State Water Resources Control BoardRecycled Water Research Needs Workshop

O b 29 2014 C M NV

Th i T i 2

October 29, 2014  Costa Mesa, NV

Thematic Topic 2:

Performance Reliability (Treatment, y ( ,

Operations, and Training)

Jeff Mosher, NWRI Executive DirectorFountain Valley, CAy

jmosher@nwri‐usa.org

Thematic Topic #2Performance ReliabilityPerformance Reliability

(Treatment, Operations, and Training)

• Fundamental to Indirect or Direct Potable Reuse:– Reliability of treatment performance– Goal:  Ensure protection of public health from chemical and pathogen risks

• Reliability:– Treatment effectiveness– Appropriate operations– Appropriate monitoring schemes

2

– Appropriate staff and staff training

Multiple Barrier Conceptp p

• Foundation for treatment performance– Drinking water concept– Diversity of independent barriers

• Involves:– Multiple treatment barriers– Technical, operational, and managerial barriers

• Goals:– Prevent contaminants at the source– Enhance treatment performance

3

– Ensure protection of public health

Potable Reuse

• Indirect Potable Reuse (use of Environmental Barrier)Groundwater Recharge– Groundwater Recharge

• Spreading of tertiary treated wastewater• Spreading or injection of Full Advanced Treatment (FAT) water (MF/RO/AOP)

S f W A i– Surface Water Augmentation• FAT for Reservoir Augmentation (e.g., City of San Diego)

– Both must meet stringent chemical and pathogen criteria – Plus many other monitoring and operational requirements

• Direct Potable Reuse– Eliminates the environmental barrier (no aquifer or reservoir)– Two options:

• Advanced treatment (FAT) plus conventional drinking water treatment plant

4

( ) p g p• Advanced treatment (FAT) and into a potable distribution system

Direct Potable Reuse

Wastewater Treatment

Urban Water Use

Plus “Engineered 

Jeff Mosher, NWRI Executive DirectorFountain Valley CA

Water Treatment

Environmental

gBuffer”

Fountain Valley, CAjmosher@nwri‐usa.org

Environmental Buffer

Advanced WaterAdvanced Water Treatment

Big Spring (TX) Reclamation Project

8/29/2012 NWRI Workshop ‐ Criteria for Direct Potable Reuse

Potable Reuse: “Full Advanced Treatment”

Ad d O id ti

Micro/Ultrafiltration

Advanced Oxidation

TreatedWastewater

ReverseOsmosis(RO)

UltravioletLight(UV)

H2O2

Ultrafiltration(MF/UF)

Wastewater (RO) (UV)

Backwash

Advanced Treated RecycledWaterConcentrate

Backwash Water(ATRW)

Direct Potable Reuse

• Eliminate the environmental buffer:– Is an “engineered storage buffer” needed?– What performance monitoring requirements are needed to ensure water quality?

– What is the role of redundancy and robustness in a t t t t i ith t i t l b ff ?treatment train without an environmental buffer?

Thi ki• Thinking:– Treatments are provenB t d d t id “ti t t”

8

– But measures are needed to provide a “time to react” to address lapses

DPR: Types of Barriers (1)yp ( )

• Significant protection provided by:– Management, operational, and technological barriers

• Examples:p– Source control (collection system)– Wastewater treatment optimization (equalization, denitrification, monitoring)

– Use of advanced treatment and monitoring– Use of drinking water treatment plant as a barrier– Engineered storage and/or additional monitoring

9

DPR: Types of Barriers (2)yp ( )

• Water quality:– Treatment strategies (e.g., FAT)– Technical controls (alarms, procedures, etc.)O li d th it i– Online and other monitoring

– Operational controls (“react to upsets”)– Monitoring and operational plans (procedures for– Monitoring and operational plans (procedures for operators)

• Monitoring (similar to drinking water):g ( g )– Bulk parameters (surrogates) and indicators– Ensure proper treatment performance

10

– Online devices (turbidity, TOC, etc.)– Grab or composite samples

DPR Design Topicsg p• Source Control Programs

– Control of constituents not compatible with DPR• Design features

– Treatment optimization, performance monitoring• Incorporate reliability and resilience

– Variability of processes, treatment lapses, other errors• Apply “4R” approach to ensure protection of public health

– Reliability: resilience, robustness, redundancy• New technologies (monitoring and treatment)

– Demonstration and validation• Surrogates and indicators for performance monitoring

– Real‐time monitoring– Use of “Critical Control Points”

• Operations, Monitoring, and Maintenance Plans

11

– Address variability, lapses, and errors• Operator Training

– For advanced treatment technologies; appropriate response times

Definition of 4 R’sTerm Definition as Pertaining to DPR Notes

Reliability A measure of the ability of a system to distribute water that meets all requirements protective of public 

Reliability includes design, operation, maintenance, and 

source control health

Redundancy The use of multiple unit processes to attenuate the same type of

More unit processes in series, even with reduced individualto attenuate the same type of 

contaminanteven with reduced individual performance, can result in 

improved overall performance

b h b f h l dRobustness The combination of technologies that address a broad variety of 

contaminants

Broad spectrum treatment is required due to the original water 

source (wastewater)

Resilience The capacity of a DPR system to adapt successfully in the face of 

threats or disaster

Resilience can be the ability to simply shut off, or the ability to adjust the level of treatment in 

12

response to single or multiple process performance failures

GWRS Microfiltration GWRS Microfiltration OperationOperationOperationOperation

Microfiltration Effluent (MFE)

2012 2013( )

MFE Turbidity 0.07 NTU 0.08 NTUMFE Turbidity Removal 97.70% 97%MFE Suspended Solids <1 mg/L <1 mg/L

► Continue to operate at 89-90% recovery► Performed 380 MF cleanings up from 366

MF cleans in 2012 across 26 cells► Operations continued to optimize

cleanings► Use clean water flux (CWF) to help monitor

cleaning effectiveness

13

GWRS: MF Operations (cont.)GWRS: MF Operations (cont.)p ( )p ( )

► Overall good MF integrity observed: ~249 million individual fibers ► 1,286 fiber pins in 2013 compared to 499 fiber repairs in 2012

– 2,828 total fiber repairs since 2008 startup– Critical control point (CCP)

► Pin repairs:Faulty fibers blocked off

The sub module is placed in a Module Test Vessel.

Test vessel pressurized to 7 psi.

Faulty fibers blocked off using stainless steel pins tapped into top hole of fiber.

Water forced to top of module, integrity leaks identified by bubbles from the faulty fiber.

This is repeated until no more bubbles observed.

GWRS: Reverse GWRS: Reverse Osmosis OperationOsmosis Operationpp

RO Product 2012 2013TOC 0.14 mg/L 0.17 mg/L

TOC Removal % 98.30% 97.8%Electrical Conductivity 57

umhos/cm58

umhos/cmElectrical Conductivity Removal %

► System recovery = 84.5% - 85%► Pressure range = 130 - 230 psi

Electrical Conductivity Removal % 96.2% 96.2%

g p► Minimum specific flux = 0.07 gfd/psi► No O-ring issues during normal operation

15

GWRS: UV/Advanced GWRS: UV/Advanced Oxidation OperationOxidation Operationpp

► UV transmittance averaged = 98%

► Operates well above the minimum required disinfection dose of 101 mJ/cm²

► 3,021 UV lamp replacements in 2013

► 2014 lamp failure summary12% before 9 000 hrs 12% before 9,000 hrs,

51% between 9,000 – 12,000 hrs and 37% reached 12,000 hrs vs. 24% in 2012

16

GWRS: “Critical Control Points”

Flow Streamor Process Target Operating Rangeor Process

1. Chlorine Residual MF Feed 3 to 5 mg/L

2. Chlorine Residual RO Feed < 5 mg/L

<5 NTU optimum

3. Turbidity MF Feed

5 NTU optimum< 20 NTU for membrane warranty> 20 NTU for no more than 4 hours

< 50 NTU at all times

4 T bidit MF Effl t < 0 15 NTU4. Turbidity MF Effluent < 0.15 NTU

5. Turbidity RO Product 0.1 to 0.15 NTU

6. Transmembrane Pressure (TMP)

MF 3 to 12.5 psi(TMP)

7. Pressure Decay Test (PDT) based on daily testing MF < 0.25 psi/minute

< 0.5 psi/minute per manufacturer

RO P d t < 60 h /8. Electrical Conductivity RO Product < 60 µmhos/cm (< 80 for individual units)

9. Total Organic Carbon RO Product 0.1 mg/L upper control limit

10 UV Transmittance UV/AOP 95% minimum (at 254 nanometers)

17

10. UV Transmittance UV/AOP 95% minimum (at 254 nanometers)

11. Average UV Train Power UV/AOP Minimum 74 kW per train

12. Calculated UV Dose per Train

UV/AOP 101 mJ/cm2 minimum

MF Performance MF Performance –– Influent Turbidity Influent Turbidity (Critical Control Point)(Critical Control Point)(Critical Control Point)(Critical Control Point)

20

25

15

dity

(NTU

)

5

10Turb

id

0 1/1/201/15/21/29/22/12/22/26/23/12/23/26/24/9/204/23/25/7/205/21/26/4/206/18/27/2/207/16/27/30/28/13/28/27/29/10/29/24/210/8/210/22/11/5/211/19/12/3/212/17/12/31/1/14/21/28/22/11/22/25/23/11/23/25/24/8/204/22/25/6/205/20/26/3/2013 013

01301301301301313 01313 01313 01313 013013013013013013013

/2013013

/2013013

/2013/201301401401401401401414 01414 01414

MFF Turbidity MFF Turbidity Target < 20 ntu18

MF Performance MF Performance –– Effluent Turbidity Effluent Turbidity (Critical Control Point)(Critical Control Point)(Critical Control Point)(Critical Control Point)

0.12

0.14

0.16

0.08

0.10

bidi

ty (N

TU)

0.04

0.06Turb

0.00

0.02

1/20

135/

2013

9/20

132/

2013

6/20

132/

2013

6/20

139/

2013

3/20

137/

2013

1/20

134/

2013

8/20

132/

2013

6/20

130/

2013

3/20

137/

2013

0/20

134/

2013

8/20

132/

2013

5/20

139/

2013

3/20

137/

2013

1/20

134/

2014

8/20

141/

2014

5/20

141/

2014

5/20

148/

2014

2/20

146/

2014

0/20

143/

2014

1/1

1/15

1/29

2/12

2/26

3/12

3/26 4/9

4/23 5/7

5/21 6/4

6/18 7/2

7/16

7/30

8/13

8/27

9/10

9/24

10/8

10/2

211

/511

/19

12/3

12/1

712

/31

1/14

1/28

2/11

2/25

3/11

3/25 4/8

4/22 5/6

5/20 6/3

MFE Turbidity MFE Turbidity Target < 0.15 ntu

19

High Level of MF High Level of MF Integrity (Pressure Decay Testing) Integrity (Pressure Decay Testing) EnsuresEnsures Proper OperationProper OperationEnsures Ensures Proper OperationProper Operation

0.55Siemens recommended PDT value = 0.5 psi/min

0.40

0.45

0.50

alue

(psi

/min

)

0.30

0.35

ure

Dec

ay T

est V

a

0.15

0.20

0.25

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

Pres

su

1/1/

201

1/15

/201

1/29

/201

2/12

/201

2/26

/201

3/12

/201

3/26

/201

4/9/

201

4/23

/201

5/7/

201

5/21

/201

6/4/

201

6/18

/201

7/2/

201

7/16

/201

7/30

/201

8/13

/201

8/27

/201

9/10

/201

9/24

/201

10/8

/201

10/2

2/20

111

/5/2

0111

/19/

201

12/3

/201

12/1

7/20

112

/31/

201

1/14

/201

1/28

/201

2/11

/201

2/25

/201

3/11

/201

3/25

/201

4/8/

201

4/22

/201

5/6/

201

5/20

/201

6/3/

201

Avg PDT all 26 cells Target 0.25 psi/min (new membranes) 20

RO Performance RO Performance –– Product TOC Product TOC (Critical Control Point)(Critical Control Point)(Critical Control Point)(Critical Control Point)

Acetone Spike Event

0 500

0.600

0.400

0.500

/L)

0.200

0.300

TOC

(mg/

0.100

Proposed Target Limit (0.1 mg/L)

0.000

1/1/

2013

1/15

/201

31/

29/2

013

2/12

/201

32/

26/2

013

3/12

/201

33/

26/2

013

4/9/

2013

4/23

/201

35/

7/20

135/

21/2

013

6/4/

2013

6/18

/201

37/

2/20

137/

16/2

013

7/30

/201

38/

13/2

013

8/27

/201

39/

10/2

013

9/24

/201

310

/8/2

013

10/2

2/20

1311

/5/2

013

11/1

9/20

1312

/3/2

013

12/1

7/20

1312

/31/

2013

1/14

/201

41/

28/2

014

2/11

/201

42/

25/2

014

3/11

/201

43/

25/2

014

4/8/

2014

4/22

/201

45/

6/20

145/

20/2

014

6/3/

2014

ROP TOC Target (max 0.45)21

UV/AOP Performance UV/AOP Performance –– UV TransmittanceUV Transmittance((Critical Control Point)Critical Control Point)((Critical Control Point)Critical Control Point)

98.0

100.0

94.0

96.0

mitt

ance

(%)

92.0

94.0

UV

Tran

sm

88.0

90.0

013

013

013

013

013

013

013

013

013

013

013

013

013

013

013

013

013

013

013

013

013

013

013

013

013

013

013

014

014

014

014

014

014

014

014

014

014

014

1/1/

201/

15/2

01/

29/2

02/

12/2

02/

26/2

03/

12/2

03/

26/2

04/

9/20

4/23

/20

5/7/

205/

21/2

06/

4/20

6/18

/20

7/2/

207/

16/2

07/

30/2

08/

13/2

08/

27/2

09/

10/2

09/

24/2

010

/8/2

010

/22/

2011

/5/2

011

/19/

2012

/3/2

012

/17/

2012

/31/

201/

14/2

01/

28/2

02/

11/2

02/

25/2

03/

11/2

03/

25/2

04/

8/20

4/22

/20

5/6/

205/

20/2

06/

3/20

UV/AOP UVT Target >95% 22

UV/AOP Performance UV/AOP Performance -- Power Power ((Critical Control Point)Critical Control Point)((Critical Control Point)Critical Control Point)

100

120

Train A Train B Train C Train D Train E Train F Train G Train H

80

 (kW)

60

ower Con

sumption

20

40

Po

0Jan‐13 Feb‐13 Mar‐13 Apr‐13 May‐13 Jun‐13 Jul‐13 Aug‐13 Sep‐13 Oct‐13 Nov‐13 Dec‐13

DATE

23

Dissolved Organic Matter: Dissolved Organic Matter: Excitation/Emission Matrix (EEM) AnalysisExcitation/Emission Matrix (EEM) AnalysisExcitation/Emission Matrix (EEM) AnalysisExcitation/Emission Matrix (EEM) Analysis

40000

60000

80000

nce Units

0

20000

40000

Fluo

rescen

TFE ASE MFF ROF ROP

24

DPR Research Needs (1)( )

• Assess reliability of overall treatment and resiliencyof unit treatment processesof unit treatment processes– Methods to assess treatment performance– Define consistency of treatmentDefine consistency of treatment– Better indicators and surrogates (performance monitoring)– Use of Critical Control Points for operationsp

• Process to validate new technologies– Treatment trains equivalent to FAT?

• Characterize pathogen and chemical risks– Removal of precursors of disinfection byproducts

25

– Document removal of pathogens and chemicals– Better understand microbial communities

DPR Research Needs (2)( )

• Preparation for failures (resiliency)– Evaluate out‐of‐spec behavior– Development of plans and protocols

• Operations– Use of Operation and Monitoring Plans– Develop training for operators– Certification for “advance treatment plant” operators

• Transition research to application– Interpretation of results

26

– Assist in the implementation of projects