Proactive and Multi-Barrier Treatment Approach for Taste-and-Odor Compounds and UCMR4 Cyanotoxins: The Lafourche Parish Water District Experience Amlan.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Amherst , MA, Drinking Water System Atkins Water Treatment Plant
Advertisements

North Texas Municipal Water District Water Treatment Process.
Case Study: Disinfection byproducts in a recently constructed public water supply Maria O’Connell, P.E. Kristine Wheeler, P.E. New York State Department.
Surface Water Treatment Plant
Water Treatment Plant General Discharge Permit
VII. Water Treatment C. Supplementation (fluoridation) of drinking water treatment, D. Special processes of drinking water treatment D. Special processes.
Simultaneous Solutions for Aesthetics and Other Water Quality Problems Stephen Booth, PhD Craig Thompson, PE.
Slide 1 Delta Water Quality: Implications for Utility Compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act Edward G. Means III Sr. Vice President McGuire Environmental.
Water Treatment for NYC Croton Schematic. NYC Filtration Plant for Delaware and Catskill Systems  Filtration avoidance criteria  Alternatives to Filtration.
Water Treatment for NYC Croton Schematic. NYC Filtration Plant for Delaware and Catskill Systems ä Filtration avoidance criteria ä Alternatives to Filtration.
NYC Filtration Plant for Delaware and Catskill Systems ä Filtration avoidance criteria ä Alternatives to Filtration? ä Where should the plant(s) be located?
Molalla Water Treatment Plant Field Trip 4/24/07 Molalla Water Treatment Plant Field Trip 4/24/07.
Evaluating Coagulants for Water Treatment Kari Duncan – City of Lake Oswego & Doug Wise – Eugene Water & Electric Board PNWS-AWWA Section Conference May.
Surface Water Treatment Plant. Fig 4-8: Flow Diagram of conventional surface water treatment plant (“filtration plant”)
Cyanotoxin Reduction Performance
Methods for the Estimation of Mine Infiltration Bruce Leavitt PE PG, Consulting Hydrogeologist Washington, Pennsylvania.
Iron and Manganese Removal
Water Treatment CE 326 Principles of Environmental Engineering Department of Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering Iowa State University March.
Operational Evaluation Level Stage 2 D/DBP Rule Compliance Michael W. Deal Compliance Assurance Section Central Office Division of Drinking And Ground.
Assessing Plant DBP Performance Using the DBP-CPE Warren J. Swanson, P.E RMSAWWA/RMWEA Annual Conference Grand Junction, Colorado Schmueser gordon.
Buckhorn Disinfection Byproducts / Backwash Disposal Project Board of Directors Meeting June 14, 2012.
Water Treatment & Distribution System Overview.
SPWSTAC 2006 From POU to Centralized Arsenic Treatment: A Small Water System Case Study 2006 NGWA Naturally Occurring Contaminants Conference J. Mitchell.
1 Full-Scale Testing of Innovative High Rate Filter Media for Plant Expansion Bob Raczko, P.E. United Water.
Sourcewater coag/settling filtration storage elevated tank consumer Optimizing the chemistry in a water treatment plant.
The Drinking Water Treatment Process
Water Treatment: Introduction Suzette R. Burckhard, PhD, PE Civil and Environmental Engineering South Dakota State University Engineering the Future 2014.
1 Water Services Training Group 19 th Annual Conference Optimising Services Delivery in the Water Industry Radisson Blu Hotel, Sligo, 3 rd. September 2015.
2015 Fly-in Regulatory Update for SEFLUC Meeting Lisa M. Wilson-Davis City of Boca Raton Shamelessly “borrowed” from and with gratitude to J. Alan Roberson,
Bloomin’ Toxins: What Public Officials Need to Know About Cyanotoxins US Council of Mayors Washington, DC April 30, 2015
Taste and Odor Control at the Bloomington Water Treatment Plant Rick Twait Superintendent of Water Purification, City of Bloomington Jill Mayes Water Lab.
NC AWWA-WEA 2015 Annual Conference Monday, November 16, 2015 The Use of Chlorine Dioxide to Reduce TOC at Davidson Water, Inc. Water Treatment Plant.
Co-Occurrence of Toxins and Taste-and-Odor Compounds in Cyanobacterial Blooms from the Midwestern United States USGS Kansas Water Science Center Algal.
Date: Monday, May 11 th 2015 Topic: Water Purification Objective: To recognize the stages of it.
Minnesota Drinking Water Designated Use Assessment Workshop Tom Poleck EPA Region 5, Water Quality Branch May 20-21,
Effective Removal of Total Organic Carbon (TOC) Using MIEX Ion Exchange Treatment J. Michael Barnes, PE.
University of Wyoming Environmental Engineering Senior Design Team Leah Birgen Brent Brouillard.
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE 5.4 The Waterworks. At the Waterworks When reservoirs or rivers are the source of drinking water, the water must be treated to remove.
Influences of environmental factors on the instant removal of Geosmin and 2-MIB by powdered activated carbon Viet Ly Quang a · Sung Kyu Maeng b · Ilhwan.
1 Highland Water District CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
Lecture4_introduction to drinking water, Chemeng, KKU, M.Thabuot      M. Thabuot CIP, Chemical Engineering KHONKAEN UNIVERSIT Y 1.
Integration of Accelerated Precipitation Softening - Microfiltration (APS-MF) Assembly to Maximize Water Recovery from the Treatment of Brackish Water.
Evaluation of Microbiological Risks Associated with Direct Potable Reuse (DPR) Water Microbiology Conference 2016 University of North Carolina May 2016.
City of Farmersville Wastewater Project January 26, 2016 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
Water Filtration Plant Improvements Project Summary
Evaluating Coagulants for Water Treatment
Workshop developed by RCAP/AWWA and funded by the USEPA
Advanced Technologies for Attaining and Maintaining DBP Compliance
Amherst , MA, Drinking Water System Atkins Water Treatment Plant
Methods for the Estimation of Mine Infiltration
FIELD INVESTIGATION OF IN SITU LIME NEUTRALIZATION OF ACIDIC SEDIMENT
Presented by, Chris Overcash, PE, BCEE, ENV SP For
RIMCON PROVIDES NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CONSULTING TO THE MINING AND AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRIES INCLUDED ARE ZEOLITE AND OTHER INDUSTRIAL MINERAL-BASED.
Course structure Part 1. Introduction (incl. generic methods)
FLIPPED CLASSROOM ACTIVITY CONSTRUCTOR – USING EXISTING CONTENT
Lake Elsinore and Canyon Lake TMDL Water Quality Monitoring Update – Summary August 15, 2017.
Jim Flechtner, PE Executive Director April 26, 2018
Kentucky Lead Workgroup Recommendations
Streaming Current Detectors
Louisiana Coastal Area
Algae, Algal Toxins, and Treatment: A Cure for Bad HABits!
Preliminary Assessment of Cyanotoxin Occurrence in Lakes and Reservoirs in the United States Keith A. Loftin, Jennifer L. Graham, Michael T. Meyer, Andrew.
OHWARN Workshop Disruption of Service Rule Update
مبانی کار تصفیه‌خانه‌های آب
CITY OF MARSHALL CHLORIDE ISSUES NOVEMBER 22, 2016
Southwest Section AWWA 2018 – Baton Rouge, LA
Adapting to a New Era: Declining Flow and Deteriorating Water Quality
Lebanon Water Works National Optimization Goals Case Study - Meeting the Goals at the Lebanon Water Works Company Daren Thompson, MBA, MPM.
Trihalomethanes Removal Evaluation
MANILLA WATER SUPPLY UPGRADE
Presentation transcript:

Proactive and Multi-Barrier Treatment Approach for Taste-and-Odor Compounds and UCMR4 Cyanotoxins: The Lafourche Parish Water District Experience Amlan Ghosh, Chad Seidel - Corona Environmental Consulting, LLC Jared Allemand, Jenny Robichaux – Lafourche Parish Water District #1 Southwest AWWA 2018 Annual Conference October 29, 2018

Acknowledgements Lafourche Parish Water District #1: Corona: Dirk Barrios Addis Landry Scott Thibodeaux Corona: Eli Townsend Keck & Wood: Michael Moffitt Wayne State University Dr. Judy Westrick Jonna Birbeck

Presentation Outline LPWD historical T&O issues PAC evaluation Partial & full plant trials WTP improvements Cyanotoxin treatability tests Conclusions

Water System Overview

T&O Events - 2014 ≤5 complaints 6-19 complaints ≥20 complaints 2014 06/24 06/30 07/06 07/12 07/18 07/24 07/30 Increased PAC and MnO4 (11) Jun 26 (7) Jun 29 Increased PAC (53) Jun 30 Increased PAC and ClO2 (20) Jul 1 Odor in Tap at POE, Contacted solution providers, ATP increased from bayou to reservoir (40) Jul 3 Norit confirms carbon type is correct (12) Jul 8 Increased MnO4 (12) Jul 9 Dialogue with Jim Bromka (Rochester) regarding experience with T&O events. They use a process consisting of roghing filters followed by H2O2/UV AOP (0) Jul 16 Met with Terrebonne to discuss the influence of chloraphyll (0) Jul 18 MnO4 jar tests at both plants (0) Jul 25 Decreased MnO4 (7) Jul 28 Cu in POE 0.04 mg/L, Reservoir overflow (7) Jul 30 Reservoir flushing (2) Aug 1 Increased PAC, Increased MnO4 (0) Jun 24 Increased PAC (9) Jun 25 Increased MnO4 (21) Jun 27 (8) Jun 28 Call LADHH and news regarding T&O, Increased ClO2 (46) Jul 2 Reservoir Overflow (2) Jul 6 Contacted Norit regarding PAC type (17) Jul 7 Met with Terrebonne (5) Jul 10 Odor in Bayou Blue (5) Jul 11 Odor in Bayou Blue back to normal, Expecting UVT monitor (0) Jul 14 DO meters ordered (0) Jul 15 (1) Jul 17 Permit for CuSO4 system recinded (3) Jul 21 Increased MnO4 and PAC, CuSO4 Permit approved, floating algae on surface of reservoir, reservoir overflow (7) Jul 29 Discussed various sludge removal options from North reservoir, decided not to shock treat reservoir, reservoir flushing, reservoir overflow showed a decrease in ATP, switch to regular overflow and flushing (7) Jul 31 (3) Aug 4 ≤5 complaints 6-19 complaints ≥20 complaints Today

Process Flow Diagram Bayou To Distribution System Reservoir Rapid Mix/Flocculation/Sedimentation Dual Media (sand- anthracite) Filters Clearwell Ground Storage Permanganate Chlorine Polymer, Alum, Fluoride, Lime, Ammonia, ClO2 PAC Zinc Orthophosphate, Ammonia, Chlorine

Response to Algae Events

T&O Study: 2015-2018 Develop T&O Monitoring Program Establish monitoring plan Collect data: 2015-2017 Develop alert and action levels based on collected data WTP T&O Control Strategies Powdered activated carbon testing Bench-scale Full-scale: Obtained approval from LDH Two rounds of partial plant trial in 2016 One round of full plant trial in 2017

MIB Results: 2015

T&O Treatment Strategies – Jar Tests Evaluate current treatment processes Using jar testing, determine the effectiveness of 5 PAC types for T&O removal Specifically, determine: Best PAC type for optimal T&O removal Best PAC dose for optimal T&O removal Best PAC addition location for optimal T&O removal 10

PACs Used in Jar Tests PAC Product Cabot Hydrodarco B Hydrodarco C Norit PAC 20BF Calgon WPH-1000 PULSORB WP260-90 Size Distribution Less than 150 µm: 99% Less than 45 µm: 65% Less than 45 µm: 90% Less than 75 µm: 95% Density 0.51 g/mL; 32 lb/ft3 0.4 - 0.7 g/mL Iodine Number 500 mg/g 800 mg/g 1000 mg/g 11

PAC Jar Test Results

Jar Test Results Best PAC type for optimal T&O removal Calgon Carbon WPH-1000 or equivalent Best PAC dose for optimal T&O removal 50 mg/L provided > 90% MIB removal Best PAC addition location for optimal T&O removal In the rapid mix basins 13

3 Rounds of Partial and Full Plant Trials

Improvements at North WTP LDH review and approval (April – May 2017) New PAC treatment used since summer 2017 New feed location at rapid-mix instead of sedimentation basin Maximum dose capability of 50 mg/L New PAC product (higher iodine number being used)

Cyanotoxins Evaluation 10-day Health Advisory (µg/L) Bottle-fed Infants School-age and Older Microcystin-LR 0.3 1.6 Cylindrospermopsin 0.7 3 Test removal of all 10 UCMR4 cyanotoxins Test simultaneously in presence of T&O compounds (MIB) Four pre-approved PACs for T&O removal Use same dose and application location as for T&O removal

Cyanotoxins & MIB concentrations Target Initial Concentration (µg/L) MC-LR 3.1 MC-RR MC-YR MC-LA MC-LF MC-LY Total Microcystin 18.6 Anatoxin 10 Nodularin 6.2 Cylindrospermopsin 2-MIB 0.1

Jar Test Results Product ID PAC A PAC C PAC D PAC E Product Name WPH-1000 AquaNuchar W-PL 900 AquaSorb CB1-MW Microcystin-RR 27% 80% 65% 82% Microcystin-YR 26% 78% 45% Microcystin-LR 35% 51% 68% Microcystin-LA 33% 44% Microcystin-LY 31% 84% 60% 81% Microcystin-LF 39% 79% 56% 85% Total Microcystin 54% Nodularin 18% Anatoxin 24% 55% Cylindrospermopsin 75% 91%   Average 32% 76%

Jar Test Results – Total Microcystins

Jar Test Results – Total Microcystins

Jar Test Results – Cylindrospermopsin

Jar Test Results – Anatoxin

Comparison of ELISA vs LC/MS/MS

Removal of T&O vs. Cyanotoxins

Recommendations/ Conclusions T&O Removal: Pre-qualified PAC product successfully reduces T&O to lower than threshold levels Application of PAC in rapid mix (vis-à-vis sedimentation basin) provides additional benefit in T&O removal Up to 50 mg/L of PAC dose necessary PAC dose driven by triggers based on T&O monitoring

Recommendations/ Conclusions Cyanotoxins Removal: Partial removal of cyanotoxins with PAC Treatment targets to be determined based on future regulatory levels, initial concentrations, water quality conditions, etc. Percent removal of individual cyanotoxins with PAC application vary Excellent removal of cylindrospermopsin Moderate removal of most microcystins Poor removal of anatoxin Relative performance of PACs for cyanotoxin removal similar to those for T&O removal

Corona Environmental Consulting Proactive and Multi-Barrier Treatment Approach for Taste-and-Odor Compounds and UCMR4 Cyanotoxins: The Lafourche Parish Water District Experience Amlan Ghosh, Ph.D., P.E. Corona Environmental Consulting Phone: (214)-250-1456 Email: aghosh@coronaenv.com