunders is a sales representativewith Environmental Operating Solutions.

F W R J

Figure 1. Westside Regional Influent and Effluent Total Phosphorus with Alum Feed OnlyContinued on page 8


carbon source) as a supplemental carbonsource to the second anoxic zone to enhanceTN removal. The test evaluation criterion wasset to remove the combined total of nitrate andnitrite (NOx) to below 1.5 mg/L consistentlyfrom the final effluent in order to achieve afinal effluent TN of 3 mg/L to meet the NPDESpermit.

After the March 2011 start of supplemen-tal carbon addition to the second anoxic zone(Figure 2), the plant staff began to notice a re-duction in the effluent phosphorus compositesamples for both TP and orthophosphates.

This reduction began almost immediately afterthe glycerol addition.

Subsequent to the first-phase testing andsuccess in lowering the TN to less than the 3mg/L threshold, evaluation of the additionalbenefit to enhanced biological phosphorus re-moval (EBPR) began. Grab samples were takenacross the second anoxic zone for TP and or-thophosphates and a profile was observedalong with on-line nitrate analyzer data fromthe second anoxic zone influent and effluent. Itwas observed that the NOx levels were beinglowered to less than 1 mg/L consistently, thusresulting in anaerobic conditions in part of the

second anoxic zone. The very low NOx levels in the second

anoxic process allowed for a secondary releaseof phosphorus and subsequent uptake in thereaeration zone. This condition, though notideal for EBPR, was occurring and lowering theeffluent TP at the facility.

After operating both an alum feed andsupplemental carbon glycerol feed to the sec-ond anoxic, the plant staff discontinued the useof alum in June 2011. Both effluent TN and TPlevels were below permit limits for TN of 3mg/L and for TP of 1 mg/L.

In June 2011, a further evaluation of theprocess was conducted with additional grabsampling of the entire process for both or-thophosphate and TP. The plant influent char-acteristics were also evaluated and it wasdetermined that the influent carbonaceousbiochemical oxygen demand (CBOD) was typ-ically low in this facility. The average influentCBOD was 130 mg/L and the average influentTP was 7 mg/L. This resulted in a BOD:P of ap-proximately 18.5. The ratio was consistentlybelow 25, typically referenced in the literaturefor five-stage Bardenpho processes. Given theweak influent CBOD, it was suggested that sup-plemental carbon be supplied to the anaerobiczone to enhance phosphorus release and sub-sequent uptake in the aerobic zone (Figure3).On July 1, 2013, the facility began feeding glyc-erol to distribution box No. 1 located just up-stream of the anaerobic zone (Figure 5).

Most current EPBR phosphorus removalprocesses rely on the function of a specificgroup of polyphosphate-accumulating mi-croorganisms (PAOs) that are capable of tak-ing up excessive phosphorus as intracellularstorage. The phosphorus is then removed fromthe system by sludge wasting. In facilities witha weak influent soluble BOD, the fermentationreactions in the anaerobic zone will be signifi-cantly slow. This will result in reduced phos-phorus release and subsequent uptake frominsufficient anaerobic poly-b-hydroxyalkanoates (PHA) storage to supportsubsequent aerobic poly-p storage.

In cases where the influent does not con-tain sufficient volatile fatty acids (VFAs) tosupport PAO enrichment, an external VFA oran external supplemental carbon can be addedto the anaerobic process. Traditionally, aceticacid, a mixture of acetic and propionic acid, ac-etate, or fermented primary sludge overflowstreams, has been used as a source of VFAs.

In the case of the WRWRF, the influentBOD:P ratio is lower than recommended forgood biological phosphorus release and uptake,resulting in insufficient EBPR performance.

The use of glycerol fed to the influentchamber upstream of the anaerobic zone

Figure 2. Initiation of Supplemental Carbon Addition to the Second Anoxic Zone

Figure 3. Supplemental Carbon Feed Points and Analyzer Locations

Continued from page 6


specifically as a VFA source from fermentationof the glycerol to VFAs within the anaerobiczone has been utilized continuously at theWRWRF since June 2011. The external carbonsupplementation has provided a unique ap-proach to solving an EBPR performance prob-lem and has resulted in permit compliance forthe TP permit limit of 1 mg/L.

The feed rates to both the denitrificationand EBPR processes were constant-feed, withapproximately 1.1 liters per minute to the sec-ond anoxic zone and 0.65 liters per minute tothe influent to the anaerobic zone. The con-stant feed scenario for denitrification was uti-lized at the facility until March 2013, when thefeed to the second anoxic zone was automatedfrom a feed-forward control loop with two ni-trate analyzers (Figure 3). The automatic con-trol system allowed for pacing of thesupplemental carbon feed for meeting nitro-gen concentration, flow, and load conditions,resulting in a significant reduction in supple-mental carbon use. The supplemental carbonfeed and control improvement projects coveredthe storage feed and control system for nitro-gen removal at both water reclamation facili-ties (WRFs), as shown in photos 1 and 2.

The supplemental carbon feed and con-trol of the anaerobic zone at the WRWRF wasnot part of the improvement project and thesystem continues to be operated in a manualfeed configuration.

2012-2013 Enhanced BiologicalPhosphorus Removal and

Nitrogen Removal Performance

The overall one-year July 2012-July 2013WRWRF nutrient removal performance hasbeen exceptional (Figure 4), with the effluentTN averaging 1.74 mg/L, (NPDES permit limitof 3 mg/L) and effluent TP averaging 0.28mg/L, (NPDES permit limit of 1 mg/L). Theaverage monthly flow, CBOD, total kjeldahl ni-trogen (TKN), and TP for the April 2012-March 2013 period were as follows: flow,23,848 m3/d (6.3 mgd); CBOD, 134 mg/L;TKN, 42 mg/L; and TP 7, mg/L.

Over the last 12 months, the feed rate ofsupplemental carbon has been at a constantfeed rate of 0.65 L/min. This feed rate was es-tablished early in the trial and has provided alevel of phosphorus removal that has consis-tently met the NPDES permit. A high supple-mental carbon feed rate was maintained due tothe need to maintain complete permit compli-ance for both TN and TP consistently for sixmonths of uninterrupted compliance as re-quired in the consent order from FDEP. As aresult of the need to achieve full compliancewith the consent order, the facility staff was

hesitant to change any of the operation condi-tions, including supplement carbon feed rates,until the consent order was noted in full com-pliance. This has most likely included timeswhen the use of supplemental carbon wasgreater than required.

The supplemental carbon feed system uti-lized at the facility consisted of a pair of peri-staltic pumps. Each pump operates with twopump heads that are capable of up to 0.84L/min total (photo 3). Supplemental carbonfor this process was not covered in the recentlycompleted carbon storage and feed improve-ment project that provided new bulk storageand pumping facilities for the denitrificationprocess. Budget limitations for the project didnot include any new facilities for the supple-mental storage and feed to the anaerobicprocess.

In order to better understand the EBPRprocess at the WRWRF, a number of plantprofile grabs were taken to better understandthe release and uptake of phosphorus acrossthe five-stage Bardenpho process. Profiles weretaken at six separate intervals in 2013 that rep-resented different times of the day and oper-ating conditions. Grab samples were taken asfollows: 1) at the influent distribution No 1,which is the combined raw influent, return ac-tivated sludge (RAS), filter, and filtratestreams; 2) anaerobic zone effluent; 3) aera-tion effluent; 4) midsecond anoxic zone; 5)midreaeration zone; and 6) final reaeration be-fore clarification. The samples were field-fil-tered and analyzed for orthophospate, TP,TKN, ammonia, and NOx. Due to the tankconcentric layout, it was impossible to grab afinal second anoxic sample, as access to thispoint was not possible.

During the most recent grab sample pro-file of June 26, 2013, an additional sample

point was added to evaluate the uptake ofphosphorus in the preanoxic zone. In all sam-ple profiles, a very distinct release of phospho-rus occurred in the anaerobic zone, followedby uptake in the aerobic zone. A secondary re-lease of phosphorus was also noted in the sec-ond anoxic zone, followed by P uptake in thereaeration zone. In all sampling profiles, theadditional reduction in orthophospate and TPoccurred across the reaeration zone after thepostanoxic P release. Typically, an additional0.1-0.2 mg/L reduction of both orthophos-phate and TP were observed.

The secondary phosphorus release didnot appear to cause any undesirable plant per-formance or operating conditions. The reasonfor the additional release is most likely due toanaerobic conditions, with available VFAs inthe reactor from denitrification at less than 1mg/L.

Two plant profiles representing differentoperating conditions are shown in Figures 5and 6. The figure profile represents a period ofhigh plant loading. The WRWRF sewer serviceareas include the Daytona International Speed-way. The profile was taken the day after theDaytona 500 race, where approximately150,000 spectators were in attendance, with ho-tels and restaurants operating at full capacity.

During the high loading profile, the plantwas experiencing difficulty in maintaining ahigh enough dissolved oxygen level for com-plete nitrification, and ammonia was breakingthrough the aeration basin. This resulted in ahigher-than-normal effluent TN. The low dis-solved oxygen condition also resulted in in-complete phosphorus uptake in the aerationbasin. What is interesting to note is that thepoor uptake of phosphorus was compensatedfor in the second anoxic zone. As shown in

Figure 4. Westside Regional Average Phosphorus Influent and Effluent (July 2012-July 2013)in mg/L Daily Composite Data

Continued on page 10


Figure 5, there was a secondary release andsubsequent uptake of phosphorus in the reaer-ation zone that resulted in a reaeration effluentorthophosphate and TP of 0.3 and 0.4 mg/L,respectively. This was most likely the result ofthe second anoxic basin becoming anaerobicwith low nitrates and abundant VFAs to allowfor a secondary phosphorus release.

Once the high organic loading passedafter the Daytona 500 race, the WRWRF wasback fully nitrifying within a couple of days.The dissolved oxygen/aeration limitations atthe facility in peak demand periods are an on-going problem that will be rectified with aplanned aeration system upgrade.

The WRWRF profile taken on June 26,2013, was a more representative profile of nor-mal nonstressed operating conditions thatwere observed with all of the other grab sam-ple profiles taken.

During this sampling period, an addi-tional grab sample point was added at the ef-fluent of the primary anoxic zone. The reasonfor the additional sample point was to see ifthere was any phosphorus uptake taking placein the zone from anoxic phosphorus uptake.As shown in Figure 6, there was simultaneousdenitrification and phosphorus uptake takingplace in the preanoxic zone. The TP was re-duced from 7.3 mg/L down to 3.3 mg/L, or ap-proximately 50 percent across the primaryanoxic zone. Additional grab sample profileswill be taken to confirm the uptake observedwith the June 26, 2013, samples.

With the other subsequent grab samplesduring normal operating conditions, a smallersecondary phosphorus release was observed,with the majority of phosphorus uptake com-pleted by the end of the aerobic zone. Theoverall EBPR removal was excellent, with or-thophosphate at 0.06 mg/L and TP at 0.09mg/L by the end of the reaeration process.

An additional phase of the case study wasto better understand the diurnal variation ininfluent phosphorus loading to the facility. Inorder to accomplish this, an on-line or-thophosphate analyzer was installed at influ-ent distribution box No. 1, just upstream of theanaerobic zone and before the addition of sup-plemental carbon. The Hach Phosphax ana-lyzer uses a colorimetric process that requiresa sample to be drawn into the analyzer foranalysis. This required a filtered sample, andgiven that the sample point was raw screenedinfluent, it presented a number of challengesin keeping the filter equipment functioning.

The sampling equipment was operatedduring the month of June 2013 and the sam-pling interval was 15 minutes. Photo 4 showsthe installed sampler at distribution box No. 1,

Figure 5. Westside Regional Profile (2/26/2013) as an Example of a Stressed High OrganicLoading Period During Daytona 500 NASCAR Race Event

Figure 6. Regional Profile (June 26, 2013)

Figure 7. Orthophosphate Analyzer Data Form the Influent Distribution Box No 1 Upstreamof the Anaerobic Zone Including Return Activated Sludge and Plant Recycle Streams



just upstream of the anaerobic zone. The wastestream at this point included screened raw in-fluent, RAS, and continuous recycled streamsfrom sludge dewatering and effluent sand fil-ter backwashing.

Use of the on-line phosphate analyzerdemonstrated a clear diurnal loading cyclewith peak loading periods occurring from lateafternoon until early morning. The typicalload varied from a low of 2 mg/L up to 5 mg/Lorthophosphate daily (Figure 7). Utilization ofon-line analyzers will allow for a better real-time understanding of the phosphorus load-ing to the facility and enable the potentialfuture ability to pace supplemental carbon tothe loading for more efficient process control.

Conclusions

Glycerol provided a reliable, readilydegradable source of supplemental carbon forenhancement of biological phosphorus re-moval when fed to the anaerobic zone at theWRWRF.

The use of supplemental carbon addition,for both denitrification when fed to the sec-ond anoxic zone and enhanced biologicalphosphorus removal when fed to the anaero-bic zone, have enabled the WRWRF to achievepermit compliance for effluent TN and TP.

The FDEP consent order has been satis-fied, and on July 2, 2013, the facility was notedin full compliance, with no effluent violationsover the previous six months.

Glycerol was shown to improve nitrogenand phosphorus removal at the WRWRF overthe seasonal variations in flow and loadingconditions. The glycerol did not require anyappreciable acclimation period and resultswere quickly observed from initiation of sup-plemental carbon pumping. Wastewater tem-peratures ranged annually from 20->30°Cwithout any observed changes in removal effi-ciency.

A better understanding through the useof an on-line orthophosphate analyzer of thedaily fluctuations in influent phosphorus load-ing to the facility from influent diurnal flowand loading variability has helped to provideinformation that, in the future, will more ac-curately and efficiently provide supplementalcarbon dosing to maximize phosphorus re-moval.

The City of Daytona is currently in theprocess of installing and commissioning anon-line orthophosphate analyzer at the planteffluent of both of its water reclamation facil-ities to better understand the overall phos-phorus removal performance.

Further analysis will be necessary to de-termine if an on-line phosphate analyzer can

be utilized continuously at the plant influentdue to the high solids present; better analyzerinfluent filtering equipment may make thispossible. The goal will be to provide an auto-matic feed and control system for enhance-ment of biological phosphorus removal, withglycerol incorporated into the plant-wide su-pervisory control and data acquisition(SCADA) systems.

Overall influent phosphorus peak load-ing has been reduced through better biosolidsmanagement. The elimination of sludge stor-age that contributed to additional phosphorusreleased from anaerobic sludge storage and re-cycled to the head of the treatment processhelped achieve this goal.

Use of glycerol to enhance EBPR in placeof alum will result in less solids generated witha metal salt precipitation process.

References

1. Nutrient Removal, WEF Manual of PracticeNo. 34, Water Environment Federation,2010.

2. Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR) Oper-ation in Wastewater Treatment Plants, WEFManual of Practice No. 30, Water Environ-ment Federation, 2005.

3. Design of Municipal Wastewater TreatmentProcesses, Fifth Edition, Volume No 2, Liq-uid Treatment Processes, WEF Manual ofPractice No. 8, Water Environment Federa-tion, 2010.

4. Operation and Maintenance PerformanceReport, Westside Regional Water Reclama-tion Facility, Volusia County, July 2013,Carollo Engineers Inc.

5. Phosphorus Fractionation and Removal inWastewater Treatment, Implications forMinimizing Effluent Phosphorus, WaterEnvironment Research Foundation(WERF) Draft Report 2012.

6. The Fate of Glycerin in BNR: A Closer Lookat Nitrite Accumulation and Glycerin Spe-cialists, Samuel A. Ledwell, et al, WEF/IWANutrient Conference, July 2013.

7. Optimizing Low-Level Nitrogen Removal,Gary R. Johnson et al, Water Environmentand Technology, June 2012 edition. ��

Photo 1. Permanent supplemental carbon bulk stor-age and pumping system at the Westside RegionalWater Reclamation Facility in Daytona Beach.

Photo 2. Permanent pumping system for supple-mental carbon.

Photo 3. Temporary bulk storage and feed/pump-ing system used for supplemental carbon at theWestside Regional Water Reclamation Facility dur-ing the study.

Photo 4. Orthophosphate on-line analyzer locatedin the influent to the anaerobic zone at the WestsideRegional Water Reclamation Facility to record real-time influent phosphorus loading during the study.


Infrastructure management has been iden-tified as a national issue due to the currentlack of planning and funding for future re-

newal and replacements to maintain systemreliability. The extremely large funding needsand poor infrastructure conditions across theUnited States have been documented over thelast 10 years in various publications from theAmerican Society of Civil Engineering(ASCE), American Water Works Association(AWWA), and U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA). Current needs are estimated inthe 2012 AWWA report, “Buried No Longer:Confronting America’s Water InfrastructureChallenge,” at more than $1 trillion over thenext 25 years for water and wastewater sys-tems.

The overall age of infrastructure contin-ues to increase; however, in most areas addi-tional funds are not being applied towardrenewal and replacement (R&R), and reactivework is most common. This is generally dueto the poor economy, as well as the lack ofasset data available to make effective decisionsand manage risk.

Implementing a risk assessment frame-work can assist utilities in identifying and mit-igating risk, and determining where to applytheir limited funds to achieve the most risk re-

duction. A complete risk framework includesthe elements of the probability of failure, orthe asset condition, and the consequence offailure, or the asset criticality to the system interms of financial, social, and environmentalimpacts. Risk can also be expressed by thissimple equation:

Asset Risk = Probability of Failure (Condition)* Consequence of Failure

Methodologies for Assessing Condition and Risk

One of the main challenges for calculat-ing buried infrastructure risk is that it is verycostly and time consuming to inspect these as-sets; in addition, some condition assessmenttechniques do not provide any standardizedscoring or specific data on remaining asset life.A piping system with gravity sewer pipes is theeasiest system to address since cameras caneasily be used for inspections while pipes re-main in service. There is also a standardizedPipeline Assessment and Certification Pro-gram (PACP) scoring that can be assigned forcondition ratings that also relates to remain-ing life expectancies. The most difficult piping

system to address has pressure mains, sincethese pipes typically cannot be taken out ofservice, the condition assessment technologiesavailable are still evolving, there is no stan-dardized condition scoring, and costs are stillhigh (but becoming more reasonable).

Figure 1 illustrates a replacement plan-ning process that can be used by any utility forpressure mains to calculate overall asset risk.Condition scoring is based on a combinationof analysis of existing failure or conditiondata, targeted additional field condition as-sessment to fill the data gaps and validatemodeling, and the use of forecasting modelsto identify the future condition for each pipesegment. A tool based in a geographic infor-mation system (GIS) is then utilized to assignthe consequence of failure and conditiondecay curves for each pipe and calculate a riskscore. Unit costs for R&R methodologies as-signed to pipes allow for financial forecasting.The benefit of this approach is that the rightprojects can be selected to be completed firstfor the least amount of inspection costs, andan overall view of future funding needs can beevaluated.

The models in Step 4 of the replacementplanning process include the Linear ExtendedYule Process (LEYP) and GompitZ. Thesemodels come from Europe and have been ap-plied to pipes and other long-lasting infra-structure such as roads and bridges, and arejust now starting to be applied in the U.S.

The LEYP is a failure forecasting modeland is the model of choice for pipes that arenot inspected and have only failure records—typically, water distribution mains. It predictsbreaks for each pipe and each year in the fu-ture. It is a multivariable regression model(taking into account all variables at once andavoiding redundancy) of a survival nature; thismeans that it can take into account the historyof the pipes that have been removed, a featurethat is typically overlooked in classic statisticsthat focus on the active population, but canplay an important role in predictions.

Innovative Methods to Assess Water Main Riskand Improve Replacement Planning Decisions

Celine Hyer

Celine Hyer is a vice president withARCADIS in Tampa.

F W R J

Figure 1. Optimized Replacement Planning Approach


The variables considered are typically:� Time (Weibul component of the model)� Physical characteristics, including period

and quality of installation, material, diam-eter, and eventually pressure (Cox Propor-tional Hazard Model component)

� Environmental characteristics, if available,such as soil, traffic, and density (Cox)

� Previous breaks; Five-year minimum (Yule)

The instantaneous risk in function oftime, h(t), is expressed as follows.

h(t)=

Two input files are needed to run the model:� Pipes and their attributes, which comes typ-

ically from the pipe GIS� Breaks; they must be assigned to pipes

The output results are the predicted breaknumber (PBN), rate (per pipe, per year), andpipe-effective useful life by pipe class.

The GompitZ is a physical conditionforecasting model and is the model of choicefor inspected pipes for which the state ofphysical condition can be measured and givena certain score, such as applying it to gravitysewers or large-diameter water or force mains.It allows for prediction of the physical condi-tion for each pipe and each year in the futurebased solely on inspection results of a smallpercent of the network. For GompitZ, inspec-tion could also have been produced at onesingle year (if enough pipes have been in-spected). The framework of the GompitZmodel is a Markov chain. It is assumed thatthe probabilities of jumping from one physi-cal condition state to the next can be calcu-lated and organized in matrices. Then,following a nonhomogeneous Markov chainprocedure (nonhomogeneous means thatscores depend on time), the states and scoresat a future time can be produced.

The Markov chain probabilities can becomputed using simple statistics or moreelaborate ones, such as the Gompertz model(a form of regression used for data for whichresults are available solely for a portion of thepopulation where one measurement sufficesas the regression draws inferences from the

variables of all the pipes inspected at once).The GompitZ approach is the combinationof a Gompertz regression and a Markovchain.

The variables considered in the modelare:� Time � Physical characteristics, including period

and quality of installation, material, diam-eter, and eventually depth

� Environmental characteristics, if availableand relevant, such as soil, traffic, and den-sity

� Inspections results; with at least 10 percentof the population, one inspection is enough

Two input files are needed:� Pipes and their attributes, which comes typ-

ically from the pipe GIS� Inspection results assigned to the pipe

The output results are for each pipe andfor each year. Computed for all the pipes in acohort, or for the overall system, the resultsshow the percent of length (or the probabilityto be) in a certain state at a certain year.

Condition assessment techniques andtechnologies are advancing quickly and thereare several free EPA publications that providea good overview of what is available, as well asseveral Water Environment Research Founda-tion (WERF) reports that are available to sub-scribers. In general, the methodologies can beclassified as internal and external, with someof the internal methods requiring pipe shut-downs, and some that have free swimming de-vices that can be inserted into a live pipe. Table1 summarizes the current technologies by themost common water pipe materials and theproject experience of ARCADIS in applyingthese tools.

In applying these technologies, the ap-proach typically taken is to use the least-costscreening methods first, and then the detailed,more-costly ones if poor-condition areas are

detected. The case studies presented for theColumbus Department of Public Utilities(DPU) in Ohio and Lee County Utilities(LCU) in Florida both utilized this overall ap-proach. Columbus has also recently incorpo-rated the LEYP model into its waterdistribution main replacement planning andhas revised its risk scores and financial projec-tions, which actually were less than originallyanticipated.

Replacement Planning Case Study: Columbus

Department of Public Utilities

Columbus DPU began its water distribu-tion main replacement planning as part of anoverall water master plan in 2009 and updatedthis plan in 2014 utilizing the LEYP model toprovide the condition scores for the pipes.

The key objectives of this project were asfollows:� Define the desired service levels for water

pipes in terms of breaks per 100 mi per year.� Assign a replacement methodology and

cost for each pipe.� Assign a condition score to each so that a

risk score could be calculated.� Define the near-term projects that may be

included in the five-year capital improve-ment program (CIP) based on risk.

� Evaluate the future funding scenariosneeded to maintain the level of service.

� Validate the risk model using limitedacoustic wall integrity testing.

� Validate the accuracy of the acoustic testingby laboratory analysis.

As shown in the replacement planningprocess model, a risk score was calculated foreach pipe using a triple-bottom-line conse-quence of failure analysis and condition scoreswere initially created by performing a basicstatistical analysis on the past 25 years of break

state p+1 at time t+1 is the state p at time t multiplied by (the probability ofmoving from state p to p+1 + the probability of staying at stage p)



data. Pipe decay curves were generated basedon an established service level of 20 breaks per100 mi per year, which represented the pipe’send of life. Once the risk scores were estab-

lished and the high-risk areas were identified,a pilot area was chosen to perform externalacoustical wall integrity testing for Echologics.This testing is accomplished by placing twomicrophones on two consecutive valves, in-

troducing a noise by opening a hydrant orvalve, and measuring the time it takes to travelbetween those points. Through advancedmath, the pipe hoop stiffness or wall integritycan be calculated and compared with the orig-inal material to provide an average wall lossover that pipe section. The testing of DPU’spredicted poor-condition pipes confirmedthat there was significant wall loss of 40-50percent in the cast-iron pipe, meaning it wasin poor condition. Since DPU was unfamiliarwith this type of testing, it took it one step fur-ther and collected pipe coupons to send outfor laboratory analysis along the samepipelines in multiple locations. The laboratorytesting confirmed in 85 percent of the areasthat the pipe had corrosion and wall loss sim-ilar to what the acoustical testing determined.

The deliverables for the project includedthe identification of risk maps (Figure 2) andan optimized funding scenario (Figure 3) forlong term R&R needs. In addition, the GIS re-placement planning tool was provided toDPU, along with training so that it can be usedfor planning purposes to create the CIP eachyear. The 2014 project revised this tool to in-clude the results from the LEYP modeling andprovided the LEYP model and training forDPU staff so that it can also be updated annu-ally during the CIP planning process.

Replacement Planning Case Study:Lee County Utilities

Lee County Utilities completed its watermain replacement planning project as part ofan overall asset management program imple-mentation during 2011.

The key objectives of this project were asfollows:� Define the desired service levels for water

pipes in terms of breaks per 100 mi per year.� Assign a replacement methodology and

cost for each pipe.� Refine the current useful life table for each

pipe material/group.� Assign a condition score to each pipe so

that a risk score could be calculated.� Define the near-term projects that may be

included in the five-year CIP based on risk.� Evaluate the future funding scenarios

needed to maintain the level of service.� Identify high-risk areas for future field con-

dition assessments.

As shown in the replacement planningprocess model, a risk score was calculated foreach pipe using a triple-bottom-line conse-quence of failure analysis and condition scorescreated by performing a basic statistical analy-

Figure 2. Risk Map Identifying Areas for Field Inspection and Projects

Table 1. Water Main Condition Assessment Methods Continued on page 16



sis on the past nine years of break data. Forpipe classes with no data, industry standard ef-fective useful life was applied. Pipe decaycurves were generated based on an establishedservice level of 20 breaks per 100 mi per year,which represented the end of life. This processwas performed strictly as a desktop assessmentusing GIS, so there was no field condition as-sessment associated with validating the riskscoring and project selections. However,

through workshops with knowledgeable staff,the high-risk poor-condition areas seemed tomatch up with their assumptions. A futurephase of the project will include select condi-tion assessments to further validate the proj-ects and funding projections, beginning withlower-cost screening tools, such as acousticalwall integrity testing from Echologics.

The deliverables for the project includedthe identification of risk maps (Figure 4) andan optimized funding scenario (Figure 5) forlong term R&R needs. In addition, the GIS re-placement planning tool was provided to LCUalong with training so that it can be used forplanning purposes to create the CIP each year.

Conclusions

Other utilities can easily adopt this typeof a risk methodology for their R&R planning and apply new techniques to assessburied pressure pipe asset conditions to easethe burden of deciding where to apply theirlimited funds to get the best risk reductionand maintain their service levels. Leveragingexisting GIS and work-order data providesthe basis to start this process and can laterevolve into using advanced modeling, suchas LEYP or GompitZ, and targeted field condition assessments to refine the initialresults. ��

Figure 3. Optimized Funding Scenario Showing a Decrease in Funds to Maintain Service Levels

Figure 4. Risk Map Showing Areas for Future Field Inspections

Figure 5. Optimized Funding Scenario Ramping Up Over Time to Maintain Service Levels



Jacqueline W. TorbertOrange County Utilities

Work title and years of service.I am the manager with Orange County

Utilities Water Division and have been withthe utility for 23 years.

Job description; what does your job entail?I am responsible for the operation of 11

water supply facilities that serve more than500,000 customers in unincorporated OrangeCounty. I am also responsible for the utility’slaboratory that provides analytical services tothe entire utility operation (water, wastewater,and solid waste), as well as services to othergovernmental agencies on an as-needed basis.

I also lead the water efficiency programs forthe county.

What do you like best about your job?The thing I like best about my job is that

no single day is the same as another, and assuch, you do not have the opportunity tobecome stagnant in your job. Orange CountyUtilities also encourages and supportsparticipation in organizations relevant to ourprofession, which is another avenue I can useto make a contribution to the water industry.

Another key aspect of my job that I takegreat pride in is the enthusiasm andcommitment of my staff to the well-being of ourcommunity. My staff is fantastic at executing allthe ideas and challenges that I throw at them, andin many cases, those executed ideas have becomethe standard of operation in our industry.

I guess if I had to choose the very bestthing that I like about my job it would beseeing my staff flourish, and hoping that I havehad a part in their growth.

What organizations do you belong to?I have been a member of AWWA for 19

years. I currently serve on the Association’s boardof directors and served as the Florida Sectionchair in 2005-2006. I also belong to the American

Metropolitan Water Association, Water ResearchFederation (past Board of Directors member)and the Water Environment Foundation.

How have these organizations helped yourcareer?

The people that I have met and thefriendships that I have made in theassociations that I am connected with havebeen invaluable. I have a ready source ofinformation and facts about any issue that Imay encounter in our industry. I have beenable to capitalize on experiences that haveallowed me to avoid mistakes that may havebeen costly—in both time and money.

What do you like best about the industry?The water industry itself is about sustaining

life. There is no life without water, and to be apart of delivering safe water to millions ofpeople is a rewarding and noble profession.

What do you do when you’re not working? I serve as the chair of the board of trustees

at my church, and that job, at times, is morechallenging than any other. Scrapbooking ismy favorite hobby, and being Jackie Torbert,mother of Candice and Michael Torbert, ispretty awesome also. ��

FWRJ READER PROFILE


There is emerging recognition that is-sues such as sea level change and cli-mate variability must be considered as

a part of integrated water resource planning.Water managers often face decisions in whichthe ramifications of their actions may not befully understood until further in the future.Issues such as growth, deteriorating infra-structure, or regulatory mandates often dic-tate a timetable for decisions that compelleaders to make prudent and timely decisionsin spite of uncertainty and risk. Decisiontools that provide the ability to assess the im-pact of sea level change and climate variabil-ity on water supplies help quantify the riskprofile of a utility’s asset portfolio over time.This capability is crucial in ensuring that op-timal strategic choices are made in water sup-ply planning.

This article summarizes development ofthe Peace River Operations Platform Assess-ment Tool (PRO-PAT), a powerful decisiontool that combines the ability to explore thebenefit of future capital projects, determinethe effectiveness of operational strategies, andassess potential impacts of climatic shifts onsystem reliability into one unified model.

The Peace River Facility

The Peace River Facility was originallyconstructed in the late 1970s, and after a num-ber of expansion projects over the past 15years, now consists of two offstream raw waterstorage reservoirs totaling 6.5 bil gal (BG) ofcapacity, 21 Aquifer Storage and Recovery(ASR) wells, and a 48-mil-gal-per-day (mgd)capacity conventional surface water treatmentplant. Figure 1 presents an aerial photographof these facilities. The Peace River Facility is lo-cated on the northern bank of the Peace Riverapproximately 11 river mi east of Interstate75and almost 40 river mi from the Gulf of Mex-ico at Boca Grande Pass. Although it wouldtake over an hour by car to reach the beach atBoca Grande from the river intake, the riverintake pump station is located just above sealevel. The water level at the river intake isgreatly influenced by tide, and during dry pe-riods, this can lead to elevated salinity levels inthe river.

The Authority’s water use permit (WUP)allows withdrawals from the river based upona moving, seasonal percentage of the collectiveflow measured from three U.S. Geological Sur-vey (USGS) stream flow gauges: the Peace

River at Arcadia; Horse Creek, near Arcadia;and Joshua Creek, near Nocatee. The Author-ity’s WUP prohibits diversion of any riverwater when the flow is less than 130 cu ft persecond (cfs). This extremely protective provi-sion prohibits river diversion when flows arenaturally low as a measure to protect the com-plex downstream ecosystem in Charlotte Har-bor. The Authority conducts extensivehydrobiological monitoring throughout thelower Peace River and Charlotte Harbor to col-lect data on the ecosystem. This program hasyielded a good understanding of the flow-de-pendent nature of water quality in the river.

Climate Variability Within the Context of

Water Supply Sustainability

The Earth has been in a constant state ofchange since its creation. Sea level in the pasthas been both higher and lower than presentlevels and temperatures, and rainfall patternshave historically varied as well. Anthropologistsstudying ancient cultures often point to climatevariability as a likely factor in social collapsedue to droughts and floods. Modern food stor-age techniques, global transportation networks,and sophisticated public works projects cansupport vast cities in barren, inhospitable land-scapes. However, not too long ago, disruptionsin agricultural production and/or water avail-ability could quickly lead to food shortages, so-cial unrest, and societal collapse as indigenouspeoples perished or migrated where conditionsfor subsistence were more favorable.

Mankind has only been measuring theEarth’s climate and weather patterns usingmodern scientific methods and technology for

Developing a Surface Water ResiliencyModel for the 21st Century

Kevin Morris, Mike Coates, and Mike Heyl

Kevin Morris, P.E., BCEE, CSEP, is thescience and technology officer, and MikeCoates, PG, is the deputy director of PeaceRiver Manasota Regional Water SupplyAuthority in Lakewood Ranch. Mike Heyl isthe chief environmental advisor for springsand environmental flows with SouthwestFlorida Water Management District inTampa.

F W R J

Figure 1. The Peace River Facility With Reservoirs Looking West Over the Peace River


a very short representative period in theplanet’s history. Although glacial ice cores arehelpful in quantifying conditions many thou-sands of years ago, the leap from understand-ing the past to being able to predict the futureinvolves great uncertainty. Climate-predictionmodels are incredibly complex and there isvigorous debate concerning the role that an-thropogenic activity plays in determining fu-ture climate conditions. Further complicatingmatters is political polarization of the climatechange issue and powerful special intereststhat stand to profit handsomely from result-ing policy directives and mandates.

Water managers may be well advised tosteer clear of the highly polarized debate andsimply ensure that their organizations are con-sidering the most recent official governmentsea level and climate variability projections,and layer this guidance into their strategicplanning frameworks. Climate variability isworking its way into the public consciousness,fueled by media coverage of extreme weatherevents of the past decade, such as HurricanesKatrina in New Orleans and Sandy in theNortheast. The loss of life and property dam-age from these storms provides visceral exam-ples of the tragic risk that society faces becauseof the preference for coastal development. Un-less corrective measures are taken, as sea levelrises, the risk of flooding and inundationalong the coastlines will increase.

Other current examples are the ongoinghistoric droughts in Texas and the WesternUnited States, which have laid bare the inade-quacy of public water supplies that previouslyhad been thought sufficient. Historic flowrecords for many streams and rivers in the U.S.only date back between 50 and 100 years,which in the context of natural systems, is avery limited timeframe. An understanding ofthe variation in climate and how it affects thenation’s water supply needs may be growing,but is far from complete and reinforces thewisdom in carefully considering climate-trendprojections.

Projected Climate Variation Trends

The most definitive projections for futureclimate trends in the U.S. today are presentedin the Third National Climate Assessment(NCA), produced in 2014 by the U.S. GlobalChange Research Program. This program is

Figure 2. Projected Annual Hot Days in the Southeastern U.S. (from Third National ClimateAssessment, 2014)

Figure 3. Projected Seasonal PrecipitationChange for North America (from Third Na-

tional Climate Assessment, 2014)

Continued from page ??



steered by the National Science and Technol-ogy Council’s Committee on Environment,Natural Resources, and Sustainability, andconsists of the research arms of 13 federalagencies, including the National Aeronauticsand Space Administration (NASA), the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), theNational Science Foundation, and the U.S. de-partments of Agriculture, Defense, and En-ergy. The NCA summarizes consensus climateprojections from a regional perspective, andthis article focuses on projections for theSoutheastern U.S., and Florida in particular.

Figure 2 summarizes the number of“hot” days (i.e., days with a maximum tem-perature above 95°F) that the NCA reportstates may be expected for the 30-year periodfrom 2041 to 2070, as compared with whatwas experienced for the 30-year period from1971 to 2000. The figure reflects that, duringthe earlier period, there were less than 15 daysa year where the temperature exceeded 95°Fover most of the state. The number of thesevery hot days is expected to increase signifi-cantly by as many as 40 to 50 days per yearover most of the Florida peninsula in the fu-ture. This could bring an expectation ofhigher water demand usage rates, elevatedsurface water impoundment evaporationrates, and an increased potential for algaeblooms in raw water impoundments.

Figure 3 presents the NCA’s consensusseasonal precipitation projections expected forthe North American continent toward the endof the present century. The projections showthat increased precipitation is expected overAlaska, Canada, and many of the northernstates for winter, spring, and fall. However, theprojections indicate less overall precipitationfor all four seasons over the entire state ofFlorida. Spring and summer appear especiallytroubling for the southern part of the state,from Tampa to Melbourne southward, where20–30 percent less precipitation is predictedduring those periods.

The NCA also provides discussion aboutthe frequency and severity of tropical storms,which are expected to increase in response tohigher ocean temperatures. More intensivedownpours could result in a greater propor-tion of total precipitation finding its way torunoff with less local recharge. River andstream flows could become more variable, re-flecting increased storm intensity and higherrunoff variability. Storage elements will likelybecome a more critical focus for surface watersystem sustainability in the future.

Sea Level: Past, Present, and Future

Scientists believe that sea level, during thepeak of the last Ice Age in North America(about 22,000 years ago) was almost 400 ft

lower than present-day levels. If sea level were400 ft lower than it is now, the state of Floridawould cover almost three times more surfacearea and would be more than 300 mi wide onan east-to-west line between Tampa and Mel-bourne. Sea level fluctuates mainly in responseto global ice inventories and thermal expan-sion of ocean water. However, movements ofthe earth’s crust also affect localized apparentsea level movement and can exacerbate or off-set sea level rise. For example, parts ofLouisiana are battling the combined effects ofground-level subsidence and sea level rise,with apparent sea level rise rates three timeshigher than Florida. On the other hand, in theGulf of Alaska, as a result of Pacific plate sub-duction under North America, the groundsurface is rising faster than sea level, so the ef-fect is a localized apparent sea level decline.

Figure 4 from the NCA report shows thatsea levels have risen about 8 in. over the past200 years and are projected to continue to riseanywhere from 1 to 4 ft higher between nowand 2100. Rising sea level creates a host of nat-ural and societal concerns, including: seashoreerosion, compression of transitional ecologi-cal buffers (dune systems and salt watermarshes), heightened risk to people and prop-erty from storm surges and flooding, risk ofsalt water intrusion to groundwater supplies,and increased risk of salinity incursions uphistorically fresh rivers and streams.

Sea level rise and the potential for chang-ing climate patterns are causing emerging con-cerns for water supply managers, especially inFlorida, which is a peninsula surrounded bywater. The Authority’s intake structure, almost40 river mi from the open waters of the Gulf ofMexico, is unprotected by salinity barriers asthe river flows freely to tide. It is the flow offreshwater down the river and into CharlotteHarbor that pushes the ocean’s salinity down-stream. Clearly, sea level will impact this dy-namic relationship as saline water pushesupstream. These impacts would be strongestat lower flow levels when the forcefulness ofriver flow is relatively weak. The challenge isquantifying this impact on river water quality.

Projecting River Water QualityImpacts from Sea Level Rise

Understandably, methodologies for pro-jecting the impacts of sea level rise on waterquality within river and estuarial systems arenot well defined, since this is a relatively recentarea of concern. The approach employed inthis work was chosen because a USGS tidegauge located at the Authority’s river intakepump station provided a relevant database oftide level and water quality data. Also, the Peace

Figure 4. Sea Level: Past, Present, and Future (from Third National Climate Assessment, 2014)



River is still largely channelized in this portionof the drainage basin, and so as sea level rises,it is not projected to significantly spill out of itsbanks, which would radically alter the behaviorof fresh and saline water interfaces.

Since the Peace River flows unobstructedto tide in Charlotte Harbor, salinity intrusionfrom tidal effects can spread back upriver adistance, depending upon variables such astide, wind, and river flow conditions. As sealevel rises, the tide-related effects on riversalinity, as measured at the current river in-take, are expected to increase. The river gaugestation installed on the Authority’s river intakestructure in 2009 provides a useful record oftide level and conductivity data (conductivityhere is used as a surrogate for salinity). Thesedata have been analyzed in an effort to modeltide-level-related water quality relationshipsbased upon the fundamental underlying pre-sumption that historic tidal effects would em-ulate the impact on water quality, which wouldbe expected from a commensurate rise in sealevel at the same relative river flow.

The data were modeled using statisticalanalysis systems (SAS) to develop the waterquality prediction model that is summarizedhere in general form. This model focused onthe low river flow range between about 100and 500 cfs. It is within this relatively weakflow regime where sea level rise would befound to have the greatest impact on waterquality.

C = b~ + (b1 x Flow1) + (b2 x Flow2) +(b3 x Stage) + (b4 x (Stage/Flow))

where:C = conductivity (uS/cm)�� = specific intercept�1 = “short-term” flow slopes (linear

and/or nonlinear)�2 = “long-term” flow slopes (linear

and/or nonlinear)�3 = gage height specific slope �4 = gage height/flow interaction spe-

cific slope

The model was then applied to verticalsea level rise projections from the 2013 Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change(IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report (AR5).Forced convergence was applied at high riverflows in recognition that the model was devel-oped for use between 100 and 500 cfs, and thatat extreme flows, the saline interface would bepushed well downstream in all scenarios. Themodel results and scenarios were then consol-idated into a baseline condition reflective ofcurrent conditions, and then five progressively

Figure 6. Mass Balance Schematic for 2 Reservoir System

Figure 5. Sea Level Rise Scenarios for Total Dissolved Solids as a Function of River Flow



worse sea level rise (SLR) scenarios. The worst-case scenario, SLR Case 5, correlates roughlyto the IPCC’s worse-case scenario of 25 in. ofsea level rise by 2075. The resulting river flow-salinity relationships developed for these casesare illustrated in Figure 5. The conversionfrom measures of conductivity to total dis-solved solids (TDS) was based upon a ratio of0.69 micro mhos per cm for each 1 mg per literof TDS.

Peace River Operations Platform Assessment Tool Model

The Authority has employed reliabilitymodeling as a decision tool since its inceptionand reliability projections have guided eachmajor capital expansion project. Early reliabil-ity models focused solely on ensuring that therewould be adequate reserves available to meetcustomer demands without regard to quality.Authority reliability models have grown suc-cessively more sophisticated as computer hard-ware and software has evolved and asprogrammer skill has increased. Also impor-tantly, over time, additional operational datahave been gathered that refine the understand-

ing of ASR system performance, which can bequite a challenging application to model.

Driven by the desire to understand possi-ble impacts from a sustainability perspective,Authority staff developed PRO-PAT. Thismodel is developed in a Microsoft Excel 2010workbook, with most content on a singleworksheet using about 600 columns and16,000 rows. The resulting workbook is ap-proximately 200 megabytes in size and containsover 200 charts and 4,000 statistics. A deter-ministic model, PRO-PAT is based on riverflow and rainfall for the 38-year period ofrecord from 1975 to 2013. The model is funda-mentally tied to the conservation of mass forboth solvent (water) and solute—in this case,TDS. The TDS is a secondary drinking waterparameter, which means it is associated withaesthetic rather than health concerns. The TDShas a maximum contaminant limit of 500mg/L and has historically been the parameterof greatest concern for the Authority. However,a similar approach could be used for other con-servative, nonreactive solutes of interest suchas sodium, chloride, or sulfate.

Figure 6 presents an illustration of thePeace River Facility system, with the existingtwo raw water reservoirs and a supplemental

groundwater-based reverse osmosis (RO)module. In this configuration, ASR recoverywater is directed back to Reservoir No. 2. Thefigure identifies all of the major variables(flow, volume, and concentration) betweeneach functional block. These variables areused to derive the mass balance equations forthe system, which ultimately predict the fin-ished water TDS on a daily basis. Since this isa daily model, it is helpful to use nomenclaturesuch as At and At+1 to represent the value ofvariable A at the beginning of the day and endof the day, respectively.

Quantity reliability is determined by con-sidering the number of days during which thesystem failed to fully meet the specified levelof demands, divided by the total number ofdays in the model sequence. Quality reliabilityis determined by the number of days duringwhich the finished water failed to meet the 500mg/L secondary drinking water limit for TDSor failed to meet demands, divided by the totalnumber of days in the model sequence. Qual-ity reliability will always be lower than quan-tity reliability under the logic that the qualityof the water doesn’t matter if there is notenough to meet customer needs.

PRO-PAT Model Input Variables

The model includes 109 variables, ofwhich 49 are operational variables and the re-maining 60 are focused on climate variability.Each model run is actually six runs in parallel:the baseline condition, as well as the five pro-gressively more severe SLR scenarios. The pe-riod used to drive the model is the 38-yearperiod from 1975 to 2013. This includes thedaily historic flow records for Joshua Creek,Horse Creek, and the Peace River, as well as thelocal monthly rainfall and evaporation recordsfor the same period. The monthly rainfall datacome from the composite seven-county aver-age for Charlotte, DeSoto, Hardee, Highlands,Manatee, Polk, and Sarasota counties. Theevaporation data come from a station locatedat Lake Okeechobee, operated by the SouthFlorida Water Management District, and hasbeen adjusted from pan evaporation data tosimulate lake evaporation. Monthly rainfalland evaporation totals are divided by thenumber of days per month to derive a dailyrate for the model.

The 49 operational variables include basicdimensional parameters such as river diver-sion pump capacity and reservoir volume, aswell as the programmed starting conditionsfor each. The operational variables also in-clude codification of the operational con-structs used to govern how the facilities aremanaged. For example, there are trigger set

Figure 7. Sample of Mass Balance Equations for 2 Reservoir System

Figure 8. User Interface Design



points that tell the model when to initiate ASRrecovery and recharge at what flow rate. An-other way of looking at operational constructsis to view them as the “rules of the game.” Theprocess of discussing and evaluating each ofthese decision points is enlightening. It is crit-ical to understand the triggers for when andwhy an organization makes its water-resourcedecisions in order to be able to then code themas logical statements in a model.

The 60 climate-related variables providethe modeler the ability to vary historic rain-fall, evaporation, and stream flow for the threestreams that comprise the aggregate flow basisfor the WUP on a monthly basis. These vari-ables are set up as a forcing function and areoriginally set to 100 percent, but can bechanged upward or downward as appropriateto evaluate contemplated effects of wetter ordrier conditions.

Mass Balance Equations

In this model, each reservoir is assumedto be fully mixed and homogenous. Themodel moves sequentially through the sub-systems, solving for volume and flow, begin-ning with customer demands and workingback towards the river. Once all flows and vol-umes are known, concentrations can then becalculated, but this time starting at the riverand working back towards the customer. Massbalance relationships expressed over time arelike a journey: where it ends depends on whereit starts, how fast the travel is, and for howlong. The basic TDS continuity equation foran open system with conservation of mass canbe expressed as:

where: TDSt = concentration at the beginning of

the dayTDSt+1 = concentration at the end of the

dayVt = system volume at the beginning of

the dayQi = any flow into or out of the system

(flows into the system would have apositive sign, whereas flows out of thesystem would have a negative sign)

TDSi = the concentration of any flow Qiwhich crosses the system boundaryand is always positive in sign

n = the number of streams crossing thesystem boundary



The lengthy expression developmentsteps for the concentration at the end of theday for Reservoirs No. 1 and No. 2 are not in-cluded here for brevity. However, the finalequations for the concentration at the end ofthe day for Reservoirs No. 1 and 2, respectively,C1t+1 and C2t+1 are presented in Figure 7.

Time Well Spent: Design of the User Interface

This moderately complex model has over100 input variables and each model run yieldssix simultaneous scenario results. Simply put,the workspace, at nearly 600 columns wideand 16,000 rows long, is enormous. A greatamount of time was devoted to planning theworkspace and developing an interface panelthat included all variables, as well as the sum-mary results for the six scenarios. The resulting

interface panel is 42 columns wide by 24 rowshigh and includes a graph of the quantity andquality reliability findings for the model run.The design makes it possible for modelers tonever have to need to leave this interface panelunless they wish to scroll down or over to ex-plore some of the individual embedded graphsor statistics. Figure 8 includes a screenshot ofthe PRO-PAT main user interface panel. Awell-designed interface panel allows modelersto focus their energy and attention on scenarioanalysis, reduces wasted time, and cuts downon mistakes.

Model Runs With and Without Temperature, Rainfall,

or Stream Flow Variation

Figure 9 presents reliability results for thebase condition model run without tempera-ture, rainfall, or stream flow variation; note

that sea level rise is not projected to have anyimpact at all on quantity reliability throughSLR 4. For the worst-case SLR scenario, SLRCase 5, quantity reliability was still greaterthan 98 percent. The quality reliability valuestell a slightly different story; the effects of sealevel rise are evident with each scenario fallingto as low as 84.8 percent for SLR Case 5, butagain, this is the worst-case scenario for over50 years into the future, assuming no im-provements are implemented.

Next, the climate forcing function vari-ables are used to reduce stream flow and rain-fall from April–September, from 100 percentdown to 85 percent. The evaporation was alsoincreased due to the projected hotter condi-tions from 100 to 115 percent over the sametimeframe. Figure 10 presents reliability resultsfor the base condition model run with theseclimate variation changes. Overall quantity re-liability values have fallen by about 0.4 percentacross the full range of SLR scenarios as com-pared with the model run prior to imple-menting the climate variability changes.Quality reliability was also reduced as com-pared with the value presented in the priorsection, and ranged from 0.5 percent less reli-ability for the baseline condition to 3 percentlower for the worse-case sea level rise scenarioat just 81.7 percent. This exercise demonstrateshow the model can be used to quickly assessthe effects of climate variability.

Exploring Adaptation Management Strategies

Adaptation management strategies are ap-proaches that can help a utility overcome theeffects of future sea level rise and climate vari-ability. Two strategies are explored here: addingmore raw water storage, and adding a supple-mental source of supply. Figure 11 presents thereliability results obtained if 6 BG of additionalraw water storage were added, along with anadditional 80 mgd of river diversion pumpingcapability. This strategy results in 100 percentquantity reliability for all scenarios, even theworst-case SLR Case 5 scenario. Quality relia-bility is also much improved, increasing for allscenarios and almost reaching 94 percent forthe worst-case SLR Case 5 scenario.

Now, instead of adding additional rawwater storage, consider a strategy consisting ofadding a supplemental source of supply in theform of a brackish groundwater RO source.Using the PRO-PAT model an RO module canbe programmed with a maximum productivecapacity of 6 mgd running at a base produc-tion rate of 3.5 mgd. The model includes atrigger point for when the RO module shouldbe compelled to ramp up from the base pro-

Figure 9. Base Model Results Without Temperature, Rainfall, and Stream Flow Variation

Figure 10. Base Model With Temperature, Rainfall, and Stream Flow Variation



duction rate to maximum capacity. This strat-egy has a double benefit: it not only offsets asupply need from surface waters, but also ben-eficially dilutes the finished water leaving thefacility.

That ramp-up trigger was set at 4 BG ofraw water storage for these runs. Figure 12presents the results. One of the first observa-tions is that the run achieved 100 percentquantity reliability for all except the worst-caseSLR Case 5 scenario, which had 99.46 percentreliability, although that is still very good. Thequality reliability values were generally a bitlower than the storage-based example, withthe exception of the worst-case SLR Case 5scenario where there was an almost 2 percentimprovement in reliability over the storage-based solution.

Conclusions

Water supply managers face significantchallenges from future climate-related uncer-tainties. Decision tools can play an importantsupporting role in placing prospective risksinto comparative context, as well as helpingguide industry leaders in making difficult de-cisions. Climate-prediction science is complexand evolving, and the ultimate role that an-thropogenic factors play in determining futureclimate conditions is still being debated. How-ever, few would dispute that the Earth has al-ways been in a state of change, and recentextreme weather events support the hypothe-sis that there is a great deal more variability inweather and climate patterns than previouslyunderstood.

In the future, projections show thatFlorida can expect hotter, drier conditionsthan in the past. Storms and rainfall events arelikely to be more extreme and sea level is pro-jected to rise from 1 to 4 ft above present lev-els by 2100. The Authority’s development ofthe PRO-PAT toolset gives it the ability togauge its water supply asset portfolio within asustainability context and gives it a tool withwhich to explore selected adaptation manage-ment strategies. The utility’s storage-depen-dent design concept is well suited to futureclimate variability, and little impact from sealevel rise is projected before 2075. The modeldemonstrates the viability of adaptive man-agement strategies, such as adding raw waterstorage or a supplemental groundwater source.Either of these strategies would handily pro-vide the Authority the capability to overcomeany loss in reliability as a result of climate vari-ation and sea level rise in this century.

The PRO-PAT model only generates relia-bility data and cannot replace the value of a ro-bust engineering cost-benefit analysis of

alternatives or the value of a diversified portfo-lio of sources in furthering water supply systemresiliency. There are many other plausible adap-tation management strategies, such as relocat-ing the river intake pumps further upstream;however, the space allowed here does not affordthe opportunity for an exhaustive review of allpossible alternatives. Finally, climate variabilityprojections are not a precise science and pro-jections are constantly being revised and up-dated. Utilities need to be prepared to updateand calibrate their decision tools frequently toreflect the latest techniques and projections toensure that their strategic planning frameworkreflects the latest guidance.

Acknowledgements

The origins of the PRO-PAT model canbe traced to early work by staff at the South-

west Florida Water Management Districtwho developed a spreadsheet-driven flow en-gine that converted historic stream flow intoavailable diversion quantities and projectedAuthority usage of the resource, includinginterplay of ASR operations. Ralph Mont-gomery with Atkins provided valuable guid-ance on sea level rise scenarios and thepotential for water quality changes. PeteLarkin and Ryan Messer of CH2M HILL, andMark McNeal of ASRUS Inc., provided guid-ance on ASR recovery water quality model-ing. Lastly, the authors would like torecognize the many scientists, professionaleducators, utility representatives, and gov-ernment agency participants with theFlorida Water and Climate Alliance(www.floridawca.org) for their support infurthering the knowledge base in this im-portant area. ��

Figure 11. Adaptation Management Strategy 1: Additional Raw Water Storage

Figure 12. Adaptation Management Strategy 2: A Brackish Water Reverse Osmosis Module


Do you dream? I mean, do you con-sciously think about what can be thatisn't? Look around you. Look at all of

the neat things that surround us each andevery day. How many things do you just takefor granted that a century, half a century, oreven a decade ago didn’t exist?

Now, you could be thinking I'm only re-ferring to inventions. There certainly aremany inventions we use every day, but somany "new" things aren't just inventions.

How about people? Were you around ahundred years ago? Fifty years to a couple ofdecades might be more like it. In August, I at-tended a 90th birthday celebration for one ofour Florida Section's living legends: Dr. Ed-ward Singley. What a treat! Dr. Singley servedas our section's chair and then as the AWWApresident. In the water field he has taught, in-vented, led, and most importantly, inspiredothers. What a life he has lived! Oh, did I sayhe's also a golfer?

Numerous advances in water treatmentproviding safe drinking water started with thebirth of AWWA in 1881 by 22 men—and theyhaven’t stopped since. People like Dr. Singleybuilt on that foundation established before him,and we continue to build on it to supply safedrinking water to hundreds of millions of ourcustomers 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

The common factor in all of these im-provements is that people, like you and me,saw a need and made dreams a reality.Dreams, inspiration, and people make a won-derful combination. If you’re reading this, youhave at least a third of that combination rightnow!

I recently returned from the AWWAsummer workshop in Denver. The guestspeaker was a young man named Chad Pre-gracke. I listened to his story and just had tobuy his book, From the Bottom Up: One Man'sCrusade to Clean America's Rivers. He grew upon the Mississippi River and joined his olderbrother clam diving at age 15. For the nextseven years, everywhere he went along theriver was filthy with tires, plastic bottles, steeldrums, and even bowling balls!

He decided to clean up the MississippiRiver. Employees of his nonprofit company,Living Lands and Waters, and more than70,000 volunteers collected 67,000 tires, 1000refrigerators, 218 washing machines, 19 trac-tors, and 4 pianos that were among thousandsof tons of refuse, in the organization’s first 15years. He has now been at it for 17 years, ex-panding his reach by working along the Ohio,Missouri, and Potomac rivers, among manyothers.

Pregracke writes in the appendix of hisbook: "Set high goals, but realize that the big-ger the goal, the more persistence, dedication,focus, and sacrifice it will take to achieve it.Big goals are accomplished only by takingsmall steps, and it starts with a single, smallaction."

Dr. Singley, Chad Pregracke, you, andme—we all have the gift of life; along with itcome opportunities. There are many dreamsstill available out there. Go find yours!

As the American musician Jamie Gracesings: “Do Life Big.” ��

Carl R. Larrabee Jr.Chair, FSAWWA

Big Dreams and Big Goals: We Have a Big Job to Do!

FSAWWA SPEAKING OUT


Earn CEUs by answering questions from previous Journal issues!

Contact FWPCOA at [email protected] or at 561-840-0340. Articles from past issues can be viewed on the Journal website, www.fwrj.com.

Members of the Florida Water &Pollution Control Association (FWPCOA)may earn continuing education unitsthrough the CEU Challenge! Answer thequestions published on this page, basedon the technical articles in this month’sissue. Circle the letter of each correctanswer. There is only one correctanswer to each question! Answer 80percent of the questions on any articlecorrectly to earn 0.1 CEU for yourlicense. Retests are available.

This month’s editorial theme isEmerging Issues and WaterResources Management. Look aboveeach set of questions to see if it is forwater operators (DW), distributionsystem operators (DS), or wastewateroperators (WW). Mail the completedpage (or a photocopy) to: FloridaEnvironmental Professionals Training,P.O. Box 33119, Palm Beach Gardens,FL 33420-3119. Enclose $15 for eachset of questions you choose to answer(make checks payable to FWPCOA). YouMUST be an FWPCOA member beforeyou can submit your answers!

___________________________________________SUBSCRIBER NAME (please print)

Article 1 ________________________________________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)

1. The primary intended purpose for glycerol addition was toa. enhance settling.b. directly oxidize nutrient compounds.c. increase dissolved oxygen.d. provide a supplemental carbon source.

2. The initial phosphorus removal study for this facility recommended theaddition of ____________________, which began in October 2009.a. limeb. alumc. polymerd. sodium hexametaphosphate

3. Five-stage Bardenpho process literature typically references a _____ ratio of25 for proper operation.a. C:Pb. BOD:Pc. N:Pd. O:P

4. Which of the following is not identified as a potential supplemental sourceof volatile fatty acid or carbon to support polyphosphate-accumulatingmicroorganisms (PAO) enrichment?a. Acetic acidb. Acetatec. Aecondary sludge overflowd. Propionic/acetic acid mixture

5. In the regional profile taken on June 26, 2016, which of the followingconstituents increased in concentration between anoxic 1 zone effluent andaerobic zone effluent?a. Nitrate-nitriteb. Total phosphorusc. Ammonia nitrogend. Ortho phosphate

City of Daytona Beach Utilizes Glycerol in a Unique Application for Enhanced

Biological Phosphorus Removal

Gary R. Johnson, Christopher J. Wall, Robert Terpstra, Tami Minigh, and Michael Saunders

(Article 1: CEU = 0.1 WW)

Operators: Take the CEU Challenge!


Kevin Vickers and Ted Long

The Sam P. Robinson Reclaimed WaterTreatment Plant is located in centralPolk County. A summary of the plant

processes is included in Figure 1. The facil-ity has a permitted capacity of 2.19 mgd (av-erage daily flow) and currently operates at0.996 mgd, or 45 percent of capacity. Thebasis of biological treatment is a 1.86 mil gal(MG) lakeside oxidation ditch. Effluent dis-posal is through public access reuse and aseven-cell rapid infiltration basin (RIB) sys-tem.

The facility underwent an expansion/up-grade in 2012 to improve nutrient removalperformance and replace aging equipment.The plant upgrades included:� Installation of new fine screen at the head-

works � Installation of two new disc rotor aerators � Replacement of the existing rotor motor as-

semblies � Installation of the Lakeside Sharp–Nutrient

Control System with dissolved oxygen(DO) and oxidation/reduction potential(ORP) probes

� Installation of variable-frequency drives forrotors

� Conversion of the existing travelling bridgesand filter to two new disc filters

� Construction of a new aerobic digester� Replacement of existing clarifier mechanisms

With the new nutrient control system andvariable-frequency drive (VFD) rotors, oper-ators can set automatic controls for the aera-tion equipment to optimize nutrient removaland minimize power consumption. Control ismaintained primarily utilizing the DO probes,which speed up or slow down the rotors tomaintain a DO set point.

Since the upgrade, the facility’s perform-ance has been excellent and considerablybelow permitted limits. Table 1 summarizesthe influent and effluent water quality. As withmany facilities, the high-quality effluent is a

direct result of the harmony between theequipment technology at the plant and a staffof very engaged operators.

Solids are removed from the process bywasting to two aerobic digesters. After the di-gesters, solids are pumped to a floccula-tion/mixing tank that utilizes polymerinjection prior to dewatering. From the floc-culation/mixing tank the solids are dewateredthrough a screw press and conveyed to a truckto be hauled to a landfill. Alternatively, the fa-cility also has two sludge drying beds availableas backup, if needed.

Kevin Vickers is an engineer with Kimley-Horn in Ocala and Ted Long is lead operator forthe City of Lake Wales Wastewater TreatmentFacility. ��

PROCESS PAGE

Greetings from the FWEA Wastewater Process Committee! This month’s column will highlight the City of Lake Wales’s Sam P. RobinsonReclaimed Water Treatment Plant. This plant took first runner-up for this year’s Earl B. Phelps award in the advanced secondary treatmentcategory. We hope that you will enjoy reading about another outstanding treatment facility and maybe learn something that can beimplemented at your facility.

Table 1. Summary of Influent and Effluent Water Quality

Figure 1. Sam P.

RobinsonReclaimed

Water Treatment

PlantProcesses


David Edward Clanton, 55,executive director of utilities for theCity of Lake City, passed away on July23 in Gainesville after a suddenillness.

Clanton worked for the city for 26years. He started his career as a shiftoperator for Brevard County in 1978.From 1979 and 1985, he was thehead operator of the West MelbourneWastewater Treatment Plant. After acouple of years in private industry,Clanton began working for Lake Cityin 1989, where he became thewastewater treatment plantmaintenance superintendent. In 1998,he was appointed director of thewastewater plant.

In 2000, Clanton was recognizedfor outstanding service and received

the Lake City Achievement Award. InAugust 2007, he became the executivedirector of Lake City Utilities. After abrief five-month stint as Lake City’sinterim city manager, he returned tothe executive director position, wherehe served until his retirement in March2014.

Clanton was very involved formany years with the Florida WaterPollution and Control OperatorsAssociation (FWPCOA) and wasserving as its secretary/treasurer-elect.

Born in Melbourne on Jan. 20,1959, he had lived in Lake City for thepast 32 years. He is survived by hiswife, Peggy; sons Grange Coffin,Matthew Coffin, and Tyler Clanton;daughter Jennifer Sandell; brotherTerry; and eight grandchildren. ��

David Edward Clanton1959-2014

~ IN MEMORIAM ~


Ihope you all had a fun,safe, and productivesummer.

I want to remind you that the FWPCOA Online Institute offers continuingeducation courses for water and wastewatertreatment plant operators and water distribu-tion operator license renewal that can be con-veniently completed at your home or officecomputer. The tuition fee is only $15 per con-tact hour (0.1 CEU).

Wastewater treatment plant operatorsshould look for course numbers with the“WW” prefix, water treatment operatorsshould look for the “DW” prefix, and waterdistribution system operators should look forthe “DS” prefix. Keep track of your continuingeducation courses, as you can’t take the samecourse for continuing education credit duringback-to-back license renewal cycles.

Simply enroll in a course of your choos-

ing, view the course presentation, pass a shortend-of-course exam, and print the coursecompletion certificate for your records. TheAssociation will file your CEUs with theFlorida Department of Environmental Protec-tion (FDEP)—it’s that easy!

The FWPCOA training office address hasbeen changed to:

FWPCOA Training Office4401 S. Hopkins Ave., Suite 108

Titusville, FL 32780-6679

Please update your records. And speakingof mailing addresses, during the last licensing re-newal cycle, many operators didn’t receive theirrenewal notice due to incorrect addresses. Pleaseverify your mailing address with us and updateit if needed. It is the responsibility of each indi-vidual operator to notify our office of your cur-rent mailing address. A change of address can’t

be done over the phone; you need to complete achange of address form, and then fax or mail itto the address provided on the form.

The Florida Legislature has passed an actthat requires the FDEP to conduct a compre-hensive study and submit a report on the ex-pansion of the beneficial use of reclaimedwater, stormwater, and excess surface water inthe state. The FDEP is further directed to co-ordinate with various stakeholders. The reportmust, among other things, identify measuresthat would lead to more efficient use of re-claimed water. Permit incentives, including ex-tended terms, must also be addressed.

The next board of directors meeting willbe held October 26 at the Jupiter Beach Resortin Jupiter. The Education meeting will be heldthe day before on October 25, at 3:00 p.m.

I hope to see you there! ��

Jeff PoteetPresident, FWPCOA

This and That

C FACTOR


In 1997, Orange County Utilities (OCU)implemented a reuse feasibility study(RFS) in support of expanding the waste-

water treatment system capacity at its North-west Water Reclamation Facility (NWRF)from 3.5 to 7.5 mil gal per day (mgd) annualaverage daily flow (AADF). The reclaimedwater management system at the NWRF atthat time consisted of 13 rapid infiltrationbasins (RIBs) with a permitted capacity of4.5 mgd AADF. The results of the 1997 studyidentified augmenting Lake Marden, an iso-lated karst lake located wholly within thelimits of the NWRF property, as the pre-ferred reclaimed water management expan-sion alternative. This alternative not onlyserved to increase the reclaimed water man-agement capacity of the NWRF, but it alsoserved to recharge the underlying Floridanaquifer, thereby offsetting potential changesin groundwater levels due to regional pump-ing.

Implementation was begun by OCU ofthe recommendations from the 1997 RFS,and the Lake Marden system was permittedthrough the Florida Department of Environ-mental Protection (FDEP) in 2003 at an op-erational capacity of 3 mgd AADF. The LakeMarden project has been included in thegroundwater flow modeling used in supportof past OCU consumptive use permits asbeneficial recharge that offsets potentialchanges in groundwater levels that may resultfrom regional groundwater withdrawals.

In 2005, OCU completed constructionand began operation of the Lake Mardentreatment wetland and lake augmentationsystem at the NWRF. This system consists ofapproximately 67 acres of constructed wet-lands used to further reduce nutrients in thereclaimed water produced at the NWRF priorto the direct augmentation of Lake Marden.From 2005 through 2008, flow to the wet-lands was gradually increased to its permit-ted capacity of 3 mgd AADF, and flow, waterlevel, and water quality data were closelymonitored to ensure compliance with per-mitted and hydrologic limitations of the sys-tem. Based on field data, the system operatedsatisfactorily at its permitted capacity duringthis time.

In 2008, FDEP issued OCU a temporary(24-month) authorization to increase theloading of the Lake Marden wetlands abovethe permit limit of 3 mgd AADF, up to ap-proximately 3.5 mgd AADF. The intent of theLake Marden rerating study was to empiri-cally determine the capacity of the Lake Mar-den augmentation system using operationaldata (e.g., flow, water level, and water qual-ity) collected from 2005 through 2010. Thisevaluation had several key components asfollows:� An evaluation of the quantity of seepage

occurring from the treatment wetlands.� Estimation of the increase in Upper Flori-

dan aquifer (UFA) potentiometric surfaceresulting from increased recharge throughLake Marden (a karst lake feature).

� Development of a continuous simulationmodel to determine the maximum poten-tial capacity of the system that would notcause adverse impacts near the NWRF.

� An evaluation of the potential nitrate con-centrations that would be anticipated fromthe treatment wetland discharge structureonce the NWRF was at its full permittedoperational capacity of 7.5 mgd AADF.

The analyses performed as part of thererating study indicated that the Lake Mar-den system had been adequately functioning(quantity and quality) at its existing permit-ted capacity of 3 mgd AADF, and would con-tinue to successfully operate at a higherrecharge rate of 3.5 mgd under a wide arrayof climatic and operating conditions. Basedon these analyses, OCU requested to increasethe permitted capacity of the Lake Mardensystem with FDEP. In 2013, FDEP issued apermit to increase the capacity of the LakeMarden system from 3 to 3.5 mgd AADF,thereby increasing the reclaimed water man-agement capacity at the NWRF and rechargeto the underlying UFA in the area.

Lake Marden Wetland System

Reclaimed water from the NWRF is dis-charged into the Lake Marden treatment wet-land system. As previously discussed, the LakeMarden wetland system was constructed to

provide additional nutrient removal beforereclaimed water is discharged into the lake.The treatment wetlands have a wetted area ofapproximately 67 acres and consist of threepairs of cascading cells (six total cells). Thewetlands are encompassed by an exteriorberm that contains a bentonite slurry wall toreduce the potential for seepage from thewetland. This was necessary because the wet-land is located at the top of a sandy hill lo-cated in the karst region of central Florida.Stages within the wetland cells were con-trolled at higher elevations than the ground-water/surface water levels present in the areaprior to construction of the wetland. Thegroundwater flow modeling results submit-ted to FDEP in support of the original per-mit application indicated that up to 0.3 mgdAADF of seepage from the wetlands laterallyinto the adjacent surficial aquifer system(SAS) and vertically to the underlying UFAwould occur as a result of implementation ofthe project.

The first step taken in determining theoperational capacity of the Lake Mardenproject was to estimate the seepage occurringfrom the wetland system. This was necessaryfor two reasons:1) To determine the total capacity of the Lake

Marden project, not just the amount ofwater discharged directly to the lake fromthe wetlands.

2) To allow the project biologists to properlydesign future planting schedules in sup-port of maintenance of the wetland sys-tem.

Lake Marden Augmentation CapacityRerating: A Water Resources Success!

Brian J. Megic, Mark C. Ikeler, Mark L. Johnston, and Jackie Martin

Brian J. Megic, P.E., is lead engineer withLiquid Solutions Group LLC in Orlando.Mark C. Ikeler, P.E., is project managerwith Orange County Utilities in Orlando.Mark L. Johnston is senior environmentalscientist with Parsons Brinckerhoff inOrlando. Jackie Martin, E.I., is hydrologistIII with St. Johns River Water ManagementDistrict in Palatka.

F W R J


To determine the potential seepage fromthe wetland system, a water balance approachwas implemented. The water balance for thewetland system was based on the continuityequation as follows:

∑ Inputs + ∑ Outputs = Δ Storage

The above equation was expanded as fol-lows:

P + RWin – ET – RWout – Seep = Δ Storage

where:

P = Precipitation within the footprint ofwetland

RWin = Observed discharge from theNWRF into the wetland

ET = Evapotranspiration (ET) withinthe footprint of the wetland(based on literature values)

RWout = Observed wetland discharge toLake Marden

Seep = Wetland seepageΔ Storage = Change in storage

within the wetland

The above equation was calculated interms of mil gal (MG) for each daily timestep.

Seepage from the wetlands was calcu-lated as follows:

Seep = P + RWin – ET – RWout – Δ Storage

Each wetland cell is controlled by a dis-charge structure similar to a typical ditch bot-tom inlet used in stormwater design. Boardsare used within the discharge structures tocontrol the water elevation of the wetlands.The NWRF operators have the ability to con-trol the water elevation of the wetlands in re-sponse to climatic conditions, wetlandmaintenance, and various other operationalfactors. The change in storage or volumewithin the wetland on any given day was basedon the historical stage and stage-storage rela-tionship within each cell.

The water balance was performed on adaily basis from Jan. 1, 2005, through Aug. 31,2011. Seepage was calculated on a daily,monthly, and annual basis. Calculated wetlandseepage turned out to be highly variable on adaily, and even monthly, increment. As such,it was elected to base seepage on the annual av-erage rates, which were calculated based on thedaily water budget.

The average calculated seepage rate forthe Lake Marden wetlands was 0.34 mgdAADF. These results are in reasonable agree-

ment with the original estimate of 0.3 mgdAADF determined using the groundwater flowmodeling performed in support of the per-mitting and design of the project.

Lake Marden Capacity

The next step in this analysis was to de-termine the seepage capacity of Lake Marden.Reclaimed water that is discharged from thetreatment wetlands to the lake is collected andstored within the depressional area associatedwith it. This depressional area is a karst featurewith high leakance characteristics. Waterstored in the lake recharges the UFA via dif-fuse leakance through the Intermediate Con-fining Unit (ICU), also referred to as theHawthorn Formation, at the sinkhole featurethat created Lake Marden. This results in bothan increase in lake stage and UFA potentio-metric surface elevation.

Lake Marden stage and the underlyingUFA potentiometric surface had an equilib-rium relationship before the project was im-plemented and will reach a new equilibriumrelationship for a specific recharge rate. Theintent of this portion of the study was to at-tempt to identify that relationship and deter-mine what recharge rate will not result inunacceptable affects from the increase in waterlevels associated with the project.

Water Balance ApproachA water balance approach similar to that

used for the analysis of average wetland seep-

age was used to determine the actual capacityof Lake Marden. The continuity equation pre-viously discussed was expanded to assess lakeseepage capacity as follows:

P + RO + SAS + RIBs + RWout – ET – QL = ΔStorage

where:P = PrecipitationRO = Stormwater runoff contributing to

Lake MardenSAS = Lateral groundwater seepage from

the SAS into Lake MardenRIBs = RIB flow contribution to Lake

MardenRWout = Wetland discharge to Lake MardenET = EvapotranspirationQL = Diffuse leakage from Lake Marden

to the underlying UFAΔ Storage = Change in storage

within Lake Marden

The above equation was calculated interms of MG for each daily time step.

PrecipitationDirect precipitation on Lake Marden was

based on the same rainfall series used for thetreatment wetland water balance.

RunoffStormwater runoff contributing to Lake

Marden resulting from rainfall on upland

Figure 1. Model Calibration: Observed and Predicted Lake Marden Stage Versus Time



areas surrounding the lake was calculatedusing the Soil Conservation Service (SCS)method. Pervious and impervious area esti-mates were obtained from the original Envi-ronmental Resource Permit (ERP) applicationsubmitted to FDEP in support of the lake proj-ect.

Surficial Aquifer System SeepageLateral seepage from the SAS to Lake

Marden is a component of the water balanceof the lake. The Dupuit-Forchheimer formulawas used as an approximation in the continu-ous simulation model to estimate lateralgroundwater seepage to the lake.

Rapid Infiltration Basins This parameter is an estimate of the

quantity of reclaimed water applied to RIBsthat percolates into the SAS groundwater sys-tem and contributes flow to the lake.

Wetland Discharge to Lake MardenThe volume of water conveyed from the

treatment wetland to the lake was based onmetered data.

EvapotranspirationEvapotranspiration rates were based on

literature values and were applied to the wet-ted area of the lake based on the historicalstage and stage-storage relationship.

LeakanceLeakance from the lake to the underlying

UFA was based on the following equation:

QL = L x (StageLM – UFApot)

where:L = Leakance (MG/ft)StageLM = Lake Marden stage (ft)UFApot = UFA potentiometric surface (ft)

The UFA potentiometric surface wasbased on historical data collected from on-siteUFA monitoring well MW-2. The stage ofLake Marden was calculated as part of thewater balance model. The leakance term wasused as a calibration parameter.

CalibrationThe water balance model was calibrated

based on lake stage data from Jan. 1, 1993,through Aug. 31, 2011. Calibration wasachieved by adjusting the following parameters:� SCS curve number (CN) II used in the cal-

culation of stormwater runoff.� SAS hydraulic conductivity (held within

reasonable ranges derived from numericalgroundwater flow models of the area).

� Lateral groundwater seepage (including thecontribution from RIB flow).

� ICU leakance.

An iterative calibration process was im-plemented and an uncertainty analysis wasperformed to identify the best combination ofthese parameters. The calibration results of thelake water balance model are presented in Fig-ures 1 and 2. Model error ranged between -3.3ft and 3.6 ft, with an average error of 0.02 ft.The absolute error and root mean square errorwere 0.38 ft and 0.96 ft, respectively.

SimulationsOnce the lake water balance model was

calibrated, it was used to perform predictivesimulations. The following changes were madeto the model:� Watershed information was updated to

postdevelopment conditions (e.g., totalacreage, impervious acreage, etc.) for theentire simulation.

� The historical UFA potentiometric surfacedata series used in the calibration simula-tion was updated to reflect the operation ofthe lake project in the predictive simula-tions. This was done by calculating amounding factor, which for the purposes ofthis analysis, was defined as the change inUFA potentiometric surface elevation tochange in reclaimed water application atthe project. The mounding factor was esti-mated based on simple statistical evalua-tions of UFA potentiometric surfaceelevations observed in wells at the NWRFand wells far enough from the NWRF tolikely not be affected by reclaimed water ap-plication at the NWRF, and on the resultsof the numerical groundwater flow model,developed in support of the original FDEPpermit application for the project.

Based on the results of the evaluationsperformed to estimate the response in the UFApotentiometric surface resulting from rechargeassociated with the project, it was assumedthat the UFA potentiometric surface elevationbeneath the lake would increase approximately0.7 ft/mgd AADF of recharge. The moundingfactor was used to adjust the historical UFApotentiometric surface elevations used in themodel to reflect what the elevations wouldhave been if the project had operated at ahigher target capacity from 1993 to 2010. Ifthis adjustment to the UFA potentiometricsurface was not made in the future simula-tions, the UFA potentiometric surface used inthe model would be too low and would notfully include the effects of the project on theunderlying potentiometric surface. � The model was updated to automatically

calculate the following results:o Peak Lake Marden stageo Normal high Lake Marden stageo Average Lake Marden stageo Lake Marden stage resulting from a de-

sign storm event

The normal high stage was calculated asthe average of the peak stage for each yearfrom 1993 through 2010. The stage resultingfrom a design storm event was calculatedbased on information contained in the origi-nal ERP submitted in support of the project. Figure 2. Model Calibration: Observed Lake Marden Stage Versus Predicted Stage


The updated version of the model as de-scribed was then used to perform predictivesimulations.

Results

The project was originally permitted for acapacity of 3 mgd AADF. The intent of thisstudy was to determine if the capacity of thesystem could be increased above the originalpermitted capacity. This was achieved by per-forming predictive simulations with the LakeMarden water balance model to simulatehigher project loading rates, which are sum-marized in Table 1. To determine if the pre-dicted stages associated with higher loadingrates were acceptable, the critical elevationevaluation performed in support of the origi-nal ERP for the project was reviewed. Based onthis information, the evaluation submitted insupport of the ERP for the project recom-mended a critical elevation of 90 ft-NationalGeodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD).

Based on the results of the lake water bal-ance model and the constraint evaluation, arecharge capacity of 3.5 mgd AADF for thelake system (including wetland seepage), wasselected as the rerating capacity to requestfrom FDEP. A recharge capacity of 3.75 mgdwas not selected for conservatism to allowgreater freeboard between predicted peak stageand the identified constraint elevation of 90ft-NGVD. The selected recharge capacity of3.5 mgd AADF was further supported by thetemporary loading test performed in 2010,during which the system successfully func-tioned at a capacity of approximately 3.5 mgdAADF. The predicted stage in the lake associ-ated with a project loading capacity of 3.5 mgdAADF is presented in Figure 3, under the his-torical climatic conditions that occurred be-tween 1993 and 2010.

Water Quality

In addition to the hydraulic acceptancecapacity of the lake system, the quality of thewater conveyed to the lake was also evaluated.The FDEP wastewater operational permit forthe NWRF has the following limitations (per-tinent to this project) with regard to waterquality:� Reclaimed water generated at the NWRF

(e.g., plant effluent): 12 mg/L nitrate (as ni-trogen).

� Water conveyed from the lake treatmentwetland to Lake Marden: 3 mg/L nitrate (asnitrogen).

The lake treatment wetland system wasoriginally designed for a capacity of 3 mgd

AADF. As part of this effort, it is proposed toincrease the capacity of the lake system; it isnot proposed as part of this effort to increasethe size of the treatment wetlands. As such, abrief analysis was performed to determine if ahigher flow rate could be accommodatedwithin the existing footprint of the treatmentwetland.

Nitrate concentration (in mg/L) wasmeasured in the treatment wetland influentand effluent from December 2004 throughDecember 2010. The historical average nitrateconcentration in the reclaimed conveyed tothe treatment wetlands was 4.8 mg/L. The his-torical average nitrate concentration in thewater discharged from the wetlands to the lakewas 0.35 mg/L. Though the historical nitrateconcentration data were not continuous, norwere wetland influent and effluent data alwayscollected on the same days or at the same fre-quency, this summary data provides a generalindication that the wetlands removed approx-imately 93 percent (e.g., removal efficiency) ofthe nitrate in the water conveyed to the system.The nitrate removal efficiency of the wetlandsvaried between 92.0 and 96.5 percent from

2005 through 2010. The wetlands were oper-ated above their permitted capacity of 3 mgdAADF in 2009 and 2010. The resulting percentnitrate removal rates observed in those twoyears were similar to the removal rates ob-served from 2005 through 2008, during whichthe wetlands were operated near or below theirpermitted capacity.

Based on this, it appears that the treat-ment wetlands were effectively removing ni-trates from the reclaimed water conveyed tothe wetlands, even at flow rates above the per-mitted capacity of the system. However, moredetailed analyses were performed to provideadditional reasonable assurance that the wet-lands would effectively function under a widerrange of operating conditions. This is dis-cussed in more detail.

The NWRF was designed for a treatmentcapacity of 7.5 mgd AADF. It was also designedto meet a 12 mg/L nitrate concentration limi-tation. However, from 2005 through 2010, theNWRF was operated between 3.95 and 5.58mgd AADF, below the plant design capacity.Because the plant was operating below its ca-

Table 1. Lake Marden Water Balance Model Results

Figure 3. Predicted Lake Marden Stage at a 3.5 mgd AADF Operating Capacity




pacity, higher nitrate production could occurthan had been observed historically once theplant was operating at its full design capacity(depending on how the plant was operated).As such, a brief analysis was performed to de-termine potential nitrate production at theNWRF at its full design capacity and the asso-ciated treatment wetland system nitrate re-moval efficiency.

A synthetic flow series for the NWRF thatsimulates how the plant would operate on adaily basis under its full design capacity wasdeveloped. This was achieved by normalizinghistorical daily plant flows and then multiply-ing the normalized daily plant flows by the de-

sign capacity of the plant (7.5 mgd AADF). Asynthetic nitrate series was then developed tosimulate nitrate production at full design ca-pacity of the plant. This is based on the fol-lowing equation:

NO3(syn) = Q(syn) x P-NO3(avg) x NO3(norm)

where:NO3(syn) = Synthetic nitrate loading (kg)Q(syn) = Synthetic plant flow (mgd)P-NO3(avg) = Average nitrate production rate

(kg/mgd)NO3(norm) = Normalized nitrate loading

(based on observed data)

Historical nitrate concentrations werenormalized in a similar manner used to de-velop the normalized plant flow series.

An average nitrate production rate of 20.2kg/mgd was used based on historical data andoperating conditions. A synthetic nitrate dataseries based on the synthetic flow series asso-ciated with the plant design capacity of 7.5mgd AADF was developed based on this aver-age nitrate production rate. This represents thedaily nitrate concentration that might be ex-pected in reclaimed water produced at theNWRF when the plant is operating at its fulldesign capacity. This data series was then con-verted back to units of mg/L.

The next step was to develop a nitrate re-moval efficiency rate for the treatment wetlandthat could be applied to the synthetic nitrateseries calculated previously. First, an estimateof the residence time of the wetland was de-veloped. The difficulty with integrating resi-dence time into the analysis is that residencetime is constantly changing depending on thedepth at which the wetlands are operated, flowinto the wetlands, rainfall, and other parame-ters. The data exist to approximate the resi-dence time of the wetland on a daily basisusing the wetland water balance model previ-ously discussed; however, the complexity ofcalculating the daily residence time would notsignificantly improve the results of the analy-sis. Furthermore, observed nitrate data are notavailable on a daily basis, nor are the influentand effluent observed nitrate data always avail-able on the same day. As such, incorporating acalculation of daily residence time would becomplex and likely beyond the level of com-plexity required for this analysis.

Instead, an approximate daily averageresidence time was calculated based on a wet-land size of 67 acres and a typical operatingdepth of 2 ft, which are the approximate di-mensions of the wetland. This equates to awetland volume of 43.7 MG. This volume wasdivided into the daily flow rate conveyed tothe wetlands to calculate a daily residencetime. It was found that the average residencetime for the period of record was approxi-mately 19 days. The average residence time of19 days is associated with an average flow rateof 2.76 mgd AADF. In 2009 and 2010, whenthe wetlands were operated above their per-mitted capacity of 3.0 mgd AADF, the calcu-lated residence times were 18 days (3.24 mgdAADF) and 17 days (3.47 mgd AADF), re-spectively. This is not a significantly differentresidence time; therefore, 19 days was ade-quate for this analysis.

The typical residence time estimated forthis project was used to develop moving aver-age data series for the historical wetland in-

Table 2. Monthly Treatment Wetland Nitrate Removal Efficiency

Figure 4. Synthetic Treatment Wetland Influent and Effluent Nitrate Concentrations



fluent and effluent nitrate data. The 19-daymoving average influent nitrate series wasthen lagged 19 days. The daily percent re-moval efficiency was then recalculated basedon the unlagged 19-day moving average in-fluent nitrate series and the lagged 19-daymoving average effluent nitrate series. Indoing this, the average influent nitrate con-centration on any given day is compared tothe average effluent nitrate concentration thatis observed 19 days in the future (approxi-mately when the water leaves the wetland).The moving average approach was used to de-velop a continuous daily data series.

Once the new set of daily treatment wet-land percent removal efficiencies was calcu-lated, the monthly average removal efficiencieswere recalculated, as presented in Table 2.

The average monthly percent removal ef-ficiencies were applied to the synthetic nitrateseries previously developed. The synthetic ni-trate series represents the nitrate concentra-tions expected to be observed in the reclaimedwater conveyed to the wetlands when theNWRF is operating at its full design capacityof 7.5 mgd AADF.

The average reclaimed water nitrate con-centration predicted for the 7.5 mgd AADFdesign capacity of the plant was 5.4 mg/L. Thepredicted maximum daily reclaimed water ni-trate concentrations were below the regulatorylimitation of 12 mg/L. This synthetic nitrateseries was assumed to be the nitrate concen-trations in the reclaimed water conveyed to theLake Marden wetlands.

Applying the average monthly nitrate re-moval efficiencies calculated for the treatmentwetlands, the average and maximum nitrateconcentrations predicted for the wetland ef-fluent (e.g., the water conveyed to Lake Mar-den) were 0.25 mg/L and 2.58 mg/L,respectively. This is within the permit limita-tion of 3 mg/L. The predicted treatment wet-land influent and effluent nitrateconcentrations associated with a syntheticplant flow series of 7.5 mgd AADF are pre-sented in Figure 4.

Based on this analysis, it is expected thatnitrate concentrations in the treatment wet-land effluent (e.g., the water conveyed to LakeMarden) will be well within the 3 mg/L per-mit limitation under expected operating con-ditions. ��

1. Heavy metals are considered a pollutantbecause of their:

A. Color B. AppearanceC. Weight D. Toxicity

2. In which form are nutrients betterutilized by microorganisms in abiological treatment process?

A. Particulate B. SolidC. Gaseous D. Soluble

3. What is a typical return activated sludge(RAS)-to-Q ratio for an extendedaeration activated sludge process?

A. 10 to 25 percentB. 25 to 50 percentC. 1 to 2 percentD. 75 to 100 percent

4. An industrial facility has a confinedspace manhole with hazardous gas, andthe vapor density of the hazardous gaspresent is 0.92; where is this gas morelikely to be found?

A. Near the ceiling.B. Equally distributed throughout the

space.C. Near the floor.D. At this density, the gas will dissipate

immediately.

5. In what section of the 40 Code of FederalRegulations (CFR) will you find generalpretreatment regulations?

A. 408 B. 403C. 406 D. 412

6. What happens to the activity rate ofactivated sludge microorganisms as thewastewater temperature increases by10°C?

A. It triples.B. It doubles.C. It remains the same.D. It is cut in half.

7. Given the following data, calculate thecarbonaceous biochemical oxygendemand (CBOD5) in a sample ofindustrial wastewater:• Sample volume = 2 ml• Initial dissolved oxygen = 6.2 mg/L• Final dissolved oxygen = 3.9 mg/L

A. 460 mg/L B. 250 mg/LC. 345 mg/L D. 587 mg/L

8. An industrial waste facility has a totalsuspended solids (TSS) value of 1,560mg/L entering its pretreatment process,with a TSS value of 275 mg/L enteringthe sanitary sewer. Calculate the percentremoval of TSS in the pretreatmentprocess.

A. 29.3 percent B. 60.7 percentC. 25.5 percent D. 82.4 percent

9. What may be the most common factorthat a stormwater utility is based on?

A. Property valueB. Impervious areaC. Amount of annual rainfallD. Location of a water reclamation

facility

10. What does the term aliquot mean?

A. Composite sampleB. Grab sampleC. The total volume of sample.D. A portion of a sample.

Answers on page 66

Readers are welcome to submitquestions or exercises on water or wastewater treatment plantoperations for publication inCertification Boulevard. Send your question (with the answer) or your exercise (with the solution) by email [email protected], or by mail to:

Roy PelletierWastewater Project Consultant

City of Orlando Public Works DepartmentEnvironmental Services

Wastewater Division5100 L.B. McLeod Road

Orlando, FL 32811407-716-2971

Certification Boulevard

Roy Pelletier

SEND US YOURQUEST IONS

Test Your Knowledge of Emerging Issues and Industrial Applications

Check the Archives

Are you new to the water andwastewater field? Want to boostyour knowledge about topics youʼllface each day as a water/waste-water professional?

All past editions of CertificationBoulevard through the year 2000are available on the Florida WaterEnvironment Associationʼs web-site at www.fwea.org. Click the“Site Map” button on the homepage, then scroll down to the Cer-tification Boulevard Archives, lo-cated below the OperationsResearch Committee.

LOOKING FORANSWERS?


FWPCOA TRAINING CALENDAR


* Backflow recertification is also available the last day of BackflowTester or Backflow Repair Classes with the exception of Deltona

** Evening classes

*** any retest given also

SCHEDULE YOUR CLASS TODAY!

SEPTEMBER2 ........Backflow Recert ............................................Lady Lake ..............$85/115

8-11 ........Backflow Tester ..............................................St Petersburg ..........$375/405

8-12 ........Wastewater Collection C, B........................Orlando ................$225/255

8-12 ........Water Distribution Level 2 & 3 ..............Deltona ..................$275/305

22-26 ........Wastewater Collection C, B........................Deltona ..................$325/355

26 ........Backflow Tester Recert*** ..........................Deltona ..................$85/115

OCTOBER6-8 ........Backflow Repair ............................................Deltona ..................$275/305

20-23 ........Backflow Tester ..............................................Pensacola ..............$375/405


NOVEMBER3-6 ........Backflow Tester ..............................................St. Petersburg..........$375/405

3-6 ........Backflow Tester ..............................................Deltona ..................$375/405

17-21 ........Reclaimed Water Field Site Inspector ....Deltona ..................$350/380


DECEMBER1-3 ........Backflow Repair ............................................Deltona ..................$275/305

You are required to have your own calculator at state short schools

and most other courses.

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 [email protected].


Zachary Loeb

Estrogenic compounds arethe best known and studiedof all endocrine disruptors,which are chemicals that alter

hormone production or function in animalsand humans. Estrogenic compounds includenatural plant compounds (phytoestrogens);heavy metals; synthetic chemicals (synthetic es-trogen in birth control pills); persistentorganochlorine pollutants, such as polychlori-nated biphenyl (PCB) used as a cleaner in in-dustrial processes; pesticides, such asdichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT); her-bicides (Atrazine); industrial chemicals, such asnonylphenol (a byproduct of detergents); andbisphenol, which is used in polycarbonate plas-tics. For this study, natural estrogen (E2) andsynthetic estrogen (EE2) will be used as estro-genic compounds as they are ubiquitous, andvery low concentrations of these compoundscan have a very large impact on aquatic life.

Endocrine Modulators

There is a group of endocrine disruptorsthat impact endocrine modulator pathways andresult in an imbalance of hormones. Atrazinehas been shown to escalate the amount of thearomatase protein that increases the conversionof testosterone to estrogen [1]. This causes repro-ductive processes to be adversely impacted andresults in gender imbalances. Studies of FatheadMinnows, frogs, and rats have all shown adversereproductive results from exposure to Atrazine.

Impact of Estrogen Mimicker Exposure tothe Aquatic Environment

The growing body of evidence demonstratesthat endocrine-disrupting compounds (EDCs),such as estrogen and estrogen mimickers, even inconcentrations as low as 5 parts per tril (ppt), cancause potentially environmentally catastrophicresults, including male fish feminization, reducedfertility, bioaccumulation, and significant behav-ioral pattern changes that, collectively, can cause

major food chains to collapse [2]. The EDCs arepassed into the aquatic environment throughurine containing residual estrogenic compoundsfrom birth control pills and from personal careproducts. Industrial sources, including paper milleffluents containing bisphenol A (BPA) and stig-mastanol, are also not eliminated during currentwastewater treatment. It is urgent that catalyticwastewater treatment methods, such as Fe-TAML (iron–tetra-amido-macrocyclic-ligand)technology [3], be developed and deployed tocost-effectively eliminate these EDCs from theaquatic environment.

Fish Population StudiesFish were examined at sites where treated

wastewater flows into 80 rivers in 30 statesacross America [4]. Fish at these sites have con-sistently exhibited intersex tissues and reducedfertility. While this is an alarming finding, theactual risk to the environment is difficult todetermine solely based on these samples. Thisled to the performance of a lake-level study

Preventing the Global Reproductive Failure of Aquatic Life Through the

Catalytic Treatment of Endocrine-Disrupting Compounds in Municipal Wastewater

Florida Student is a 2014 Stockholm Junior Water Prize Runner-UpThe Stockholm Junior Water Prize (SJWP) is the world’s most prestigious youth award for water-related science projects submitted by high

school students. In the United States, the Water Environment Federation (WEF) and its member associations organize the national, state, and re-gional competitions.

This year, 48 state SJWP winners competed in the national contest, held June 13-14 in Herndon, Va. Zachary Loeb, a graduating seniorfrom Melbourne, Fla., was named a runner-up. For the past five years he has conducted research on endocrine-distrupting compounds and theireffects on the aquatic environment. The paper he submitted for the competition appears here.

that conclusively demonstrated a high level ofenvironment risk. Dr. Karen Kidd [2] con-ducted a study on Lake 260 of the Experimen-tal Lakes Area of Canada. Synthetic estrogenfound in birth control pills was added eachmonth at concentrations of 5 ppt. The fishpopulations of the lake were carefully moni-tored. Within three years of consistent expo-sure to the synthetic estrogen, the FatheadMinnow population collapsed; no successfulreproduction was observed. This demonstratesconclusively that the environmental risk of un-treated EDCs to the aquatic environment iscritical.

Atrazine Atrazine was selected as one of the com-

pounds to be studied for this research as it isknown to act as an endocrine disruptor. This se-lection was also made because Atrazine is so per-sistent, it is found in wastewater streams, andeven in drinking water. Approximately 800 milpounds are used in the United States each year.

Atrazine does not dissolve and degradesslowly in water, and it has been banned in Euro-pean Union (EU) countries because of the po-tential harmful effects. Figure 1 shows theAtrazine usage in pounds/sq mi across theUnited States.

Fe-TAML Advantages Over Other TreatmentMethods

Criteria for Selecting Water Treatment Methods for Research

The following four criteria were consid-ered in the selection of the water treatmentmethods to be used for further experimenta-tion. First, the water treatment method mustbe what is known as an “end of pipe” or “pol-ishing” method. This means that the methodwould be added after currently used watertreatments are applied to wastewater. By meet-ing this requirement, a water treatmentmethod can be quickly implemented byadding on to an existing wastewater treatmentfacility. The second criterion is a low- ormedium-energy requirement for the treat-ment method. If a treatment method requiresa high amount of energy, it will simply be toocostly for widescale application.

The third criterion is that the method mustnot be prone to high maintenance failure con-cerns so that it can be used in large-scale watertreatment plants. The fourth criterion is that thetreatment method must not create a new wastestream that requires disposal. As shown in table1, of all the water methods evaluated, including[5] membranes, [6] granular activated carbon, [7]

ozone, and [8] natural enzymes, the [3] Fe-TAMLmethod is the most favorable method whenmeasured against these selection criteria.


Continued on page 50 Figure 2. Chemical Structure of Fe-TAML

Table 1. Comparison of Treatment Options

Figure 1. Atrazine Use in the United States

Fe-TAMLFe-TAML was created by the Green Chem-

istry Department of Carnegie Mellon Univer-sity. When combined with hydrogen peroxideand added to wastewater, this compound canrapidly—within five minutes—eliminate estro-gen and many estrogen mimickers to belowmeasurable levels (>99 percent degradation) [3]

from the wastewater. This compound has beendescribed as “fire in water” because, like fire, itoxidizes compounds, but it does this in water atroom temperature. Figure 2 represents thechemical structure of Fe-TAML.

A sample of Fe-TAML was obtained andused on the Atrazine, EE2, and E2 for this pro-ject’s research on Medaka Fish embryonic de-velopment.

Materials and Methods

Method: Years 1-4In Year-1 investigations, it was demon-

strated that genistein isoflavonoids will impactthe rate of the embryonic development ofMedaka Fish. It showed that the exposure toisoflavonoid genistein reduced the rate of growthof the circumference of the medaka embryos by40 percent. Figure 3 shows the comparison of acontrol medaka embryo to a genistein-exposedembryo at 48 hours of development.

Year 2 monitored how genisteinisoflavonoid water treated with Fe-TAML im-pacts the embryonic development of MedakaFish. The chosen exposure concentration of theisoflavonoid genistein was 10 parts per mil(ppm). In the original genistein study [9], treat-ments with 1 ppm of genistein resulted in 72percent of male medaka (as identified by the go-nadal phenotype) having feminized secondarysex characteristics; this is shown in figure 4. Agreater than 90 percent degradation of the genis-tein by the Fe-TAML treatment would result inno observable embryonic developmental im-pact, which would support the Year-2 hypothe-sis. This project was the first to conduct thisresearch. The hypothesis was that the Fe-TAMLwould break down and eliminate theisoflavonoids and no toxic byproducts would beproduced. By comparing the appropriate con-trols, this research showed the effectiveness ofFe-TAML as a potential solution for eliminatingisoflavonoid estrogen EDCs from wastewater.

As shown in graph 1, after 72 hours, themedaka eggs exposed to the isoflavonoid solu-tion not treated by Fe-TAML grew at a 36 per-cent slower rate than the control untreatedmedaka eggs. The final results showed that after72 hours, the medaka eggs exposed toisoflavonoid solution treated by Fe-TAML grewat the equivalent rate (within 5 percent) as thecontrol untreated medaka eggs.

Year-3 research monitored how nonylphe-nol monoethoxylate (NP1EO) water treatedwith Fe-TAML impacts the embryonic develop-ment of Medaka Fish. Once again, Fe-TAMLwas able to degrade the environmentally per-sistent NP1EO. An 81 percent reduction ofNP1EO by Fe-TAML treatment was indicatedby Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry(GC-MS) concentration testing.

The NP1EO-exposed group grew signifi-cantly slower than the Fe-TAML group. Themedaka eggs exposed to the NP1EO solutionthat were not treated by Fe-TAML grew at a 31percent slower rate after 72 hours than thecontrol untreated medaka eggs. Figure 5 showsa comparison of a Fe-TAML-treated NP1EO-exposed medaka embryo with a circumferenceof 5.53 mm, versus an untreated NP1EO-ex-posed medaka embryo, with a circumferenceof 4.83 mm at hour 60.


Figure 3.

ISO No. 3, Hour 48: Genistein Attached to Filaments

Control No. 6, Hour 48: Distilled Water Only

Figure 4. Sex Characteristics

of Medaka Fish

Graph 1. Fe-TAML-Treated Growth Rate Versus Isoflavonoid Untreated Growth Rate


The final results after 72 hours showed thatthe medaka eggs exposed to the Fe-TAML-treated nonylphenol monoethoxylate solutiongrew at the same rate (within 5 percent) as con-trol untreated medaka eggs (all results with p <.05). Year 4 also focused on testing the effective-ness of Fe-TAML as a catalytic wastewater treat-ment for paper mill effluent. The methodsincluded color testing, medaka assays, and con-centration testing using U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency (EPA) Method 8270 (BBP)and EPA Method 1698 (BPA). Both estrogenicand testosterone (stigmastanol) mimics weretested. Medaka development has been shown tobe impacted by exposure to BPA and BBP [10].

The Fe-TAML treatment of the BPA, BBP,stigmastanol, and PME solutions was effectiveat eliminating any detectable impact of the EDCon the medaka eggs. No toxic byproducts weredetectable. Additionally, color testing in Plat-inum Cobalt Units (PCU) of the paper mill ef-fluent indicated a 200 percent increase of clarity,as shown in figure 6.

MethodsThe current 2014 project focuses on testing

the effectiveness of Fe-TAML as a catalytic waste-water treatment of municipal wastewater effluent(MWE), which often contains Atrazine, E2, EE2,and other EDCs. Samples of MWE were col-lected at the Orange County Water ReclamationPlant; both prechlorination and postchlorinationsamples were collected. Sodium sulfide was usedto perform dechlorination immediately prior toenzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)testing and medaka assays.

The hypothesis tested was: Fe-TAML treat-ment will decrease the impact of the Atrazine,E2, and EE2 on medaka embryonic develop-ment and will not produce toxic byproducts.The Fe-TAML water treatment of the MWE willreduce the concentration of EDCs present. Itwill also act as a disinfectant, reducing the needfor chlorine.

Since MWE is a very complex water matrix,with multiple EDCs present, the testing requiredwas exponentially higher than in the previousresearch. Nine experiments were performedwith four different testing methods, as shown intable 2.

The methods included bacteria count test-ing using membrane filtration to determine theeffectiveness of Fe-TAML treatment for elimi-nating E. coli bacteria, as compared to currentchlorination methods. Medaka assays and con-centration testing using EPA Method 525.2 withsolid-phase extraction were performed. TheELISA testing was also performed for Atrazine,E2, and EE2. In the treatment protocol using Fe-TAML, catalase is used to end the reaction andeliminate any leftover hydrogen peroxide(H2O2).

Florida Water Resources Journal • September 2014 51Continued on page 52

Figure 5. Embryonic Development of Medaka Fish

Figure 6. The Before and After Fe-TAML Treatment Comparison of Clarity

Table 2. Experiments Performed for the Municipal Wastewater Study


Six eggs for each control (distilled, un-treated, partial, and Fe-TAML-treated) weretested and monitored once a day for six days;this means 13 controls (x six eggs, x six days, xone observation per day) for a total of 468 ob-servations per trial. If the hypothesis is correct,there should be no statistical difference be-tween the Fe-TAML-treated embryos and theembryos exposed only to distilled water.

Materials, Concentrations, and TreatmentMolar Ratios

Medaka eggs were obtained from AquaticResearch Supply and kept in vitro in mini-petri dishes, initially with rearing medium,until exposed to the control treatments.

Chemicals. H2O2 (3 percent solution) wasobtained from Walgreens Pharmacy, as well asdistilled water and sodium bicarbonate. Atrazine(1000ug/ml), E2 (100 ug/ml), and EE2 (100ug/ml) ampoules were obtained from Restex.Catalase was obtained from Carolina BiologicalSupply and kept refrigerated. Fe-TAML was ob-tained from the Green Chemistry Departmentof Carnegie Mellon University. Municipal waste-water effluent was obtained from the IronBridge Wastewater Treatment Plant, in cooper-ation with Orange County, Fla., both at theprechlorination and the postchlorination stage.

Concentrations. The chosen exposureconcentration of the Atrazine was 50 parts per

Table 3. Reaction Order and Graphical

Method Utilized

Graph 2. Fe-TAML Treatment Degradation Curves for E2, EE2, and Atrazine

Figure 7. Analysis of Variance Results for E. coli Testing


bil (ppb), or 50 ug/l; the chosen concentrationof the E2 was 1.0 ppb, or 1 ug/l; and the cho-sen concentration of the EE2 was 1 ppb, or 1ug/l. These concentrations were chosen so thata 70 percent or greater degradation rate wouldtake the levels below the lowest observable ef-fect levels, as indicated from research [14].

Molar Fe-TAML Treatment Concentra-tions. All molar concentrations are based onthe ratios to the compound to be degraded.The moles/L ratios used are: H2O2 was 10 to 1,Fe-TAML was .02 to 1, and catalase was .005to 1. The pH was adjusted to 8 using a sodiumbicarbonate buffer.

Treatment Protocol. � Add the selected EDC solution into the

beaker containing 2700 ml of distilled waterto achieve the target concentration.

� Adjust pH to 8 by using sodium bicarbonateas needed.

� Pour 900 ml into the untreated, partially-treated and fully-treated bottles respectively.

� Seal and label the untreated bottle. � In the fully-treated bottle, add 75 ml of H202

(3 percent solution). � Mix 2 mg of Fe-TAML in 10 ml of distilled

water and add to the fully-treated bottle.� After 20 minutes, add 5 ml of the catalase en-

zyme. � In the partially-treated bottle, add 75 ml of

H202 (3 percent solution). � After 20 minutes, add 5 ml of catalase. � Label a bottle Fe-TAML-treated. � Add 750 ml of the EDC solution into the

beaker. � Add 75 ml of H202 (3 percent solution). � Adjust pH to 8 by using sodium bicarbonate

as needed. � Add 25 ml of the Fe-TAML solution. � After 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 30 minutes, add 50 ml

of the catalase enzyme. � Analyze this solution and record the concen-

tration after Fe-TAML degradation.

Results

Medaka development has been shown tobe adversely impacted by exposure to theAtrazine, E2, and EE2. The Fe-TAML treat-

ment of the Atrazine, E2, EE2, and MWE so-lutions is effective at eliminating any de-tectable impact of the EDC on the medakaeggs. No toxic byproducts were detectable. Ad-ditionally, bacteria testing in colony-formingunits (CFU) of the municipal wastewater ef-fluent indicated that Fe-TAML treatment was25 times more effective than the current chlo-rination method used at the facility. The EDC-exposed group grew significantly slower thanthe Fe-TAML group.

The analysis revealed that the medaka eggsexposed to the Atrazine solution that were nottreated by Fe-TAML grew at a slower rate thanthe control untreated medaka eggs after the 72-hour period. The untreated E2 solution resultedin a 34 percent reduction in embryonic growth.The untreated EE2 growth rate reduction was31 percent.

The kinetics study measured the concen-tration versus time so a degradation law couldbe determined. The graphical methods that canbe used to determine the reaction order areshown in table 3.

For the EE2 and E2, the natural log of theconcentration versus time was a straight line.This indicates that the E2 and EE2 reactions area first-order reaction. For the Atrazine, the in-verse of the concentration was plotted againsttime. A straight-line relationship was shown for

the Atrazine Fe-TAML reaction. This indicatesa second-order reaction for Atrazine, which ex-plains why Atrazine took nine minutes to de-grade 90 percent, whereas E2 and EE2 degraded90 percent in less than three minutes. It is likelythat the chlorine in Atrazine causes this second-order degradation reaction.

The degradation curves from the reactionkinetic study are shown in graph 2. The slope ofthe line is the reaction constant k. The half-lifefor a first-order reaction is given by: t½ = .693/K;this was used to calculate the half-life of 48.2 sec-onds for E2 and 46.8 seconds for EE2. For a sec-ond-order reaction, the half-life at the initialconcentration is given by: t½ = 1 / K [Ao], whichwas the equation used to calculate the half-lifeof 48.1 seconds for Atrazine. These half-livesagreed with the graphical observations for E2,EE2, and Atrazine.

Discussion

This experimental design was created toallow the comparison of means using one-wayanalysis of variance (ANOVA) on each EDCgroup. Fe-TAML testing confirmed that theEDCs were degraded effectively so no impactto the development rate of the medaka em-bryos was evident. Only the treatment with



Figure 8. Side-by-Side Comparison of Fe-TAML Versus Standard Chlorination


Fe-TAML eliminated any adverse effect fromexposure to the EDCs and was shown to bestatistically equivalent to distilled water.

Additionally, the ANOVA results for thebacteria testing in figure 7 show that the bacte-ria count of the municipal wastewater effluentwas reduced by over 25 times by the Fe-TAMLtreatment as compared to the chlorinatedtreatment. The statistical tests establish this tobe true to a 95 percent confidence interval.

Figure 8 visually shows the impact of Fe-TAML treatment on the bacteria count of theMWE, which is compared against the standardchlorine treatment methods currently used inmunicipal wastewater facilities.

Graph 3 shows the difference in medakaembryonic growth in the partially-treated ef-fluent and the Fe-TAML-treated embryos. A28 percent reduction in growth rate was ob-served. The Atrazine untreated medaka em-bryos also developed heart issues andmalformations, as seen in figure 9.

Economic StudyAn initial economic study performed in

this research indicated that a medium-sized100 mil gal per day (mgd) municipal waste-water treatment plant (MWTP) would have anet savings of $2.4 million annually by de-ploying the Fe-TAML treatment and reducingchlorine usage. A large 250 mgd MWTP wouldsave $10.4 million annually by deploying theFe-TAML treatment. The savings would behigher in plants that require dechlorination ofwaste effluent. These estimates assume a 50percent reduction in chlorine usage and in-clude the estimated costs of the Fe-TAMLtreatment.

The medaka assay results and T-Test sta-tistical analysis (assessing whether the means oftwo groups are different from each other) clearlyindicate that there is a significant statistical dif-ference in the Atrazine concentrations after theFe-TAML treatment.

Solid-phase extraction (SPE) with sophis-ticated GC-MS was needed to get an actualquantification of the reduction of Atrazine thatwas achieved after the Fe-TAML treatment.

Graph 3. Medaka Embryonic Growth Partially-Treated Versus Fe-TAML-Treated MunicipalWaste Water Effluent

Automated Solid Phase Extraction (SPE)System Being Used The Photos Show the Student Researcher Performing ELISA Testing

Figure 9. Medaka Embryonic Growth Untreated Atrazine Versus Fe-TAML-Treated Hemor-rhage Observation Captured


These tests show that the Fe-TAML treat-ment reduced the Atrazine by 93 percent, as isshown in the ELISA results.

The ELISA testing (as shown in the pho-tos) was also performed for the E2 and EE2 test-ing, in addition to the Atrazine. The E2 and EE2were rapidly degraded by greater than 95 per-cent within three minutes.

These tests confirmed degradation above93 percent for all of the EDCs.

The hypothesis tested was that Fe-TAMLwill decrease the impact of the Atrazine, E2, andEE2 on Medaka Fish embryonic developmentand will not produce toxic byproducts. The Fe-TAML water treatment of the MWE will reducethe concentration of EDCs present. It will alsoact as a disinfectant, reducing the need for chlo-rine. The summary of these results is shown intable 4. Both parts of the hypothesis were provento be true by these results (α = .05).

Real-World Applications

There is a tremendous array of applicationsfor the Fe-TAML catalytic wastewater treatmenttested in this project to reduce bioaccumulationpollutants from the environment. This researchindicates that Fe-TAML treatment does not pro-duce undesirable byproducts. Three very im-portant and promising areas for application ofthis technology include:

Industrial Effluent Treatment. The Fe-TAML catalysts with hydrogen peroxide havebeen used in full-scale field trials in NewZealand to remove the colored effluents in tex-tile dyeing mills to clean up dyes that do not

stick to the fabrics; these dyes would end up inwaterways. This type of pollution can causemiles-long dead zones due to the blocking ofsunlight, as observed in Florida’s FenhollowayRiver and the feminization of male mosqui-tofish [12].

Wastewater Treatment Plants. One EDC,ethinyl estradiol, the active ingredient in thebirth control pill, is excreted by humans andresults in a major source of artificial environ-mental estrogenicity. This is incompletely re-moved by current technologies used byMWTPs. The Fe-TAML activator, as shown inthis research in trace concentrations, activateshydrogen peroxide and was shown to rapidlydegrade these natural and synthetic reproduc-tive hormones found in agricultural and mu-nicipal effluent streams [3]. Year 2 of the researchproject demonstrated that the Fe-TAML acti-vator effectively eliminated genistein, a potentphytoestrogen that impacts the gonadal devel-opment of Medaka Fish [9], which is found inagricultural runoff from intensive livestockoperations.

Agricultural Pesticides Cleanup of Soil. Fe-TAML activators with hydrogen peroxide ap-pear to totally break down someorganophosphorus compounds used as poly-merization catalysts, lubricant additives, flameretardants, plant growth regulators, and sur-factants. These are widely used in agriculturalpesticides such as herbicides, fungicides, andinsecticides. Although effective at curbing in-sect damage to crops, some organophospho-rus compounds have been associated withneurotoxicity and other health problems.

Additional Application Areas. Applicationareas also include arsenic remediation and fueltreatment. The catalytic treatment methodevaluated in this research can be used to de-grade many major sources of EDC pollution.

Conclusion

This research indicates that increasedconcentrations of EDCs have been found inrivers, oceans around the world, and even inthe polar icecaps [11]. The Fe-TAML catalystwill degrade the EDCs commonly found inMWTP effluent [12] to the point that the treatedwater shows no impact to the embryonic de-velopment of the Medaka Fish. Additionally,the use of chlorine can be reduced since theFe-TAML treatment acts as a highly effectivedisinfectant. While this research has focusedon the aquatic environment, the spread of en-docrine-disrupting compounds affects repro-ductive processes in other forms of wildlife,including amphibians [13] and mammals [14].

The exposure to EDCs such as Atrazinehas been found to be ubiquitous [15] for humansas well, and is impactful to society because ofthe adverse health effects observed from expo-sure, such as links to heart disease, diabetes, andliver abnormalities [16]. Combine the global na-ture of EDCs with the potential impact to re-productive processes for many species, and it isevident that the scope of the damage from thispollution is very large. These EDCs, such asAtrazine, E2, and EE2, if left unchecked, couldpotentially cause a devastating collapse of fishpopulations [2], which would reduce the avail-ability of fish as a food source and impact theentire food web. The Fe-TAML catalyst providesa significant new tool for wastewater treatmentto eliminate endocrine-disrupting compounds,and its deployment should be urgently investi-gated. Responsible action is required to protectthe aquatic environment—for today and for fu-ture generations.



Table 4. Results of Hypothesis Testing

Papermill waste water effluent flowing intoFlorida rivers. (Source: Melissa Luce,July 2011, http://earthraiders-environmentalscience.blogspot.com)


Acknowledgements

Thanks go to the following people andorganizations for their help and support dur-ing this project:� Mrs. Guytri Still – A mentor and former

teacher who inspired me to find solutionsfor EDC pollution.

� Dr. Nelson Ying – Was instrumental in sug-gesting resources for this project and hasencouraged, challenged, and mentored me.

� Dr. Terrence Collins – Director of GreenChemistry for Carnegie Mellon Universityof Pittsburgh, who provided samples of theFe-TAML.

� Melanie Vrabel Adams – With EPA and awinner of the James W. Craig Pollution Pre-vention Award (2008, 2010), Washington,D.C. A key mentor and supporter for thepast five years.

� Jacqueline Torbert – With the OrangeCounty Utilities Quality Labs in Orlandoand who allowed me to use its supervisedlaboratory for the Fe-TAML treatment pro-tocol.

� Dr. Amy Gilliam and Diane Vaughn – WithOrange County Utilities Water Quality Lab-oratory and who provided guidance andrecommendations of laboratory methods

to use to make sure the project had an effi-cient use of laboratory time.

� Scott Rampanthal – With the OrangeCounty Utilities Quality Labs in Orlandowho supported performing the GC-MStesting on the before-and-after FE-TAMLtreatments samples.

References

[1] Miyuki Suzawa; Holly A. Ingraham. TheHerbicide Atrazine Activates EndocrineGene Networks via Non-Steroidal NR5ANuclear Receptors in Fish and Mammalian.PLoS ONE 3 (5): 1-11 (2008).

[2] Kidd, K. A. Collapse of a fish population afterexposure to synthetic estrogen. The NationalAcademy of Science for USA. 2007, 104, (21),8897 – 8901.

[3] Shappell, N.; Vrabel, M. A.; Madsen, P. J.;Hunt, P.G.; Collins, T. J. Destruction of es-trogens using Fe-TAML/peroxide catalyst.Environ. Sci. Technol. 2008, 42, 1296–1300.

[4] Jobling, S.; Nolan, M.; Tyler, C. R.; Brighty,G.; Sumpter, J. P. Widespread sexual disrup-tion in wild fish. Environ. Sci. Technol. 1998,32, 2498-2506.

[5] Yoon, Y.; Westerhoff, P.; Snyder, S. A.; Wert,E. C. Nanofiltration and ultrafiltration of en-docrine disrupting compounds, pharma-ceuticals, and personal care products. J.

Membr. Sci. 2006, 270, 88-100.[6] Jones, O. A. H.; Voulvoulis, N.; and Lester, J.

N. The occurrence and removal of selectedpharmaceutical compounds in a sewagetreatment works utilizing activated sludgetreatment. Environ. Pollut. 2007, 145, 738-744.

[7] Kimura, A.; Taguchi, M.; Ohtani, Y.; Shimada,Y.; Hiratsuka, H.; Kojima, T. Treatment ofwastewater having estrogen activity by ioniz-ing radiation. Radiat. Phys. Chem. 2007, 76,699-706.

[8] Khan, U.; Nicell, J. A. Horseradish peroxi-dase-catalysed oxidation of aqueous naturaland synthetic estrogen. J. Chem Tech Biotech-nol. 2007, 82, 818–830.

[9] Kiparissis, Y.; Balch, G. C.; Metcalfe, T. L.;Metcalfe, C. D. 2003. Effects of the IsoflavonesGenistein and Equol on the Gonadal Devel-opment of Japanese Medaka (Oryziaslatipes). Environ Health Perspect. 2003, 111,1158-1163. doi:10.1289/ehp.5928.

[10] Balch, G. C. ; Metcalfe, C.D. Developmentaleffects in Japanese medaka (Oryzias latipes)exposed to nonylphenol ethoxylates and theirdegradation products. Chemosphere Volume62, 2006, 8, 1214-1223.

[11] Dewailly, E; Ayotte, P; Bruneau, S. LaLiberte,C. Muir, D; and Norstrom, R. Human Expo-sure to Polychlorinated Bipheny is Throughthe Aquatic Food Chain in the Arctic. Dioxin'93, 13th International Symposium on Chlo-rinated Dioxins and Related Compound: Vi-enna, 1993, 14:173-175.

[12] Lee, P.A.; Passehl, J. 1995. Delineation ofGroundwater and Surface Water Areas Po-tentially Impacted by an Industrial Dis-charge to the Fenholloway River of TaylorCounty, Fla. Florida Department of Envi-ronmental Protection (FDEP). Tallahassee,Fla.

[13] Oehlmann, J.; Schulte-Oehlmann, U.; Kloas,W.; Jagnytsch, O.; Lutz, I.; Kusk, K.; Wollen-berger, L.; Santos, E. M.; Paull, G. C.; A criti-cal analysis of the biological impacts ofplasticizers on wildlife. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B2009, 364, 2047-2062.

[14] Sharpe, R. M.; Fisher, J. S.; Millar, M. M.;Jobling, S.; and Sumpter, J. P. Gestational andlactational exposure of rats to xenoestrogensresults in reduced testicular size and spermproduction. Environmental Health Perspec-tives, 1995, 103(12):1136-1143.

[15] Guenter, K.; Heinke, V.; Thiele, B.;, Kleist, E.;Prast, H.; Raeckner, T.. Endocrine Disrupt-ing Nonylphenols Are Ubiquitous in Food,Environ. Sci. Technol., 2002, 36, 1676-1680.

[16] Lang, I. A.; Galloway, T. S.; Scarlett, A.; Hen-ley, W. E.; Depledge, M.; Wallace, R. B.; andMelzer, D. Association of urinary bisphenol Aconcentration with medical disorders andlaboratory abnormalities in adults. JAMA.2008, 300(11): 1303-10. ��


Raymond Dennishas joined Stantec in itsTampa office as seniorproject manager in envi-ronmental services. Anecologist, Dennis has 19years of experience inthe fields of coastal andfreshwater wetland ecol-ogy, regulatory policy,habitat restoration and mapping, speciessurveys, and wildlife management.

His professional accomplishments in-clude the development of highly specializedrestoration methods and a patented tool thathave contributed to advancements in thecoastal restoration ecology; adaptable andscalable systems for transplanting shallowand deeply rooted seagrass species; portable,shallow water vacuum equipment designedfor restoring substrate elevations within sen-sitive coastal habitats; and a GPS-based sea-grass mapping/ground-truthing method forassessment of areal coverage and trendanalysis.

Dennis received his bachelor of sciencedegree in biological sciences (aquaculture)from the Florida Institute of Technologyand is a certified professional wetland sci-entist.

Also joining the Tampa office is JuliaMillet. She has more than five years of ex-perience in environmental resources man-agement, with specialization in coastalregulations and permitting. Millet has amaster of science degree in marine biologyfrom NOVA Southeastern UniversityOceanographic Center in Dania Beach.

�WeiserMazars, an accounting, tax, and

advisory services firm, has released a report,titled “2014 U.S. Water Industry Outlook.”The report, developed from an extensivesurvey, found that the most significant chal-lenges facing the water industry, accordingto 95 percent of its survey respondents, areaging infrastructure and capital needs,which were the top challenges presented inthe 2012 report.

The aging of management and plantworkers is also a major concern, accordingto survey participants. The survey presentedwater-industry issues ranging from opera-tions to finance and trends impacting theindustry.

The 2014 survey addressed several newtopics, including pricing, nonrevenue water,service quality, and job opportunities. Par-ticipants represented a cross section ofwater workers, from operators to investors

and technology/equipment solution ven-dors, with 67 percent coming from privatecompanies and 18 percent from publiccompanies. Eighty-six percent of the re-spondents are in management, with 75 per-cent in executive positions and 11 percentin middle management.

An analysis of developing trends in thewater industry was also new in the 2014 re-port, covering essential factors such as ob-taining new and/or renewed contracts,annual revenue, operating costs, access tofinancing for critical upgrades, and the cur-rent process of obtaining approvals forchanges in regulated rates.

“The objective of the year’s report wasto track the progress of the water industryover the past two years. The significantlylarger number of participants gave us aclearer picture of the state of the industryin the United States,” said Jerome Devillers,head of water infrastructure/project financ-ing. “Seeing the same key challenges in the2012 and 2014 studies provides a wake-upcall that the water industry remains at risk.”

Go to http://weisermazars.com/im-ages/WeiserMazars_2014_US_Water_In-dustry_Outlook.pdf to access the study.

�Mike Nixon has

joined the Sarasota officeof McKim & Creed as anengineer intern. He willwork as part of a projectteam, providing techni-cal and design services insupport of water, waste-water, reclaimed water,and stormwater infra-structure projects.

He is a graduate of Florida Gulf CoastUniversity, where he earned a degree in en-vironmental engineering and served as thepresident and concrete canoe captain of thestudent chapter of the American Society ofCivil Engineers, and as vice president of thestudent chapter of the Florida Water Envi-ronment Association.

In the Daytona Beach office, RobertaSchneider-Bowden hasbeen hired as an admin-istrative assistant. She isa graduate of the Com-munity College of Al-legheny County, withseveral years of experi-ence in administrativesupport for engineeringfirms.

�The South Florida Water Manage-

ment District is improving water quality inthe St. Lucie River and Estuary with con-struction of stormwater treatment wetlandsin Martin County.

As part of the Indian River Lagoon-South Phase 1 Project, the C-44 Reservoirand Stormwater Treatment Areas (STAs)will help capture, store, and clean localstormwater runoff before it reaches theriver and estuary.

All project components were originallyplanned to be built by the U.S. Army Corpsof Engineers. The district’s governing boardapproved an agreement with the Corps thatallows the district to expedite constructionof the STAs, a pump station, and a portionof the project discharge canal. Under theagreement, construction on 6,300 acres ofwater-cleaning wetlands is planned to beginin October and be completed in 2017.

When the project is operational, waterwill be pumped into the STAs, which aretreatment wetlands-containing plants, suchas cattails, pickerel weed, and bulrush. Thisvegetation removes and stores nutrients, in-cluding phosphorus, from the water beforeit flows into the St. Lucie River and Estuary.

�For almost 20 years, water flowing

from farmland in the Everglades Agricul-tural Area (EAA) has had phosphorus re-ductions that exceed those required by law.Implementation of improved farming tech-niques resulted in a 63 percent phosphorusreduction in the 470,000-acre EAA farmingregion south of Lake Okeechobee for thewater monitoring period of May 1, 2013 toApril 30, 2014.

The requirement calls for a 25 percentreduction in phosphorus. A science-basedmodel is used to compute the reductions andmake adjustments to account for influencessuch as rainfall. The improved farming tech-niques include refined stormwater practices,on-farm erosion controls, and more precisefertilizer application methods. ��


News Beat

DENNIS

SCHNEIDER-BOWDEN

NIXON


HydroPoint offers WeatherTRAK, a smartirrigation system for commercial and municipallandscapes, with more than 28,000 smart con-trollers installed at organizations across the U.S.Proven in more than 25 independent studies, in-cluding achieving perfect scores during its EPAWaterSense certification, WeatherTrak deliversmaximum water savings, operational efficiency,and risk reduction. (www.hydropoint.com)

�The Smith & Loveless nonclog pump

provides significant energy efficiency savingsfor wastewater and stormwater pumping. Thepump’s design features an oversized, stainlesssteel pump shaft that minimizes overhang, re-sulting in less shaft deflection and greaterpump efficiencies. The impeller is also de-signed for maximum efficiency. By trimmingthe impellers inside the shrouds, the pumpleaves the back shroud in full diameter to pre-vent string material from winding around theshaft. (www.smithandlovelss.com)

�Dewatering containers from Wastequip

are suited for wastewater treatment facilities,manufacturing plants, refineries, and mines.They have gasketed doors and are hydrotestedfor leakage. Disposable liners and an easy-to-remove shell facilitate fast cleanup. The remov-able shell allows the unit to be used as a sludgecontainer. The containers can be custom-con-figured and are available in 20- and 25-cubic-yard capacities. (www.wastequip.com)

�A new demand control valve from IVL

Flow Control delivers water at the lowest pos-sible cost. The valve ensures security of supply,maintains customer service levels, and reducescarbon footprint on the production of water,without the need for a complicated comput-erized algorithm. All valves from 40 mmthrough 800 mm can regulate down to flowrates of 0.36 Isec-1 and operate from a drip-tight closed position without loss of controlstability, promoting calmer network condi-tions. (www.ivfflowcontrol.co.uk)

�The HPR-32i Pressure Impulse Recorder

from Telog is an advancement of the com-pany’s HPR-32 Hydrant Pressure Monitor. Inaddition to the HPR-32’s ability to record sys-tem pressures and trends, the HPR-32i captureswater hammer and negative pressure eventwaveforms in a separate memory and down-loads them wirelessly to Telog’s host computerapplication. This recorder samples up to 20water pressure samples per second, storing the

waveform of impulse events detected by a rate-of-change detector. More than 300 events, eachlasting from a few second to several minutes,can be stored. (www.telog.com)

�The Greyline AVMS 5.1 flow meter is de-

signed for municipal stormwater, combinedeffluent, raw sewage, and irrigation water. Ituses three submerged ultrasonic sensors tocontinuously measure velocity at differentpoints in the channel and provide an averagevelocity reading for flow monitoring. One of

the three sensors can also monitor the waterlevel, or a separate noncontacting ultrasoniclevel sensor can be used in the system. TheAVMS 5.1 measures forward and reverse flowand includes a backlit flow-rate display, total-izer, three 4-20 mA outputs, and two controlrelays. (www.greyline.com)

�The enhanced version of ProSeries-M™

M-2 Peristaltic Metering Pump from Blue-White Industries is designed for use in small

New Products



to midsize municipal water and wastewatertreatment plants. The pump includes manyfeatures and options seen in previous models,which are primarily designed for large munic-ipalities. It can be used with many aggressivechemicals, as well as chemicals that can vapor-lock a pump, such as sodium hypochlorite andhydrogen peroxide. The pump operates at feedrates ranging from 0.03 to 57L/h (0.007 to 15gal/h), pressures to 806 bar (125 lb/in.2) and a200:1 turndown ratio. Inputs include dual 4-20 mA for primary speed and secondary trimcontrol, pulse inputs, and remote start/stop.Outputs include a scalable 4—20-mA, 6-amprelay. Additional communications include op-tional industrial Ethernet, Profibus, ProfiNet,Modbus, and Modbus TCP. The firmware isfield-upgradable. (www.blue-white.com)

�The TEQUATIC™ PLUS fine-particle fil-

ter from Dow Water and Process Solutionscombines the power of continuously cleaning,crossflow filtration with centrifugal separationinto one device specifically designed to handlea wide range of difficult-to-treat feedwatersmore consistently and cost-effectively thantraditional technologies. Applications for thefilter range from pretreatment for ultrafiltra-tion and reverse osmosis to filtering produced

water for oil and gas. The filter can be used asan alternative or a complement to traditionalfiltration technologies. It is available in vari-ous flow rates with filter cutoffs from 10 to 55µm to meet specific customer needs.(www.dowwaterandprocess.com)

�The Dimminutor® from Franklin Miller

Inc. effectively reduces wastewater solids sizein open-channel installations. The unit fea-tures a high-capacity, low head-loss design.Solids are captured on a curved screen, whererotary cutters sweep them into adjacent sta-tionary cutters with a continuously rotatinghigh-torque action. As the cutters intermeshat close clearance, they shear, tear, and crushthe solids to a size small enough to passthrough the fine-screen slots. The grinder fea-tures individually replaceable hardened stain-less cutters, no seals or bearings at the channelbottom, a heavy-duty stainless steel semicir-cular screen, true submersible, explosion-proof motor, an S250 automatic reversingcontroller, and a choice of channel frames foreasy installation and maintenance. Units areavailable in single and duplex versions in duc-tile-iron or stainless steel construction.(www.franklinmiller.com)

�The 1418, 1422, and the HN4SS series of

stainless enclosures from Hammond Manu-

facturing are designed to house electrical,electronic, hydraulic, or pneumatic controlsand instruments. The units are installed in oiland gas facilities, water treatment plants, foodmanufacturing plants, and pharmaceuticalproduction facilities where equipment may behosed down, very wet, or corrosion is a prob-lem. All units include heavy-duty stainless steellifting eyes. The doors are mounted on con-tinuous hinges and sealed with a seamlesspoured-in-place gasket. Users have a choice ofclosure options of traditional clamp covers.Enclosures are available in a wide range ofheights, widths, and depths. (www.ham-mondmfg.com)

�The bulk-bag unloader from Sodimate is

designed to combine the efficiency and relia-bility of mechanical discharge, accurate feed-ing, and complete bulk-bag discharge. Eachunit incorporates an arch breaker spindlemounted with flexible blades that extract bulkchemicals, while preventing the jamming,bridging, or compaction often seen with vi-bration systems. The unloader can be used toinject powdered activated carbon, lime, andsoda ash. Depending on the process, the dis-charger can be integrated with up to four in-dependent screw feeders, which enablesaccurate distribution to different injectionpoints with a single unloader. (www.sodimate-inc.com) ��

New ProductsContinued from page 59

ENGINEERING DIRECTORY

Tank Engineering And ManagementConsultants, Inc.

Engineering • Inspection

Aboveground Storage Tank SpecialistsMulberry, Florida • Since 1983

863-354-9010www.tankteam.com


ENGINEERING DIRECTORY

Showcase Your Company in the Engineering or Equipment & Services Directory

[email protected]

EQUIPMENT & SERVICES DIRECTORY

Contact Mike Delaney at 352-241-6006

Fort Lauderdale954.351.9256

Gainseville352.335.7991

West Palm Beach561.904.7400

Jacksonville904.733.9119

Key West305.294.1645

Miami305.443.6401

Navarro850.939.8300

Orlando407.423.0030

Tampa813.874.0777 813.386.1990

Naples239.596.1715



CentralFloridaControls,Inc.

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

Instrumentation,Controls Specialists

Florida Certified in water meter testing and repair

P.O. Box 6121 • Ocala, FL 34432Phone: 352-347-6075 • Fax: 352-347-0933

www.centra l f lor idacontrols .com

CEC Motor & Utility Services, LLC1751 12th Street EastPalmetto, FL. 34221

Phone - 941-845-1030Fax – 941-845-1049

[email protected]

• 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

Motor & Utility Services, LLC




Posi t ions Avai lableBooth, Ern, Straughan & Hiott, Inc.

Utility Design EngineerBESH Engineering seeks experienced utility design engineer for all as-pects of water and wastewater design, including treatment plants, pumpstations, and collection/transmission/distribution systems. Applicantmust have water and wastewater treatment plant design and permit-ting experience. Experience with hydraulic modeling, specificationwriting, Autocad drafting, project bidding, construction oversight andproject funding preferred. Applicant must possess State of Florida E.I.with minimum 4 years experience. Florida P.E. a plus. Salary commen-surate with experience. Come join a great team! Drug Free Workplaceand an Equal Opportunity Employer. Please email resume to: [email protected]

WATER TREATMENT PLANT OPERATORUtilities, Inc. is seeking a Water/Wastewater Operator for thePasco/Pinellas County area. Applicant must have a minimum Class CFDEP Water license. A dual license is preferred. Applicant must havea HS Diploma or GED & a valid Florida driver’s license with a cleanrecord. To view complete job description & apply for the positionplease visit our web site, www.uiwater.com, select the Employment Op-portunities tab. The job is listed under Operations – Dunedin.

TREATMENT PLANT OPERATORWATER RECLAMATION DEPARTMENT

Starting Wage for Class "C" $13.72 per hour (Class "B" $14.86 per hour,Class "A" $16.00 per hour) with shift differentials for 2nd and 3rd shift.Full benefits package. Position may require weekend and holiday work,to include religious holidays.

Drug-Free Workplace ~ EOEFor General Description and Minimum Requirements please see

https://www.cityofcocoabeach.com/employment/

City of CallawayEquipment Operator I

$19468-$26270/yr. Full-Time. Semi-skilled work in operation of heavyvehicles and equipment to construct, maintain or repair City-ownedfacilities and properties. Job postings and application available on ourwebsite: www.cityofcallaway.com. Callaway is located in Bay County.

City of CallawayUtility Service Worker I

$20820-$28100/yr. Full-Time. Skilled journeyman work involvingmonitoring the City's potable water distribution and wastewater col-lection system. Job posting and application available on our website:www.cityofcallaway.com. Callaway is located in Bay County.

City of CallawayWater Quality Specialist

$22276-@30076/yr. Full-Time. Monitor the City's potable water distri-bution and wastewater collection system. Job posting and applicationavailable on our website: www.cityofcallaway.com. Callaway is locatedin Bay County.

City of CallawayLift Station Maintenance I

$20820-$28100/yr. Full-Time Performs skilled and responsible work inthe maintenance, repair and replacement of components in wastewaterlift stations. Job posting and application available on our website:www.cityofcallaway.com. Callaway is located in Bay County.

Purchase Private Utilities and Operating RoutesFlorida Corporation is interested in expanding it’s market in Florida.We would like you and your company to join us. We will buy or part-ner for your utility or operations business. Call Carl Smith at 727-835-9522. E-mail: [email protected]

C L A S S I F I E D S

Utilities, Inc.


We are currently accepting employment applications for the following positions:

Water & Wastewater Licensed Operator’s – positions are available in the following counties: Pasco, Polk, Highlands, Lee,

Marathon

Maintenance Technicians – positions are available in the following locations: Jacksonville, New Port Richey, Fort Myers,

Lake, Marion, Ocala, Pembroke Pines

Construction Manager – Hillsborough

Customer Service Manager - Pasco

Employment is available for F/T, P/T and Subcontract opportunitiesPlease visit our website at www.uswatercorp.com

(Employment application is available in our website)4939 Cross Bayou Blvd.

New Port Richey, FL 34652Toll Free: 1-866-753-8292

Fax: (727) 848-7701E-Mail: [email protected]

Water and Wastewater Utility Operations, Maintenance,Engineering, Management

Utilities Storm Water Supervisor$53,039-$74,630/yr. Plans/directs the maintenance, construction, re-pair/tracking of stormwater infrastructure. AS in Management, Envi-ronmental studies, or related req. Min. five years’ exp. in stormwateroperations or systems. FWPCOA “A” Cert. preferred.

Utilities Treatment Plant Operator I$41,138-$57,885/yr plus $50/biweekly for “B” lic.; 100/biweekly for “A”lic. Class “C” FL DW Operator Lic. & membrane experience required.

Water Plant Mechanic$43,195 - $60,779/yr. Performs inspections and maintenance ofwater/reuse facilities, pumping stations, well fields/equipment. Strongmechanical background with electrical knowledge of equipment in-stallation and repair.Apply: 100 W. Atlantic Blvd., Pompano Beach, FL 33060. Open untilfilled. E/O/E. http://pompanobeachfl.gov for details.

City of GrovelandClass C Wastewater Operator

The City of Groveland is hiring a Class "C" Wastewater Operator. SalaryRange $30,400-$46,717 DOQ. Please visit groveland-fl.gov for applica-tion and job description. Send completed application to 156 S Lake Ave.Groveland, Fl 34736 attn: Human Resources. Background check anddrug screen required. Open until filled EOE, V/P, DFWP

City of Vero BeachElectronics Technician

Services, maintains, installs and performs preventative maintenance ofelectronic and electrical equipment throughout the water and sewersystem. Must have thorough working knowledge of configuring, pro-gramming and maintenance of Modicon Programmable Logic Con-trollers and GE IFix HMI software version 5.5 and later. Visit website forcomplete job description, qualifications needed, and instruction toapply. $28.04 p/hr www.covb.org City of Vero Beach EOE/DFWP 772978-4909

PIPELINE CONTROLMANThe Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority is looking fora Pipeline Controlman. The purpose of this classifica-tion is to operate the 130+ miles of high pressure trans-mission pipeline extending through the Florida Keys

terminating in Key West. This classification directly monitors all pump-ing stations, monitors & fills all transmission and distribution storagetanks, controls Sustaining and Cla-valves while adhering to strict trans-mission-main operating parameters. Pipeline monitor and control isaccomplished via a system wide Supervisory Control and Data Acquisi-tion (SCADA) computer system with specific responsibility for powermonitoring and energy optimization. The Pipeline Controlmen also re-ceives and manages all after-hour customer complaints and dispatchesrepair crews during a leak event or during other emergencies. Qualifi-cations: H.S. diploma or GED; supplemented by 3 yrs. previous experi-ence and/or training as a Pipeline Controlman with a water utility. Mustbe able to work rotating shift. Must possess and maintain a FDEP Level1 Distribution license or a minimum Florida Class “C” WTPO license.Salary Range $52,033 - $79,299; with excellent benefits. Location:Florida City. Apply online at www.fkaa.com. EEO, VPE, ADA

Field Distribution CollectionThe North Springs Improvement District is searching for a water dis-tribution and wastewater collection field operator. Applicant must be li-censed by the Florida Environmental Protection Agency or obtain alevel 3 water distribution license within 24 months. Please [email protected] with your application or you can apply atwww.nsidfl.gov.

City of TitusvilleEngineering Manager

Responsible for the management of the Engineering Division, Re-claimed Water Program, and Geographic Information Systems Pro-gram. Also responsible for supervision of designing, reviewing,permitting and inspecting processes for utility projects. Requires BS inCivil or Environmental Engineering, or related engineering field plus 5years of engineering experience related to municipal water and waste-water systems. 3 years of supervisory experience required. Must be aregistered Florida Professional Engineer or be able to obtain within sixmonths of employment. City of Titusville - www.titusville.com - 321-567-3728 EOE Applica-tion required

Classifieds continued on page 66

City of Gainesville – GRUWater Plant Operator Mechanic Apprentice

Gainesville Regional Utilities’ Water/Wastewater Department is cur-rently seeking to fill a Water Plant Operator/Mechanic Apprentice toperform skilled work in the operation and maintenance of the WaterTreatment Plant equipment and facilities.

To qualify, you must possess a high school diploma or an acceptableequivalency diploma (GED), supplemented by college level courses inchemistry or mathematics and one (1) year of experience in water plantoperations. ** Additional 6 months of experience directly related towater plant operations as recognized by the Florida Department of En-vironmental Protection can be substituted for the college level courses.

For further information and/or to apply, visit: www.cityof-gainesville.jobs EOE/AA/DFWP/VP

Seacoast Utility Authority has an opening forLaboratory Supervisor

Responsibilities are to monitor development of and Seacoast’s compliancewith existing and proposed laws, rules, regulations and permits governingwater, sewer, and reclaimed water operations, and air quality standards(e.g., federal Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engine regulations).

Responsible for the operation, maintenance and certification of theCentral Laboratory and PGA WWTP Laboratory; supports all processlaboratory operations for water and wastewater treatment plants, in-cluding but not limited to purchasing laboratory supplies and fieldmonitoring equipment for certified and process laboratory operations.

Responsible for regulatory compliance monitoring, sample collection,and laboratory analysis (in-house and by contract laboratory) fordrinking water and wastewater operations. Compiles data and reportsto these departments for submittal to the applicable regulatory agency.

Supervise work group providing ongoing support and coaching re-garding work performance, evaluates, counsels and submits employeeperformance evaluation, provides safety training, explains the Au-thority’s policies and procedures and approves work group timesheets.

Minimum requirements are valid Florida driver’s license, minimum oftwo years experience as a laboratory supervisor, Bachelor of Science de-gree (Biology, Chemistry, Natural Sciences) with a minimum sixteen (16)college semester hours in microbiology and biology, two years experi-ence with regulatory compliance, environmental protection, environ-mental regulation or safety and health management, demonstratedsuccessful experience in the analysis and treatment of drinking water andwastewater samples and operation of a water/wastewater laboratory.

Salary Range is $52,270.40 – $87,796.80 annually plus an excellent ben-efits package to include employer paid health, dental, life, short & longterm disability and retirement.

Closing Date: Open until filled.

Apply to Seacoast Utility Authority, Human Resources Department4200 Hood Rd, Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410

(561) 627-2900 ext [email protected]

Licensed Water Plant Operator-Public UtilityThe North Springs Improvement District is seeking a licensed waterplant operator. Applicant must be licensed through the Florida De-partment Environmental Protection with an A, B, or C water plant li-cense. Please email Mireya Ortega at [email protected] with yourapplication or you can apply at www.nsidfl.gov

Certification Boulevard Answer Key


Display Advertiser Index CEU Challenge ................................33Crom ..............................................29Data Flow ........................................35FSAWWA Conference..................17-22FWEA Biosolids ................................37FWEA Wastewater............................23FWPCOA Training ............................47FWRC Call 4 Papers ........................59Garney .............................................5GML Coating ..............................36,38Hudson Pump ..................................15

McKim & Creed..................................4Polston Technology ..........................39Professional Piping ..........................57Rangeline ........................................67Reiss Engineering ..............................7Stacon ...............................................2Sunshine 811 ..................................56TREEO ............................................32US Water .........................................45Wade Trim........................................53Xylem .............................................68

From page 46

Classifieds continued from page 65

1. D) ToxicityHeavy metals become toxic whenthey are not metabolized by thebody and accumulate in the softtissues. Heavy metals may enterthe human body through food,water, air, or absorption throughthe skin when they come incontact with humans inagriculture, and inmanufacturing, pharmaceutical,industrial, or residential settings.

2. D) SolubleThink of solids as “steak” for thebugs; they have to break it downbefore they can consume it.However, think of soluble as a“milk shake”; it is more readilyconsumable by the bugs.

3. D) 75 to 100 percentThe typical RAS-to-Q ratio forextended aeration activatedsludge is about 75 to 100 percent.Conventional activated sludgeRAS is typically between 20 to 50percent of Q.

4. A) Near the ceiling.Gasses with a density of less than1.0 will rise to the top of itsspace, where gasses with adensity greater than 1.0 willsettle to the bottom of its space.

5. B) 40340 CFR Part 403 - GeneralPretreatment Regulations forExisting and New Sources ofPollution.

6. B) It doubles.Warmer temperatures will speedup the activity of microorganisms;colder temperatures will slowdown the activity of the bugs—much like people!

7. C) 345 mg/LCBOD5, mg/L = (Initial D.O., mg/L - Final

D.O., mg/L) ÷ (samplevolume, ml ÷ 300 ml)

= (6.2 - 3.9) ÷ (2 ml ÷ 300 ml)= 2.3 ÷ 0.00666666= 345 mg/L

8. D) 82.4 percentPercent TSS Removal = (Inlet TSS, mg/L - Outlet TSS,

mg/L) ÷ Inlet TSS, mg/L x 100= (1,560 mg/L - 275 mg/L) ÷1,560 mg/L x 100= 1,285 ÷ 1,560 = 0.8237 x 100= 82.4 percent

9. B) Impervious AreaImpervious means notpermitting penetration orpassage; impenetrable. Example:The coat is impervious to rain.

10. D) A portion of a sample.aliquot:1. A sample that is representative

of the whole.2. A number that will divide

another without a remainder;e.g., 2 is an aliquot of 6.

70- Wade trim71- Stantec FWEA 1/4 page

72 - Move directories

C- factor start on 70 & jump

ad log arcadis and ISA


florida water resources journal - september 2014

Documents

state of florida

executive manager

issue trademark names

fwpcoa operators

trademark owner

email changes

emerald lakesdrive

post office