City Council May 15, 2012 Hickory Update

491 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
491
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
83
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

City Council May 15, 2012 Hickory Update

  1. 1. Agenda1. Overall project progress2. Groundwater (GW) Treatment & Disposal Alternatives3. Surface Water Treatment Plant Assessment4. Updated treatment costs & schedule5. Questions 2
  2. 2. Well Field Piping Completed design: June 28, 2011 Bids Received: August 12, 2011 Contractor: Price Construction, LTD NTP: October 4, 2011 Current Status: Construction is 95% complete 3
  3. 3. Transmission Main Completed design: August 12, 2011 Bids Received: September 23, 2012 Contractor: Oscar Renda Contracting Delay in approval and release of funds by TWDB NTP: January 23, 2012 Current status: Construction activities are underway 4
  4. 4. Booster Pump Station & Well Field Completed design: February 29, 2012 Design approved by TCEQ & TWDB: April 2012 Bids Received: May 1, 2012 Contractor: Archer Western Construction LLC Status: COSA Approval NTP: June 11, 2012 pending final approval and release of funds by TWDB 5
  5. 5. Groundwater Treatment Ion Exchange (IX) pilot testing 100% complete Reverse Osmosis (RO) pilot testing 95% complete Surface Water Treatment Plant Assessment completed for incorporation of new facilities Final design will commence upon selection of treatment/disposal alternative 6
  6. 6. Groundwater Treatment Background Single-use Ion Exchange (IX) • Previous pilot testing for groundwater indicated that single use ion exchange is a viable technology for removing radium • Pilot tests showed that O&M costs were higher than what was suggested by the manufacturers • Results suggested evaluating other treatment technologies like RO Reverse Osmosis • Pilot Plant investigations started in January 2012 7
  7. 7. Treatment Alternative 1: Single-UseIon Exchange (IX) Pretreatment Ion Exchange (IX) Phosphate Finished Water (99% Recovery) Well Granular Spent Disposal to Media Resin Licensed Facility Filter 8
  8. 8. Treatment Alternative 2: Reverse Osmosis (RO) Pretreatment 3-Stage RO Post Treatment Acid Antiscalant Finished Water (90% Recovery) CO2 Cartridge Excellent Filters Water QualityWell Granular Brine to Media Air Calcite Treatment/ Filter Stripper Contactor Disposal 9
  9. 9. Preliminary RO Results Summary Excellent membrane performance All three (3) RO membranes tested produced good results which allows good competition All membranes tested maintained radium below 1 pCi/L in the treated water 10
  10. 10. Comparison of Radium at the Point of Entry Using RO and Single-Use IX IX Effluent RO EffluentCombined TCEQ Limit Ra 5 (pCi/L) 0 Time 11
  11. 11. GW Treatment/Disposal Alternatives1. Single-Use Ion Exchange (IX) with spent media to an approved landfill2. Reverse Osmosis (RO) with Brine to: a. Deep well injection b. Land application (mixing with WWTP Effluent) c. Single-Use Ion Exchange (IX) 12
  12. 12. 2a. Brine Disposal/ Deep Well Injection Inject RO brine into deep underground aquifer Location of injection wells needs to be identified Test well needs to be constructed and piloted at anticipated full scale capacity prior to approval (approx 18 months)
  13. 13. 2b. Brine Disposal / Land Application  Brine is pumped to storage pond at wastewater treatment plant (WWTP)  Brine blended with WWTP effluent  Mixture is land applied
  14. 14. 2c. Brine Disposal/ IX Brine Treatment  Single-use IX used to treat RO brine  Treated concentrate sent to sewer  Resin disposed of at a low-level radioactive waste site
  15. 15. Incorporation of Hickory GW intoExisting SWTP Investigated incorporation of Groundwater Treatment Facilities to expedite design once a treatment alternative is selected Evaluated existing plant conditions with respect to regulations, reliability, performance & hydraulics Conducted a blending study to investigate compatibility of the Surface Water & Ground Water 16
  16. 16. Estimated Construction Costs Comparison for a Treatment Capacity of 6 mgd 2a. RO / Deep 2b. RO / Land 1. IX 2c. RO/IX Well Inj. ApplicationAlternativeCapital Cost(millions) $23.4 $61.0 $65.0 $39.8Annual O&M(millions) $3.3 $2.4 $1.8 $2.2NPV O&M Costs(millions) $92.3 $68.5 $51.1 $62.2Total NPV Cost(millions) $115.7 $129.5 $116.1 $102.0Note: Costs in millions and are for 2012 dollars, assuming a discount rate of 3% and a project life o30 years starting in 2014, with a capacity of 6 mgd and no expansions.
  17. 17. Anticipated Schedule RO/ Deep RO / Land IX RO / IX Well ApplicationAnticipated Start June 2012Deep Well Full Scale PilotDesign & Operation (Approvalneeded by TCEQ, TWDB) --- 18 --- ---Design (Expedited) 8 11 11 9TCEQ / TWDB Review 2 2 2 2Bid/Award/NTP 2 2 2 2Construction 12 – 15 15 - 18 15 - 18 15 - 18 24 - 28 48 - 51 30 - 33 28 - 31Total time months months months months 18
  18. 18. Treatment Alternative Evaluation Summary Reverse Ion Exchange Osmosis with (IX) Brine (IX) TreatmentCapital costs ✓Annual O&M ✓Net present value ✓ ✓Schedule ✓ ✓Treated water quality ✓Water recovery ✓Price fluctuations/competition ✓
  19. 19. EXTRA SLIDES
  20. 20. Capital Cost to Add 3 MGD Capacity in 2014 Reverse Osmosis with Ion Exchange IX of BrineAdditional Wells, piping,civil, electrical etc $14.5 $14.5Booster Pump StationUpgrade $0.4 $0.4Treatment $6.0 $11.1Total Cost $20.9 $26.0Note: Estimates are given in millions for 2012 dollars.Additional engineering & management is estimated at 12% and is included in the estimate
  21. 21. Recommended SWTP Improvements Chemical storage and feed facilities for joint use between GW and SW facilities New clearwell as the existing clearwell is reaching its service life Facilities to recycle filter backwash washwater to the head of the surface WTP will conserve an average of 0.3 MGD (100 MG/year) Raw water blending and flow split structure to handle the different source waters 23
  22. 22. Costs for Major Recommended SWTP Improvement Estimated Costs Alternative Clearwell $3.9 Backwash handling facilities $3.4 Flow blending split structure $2.9 New control/lab building $2.4Note: Estimates are given in millions for 2012 dollars. Additional engineering &management is estimated at 15% and is included in the estimate

×