BEFORE

THE IIILLINOISPOLL1J5I/I~CONTROL BOARD

jj

\/r

~~IL3

CITY OF CHARLESTON, ILLINOIS,

)

)

Petitioner,

)

)

v.

)

PCB

04-111

)

)

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

)

PROTECTION AGENCY,

)

)

Respondent,

)

NOTICE

OF FILING

To:

Illinois

Pollution Control Board

100 West Randolph Street

James R. Thompson Center

Suite 11-500

Chicago, Illinois

60601-3218

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

1021

North Grand Avenue East

P.O. Box

19276

Springfield,

Illinois 62794-9276

PLEASE

TAKE

NOTICE

that

I have today

filed with

the Office

of the

Clerk of the

Pollution Control Board,

Substitute Exhibits to

the Variance

Petition previously filed herein said

exhibits being attached hereto this Notice.

Brian L. Bower

City Attorney

600 Jackson Avenue

Charleston, Illinois 61920

(217) 345-4012

,~ATED

---

I

CERTCi4TI!

SERVICE

\~U

\::~~

U U

~

The undersigned, being first

duly

sworn upon

oath deposes and

states

that

on

the

day

ofFebruary 2004

,

by way of depositing

a photocopy of

NOTICE

OF FILING

along with ten (10)

copies of ORIGINAL

SUBSTITUTE EXHIBITS

going to

the Illinois Pollution

Control Board and one

(1)

copy

going

to

the

Illinois

Environmental

Protection

Agency

via

Overnight

mail

with

the

proper

postage prepaid and addressed to the following in

the manner set forth:

Illinois Pollution Control Board

Illinois Environmental Protection

Agency

100

W. Randolph

1021

North Grand Avenue East

James R. Thompson

Center

P.O. Box

19276

Suite

11500

Springfield,

Illinois 62794-9276

Chicago, Illinois 60601-3218

SUBSCRIB~Dand

SWORN

to before

me this

~‘k~

day ofFebruary 2004.

NOTARY PUBLIC

Brian L. Bower

City Attorney

600 Jackson Avenue

Charleston, IL 61920

(217) 345-4012

(217) 345-7554 (fax)

1W:

---

R~CEVEO

CLERK’S OFFICE

ILLiNOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

JAN

132004

January

13, 2004

STATE OF iLLINOIS

Pollution

Control Board

CITY

OF CHARLESTON,

ILLINOIS,

)

RECE~v~Q

Petitioner,

.

)

-

CLERK’S OFFICE

FEB

-3

2004

v.

)

PCBO4-111

)

(Variance

-

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION AGENCY,

•.•

.

)

)

Respondent.

.

)

HEARING

OFFICER ORDER

The parties are advised that this matter has been assigned to the hearing officer identified

below.

From this date forward, any.pleading filed with the Clerk ofthe Board in this matter

must also be served individually

on. the hearing officer.

The parties are directed to participate in a telephone status conference with the hearing

officer at

10:00 a.m. on January 23,

2004.

The telephone status conference willbe initiated by

the complainant.

The parties shall be prepared

to. discuss the status ofthis matter.

The statutory decision deadline is

May 7, 2004,

which would require the Board

to decide

this matter at its meeting on May 6, 2004.

If petitioner does not waive the statutory decision

deadline, the parties shall

be

prepared to

set this matter for hearing.

ITIS SOORDERED~

.

Carol Sudman

Hearing Officer

Illinois Pollution Control Board

.1021

North Grand Avenue East.

P.O. Box

19274

Springfield,

Illinois 62794-9274

217/524-8509

.

sudmanc~ipcb.state.il.us

---

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

It is hereby certified that true

copies of

the foregoing order were mailed, first class, to

each

of

the’foflowfng ofilanuary

13, 2004:

Brian L. Bower

.

.

IEPA, Division ofLegal counsel

Brainard, Bower and Kramer Law

1021 North Grand Avenue East

Office

P.O. Box

19276

600 Jackson Avenue

Springfield, IL

62794-9276

Charleston, IL 619203

It

is hereby certified that

a

true copy ofthe foregoing order was hand delivered to the

following on January 13, 2004:

.

.

Dorothy M. Gunn

.

Illinois Pollution Control Board

James R. Thompson Center

.

100

W. Randolph St.,

Ste.

11-500

Chicago, Illinois 60601

.

.

Carol

Sudman

Hearing Officer

Illinois Pollution Control Board

1021. North Grand Avenue East

P.O.Box

19274

Springfield, Illinois 62794-9274

217/524-8509

•sudmanc@ipcb.state.il.us

.

---

ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

December 6,

2001

CITY OF CHARLESTON,

)

)

Petitioner,

)

)

V.

)

)

PCB 02-20

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL

.

)

(Variance

-

Public

Water Supply)

PROTECTION AGENCY,

)

)

Respondent.

)

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD

(by

N.J.

Melas):

This matter

is

before the Board pursuant toa petition

for

variance

filed by

the

City

of

Charleston (Charleston),

on

August

16,

2001.

Pursuant

to Section

3

5(a)

ofthe

Environmental

Protection Act (Act),

the Board may grant variances from Board

regulations whenever

immediate compliance with Board regulations would impose an arbitrary or unreasonable

hardship

on the petitioner.

415

ILCS

5/35(a)

(2000).

The Illinois

Environmental Protection

Agency (Agency)

is required to appear in hearings

on variance petitions.

415 ILCS

5/4(f~

(2000)

The Ag~ncy

is cbarged,with

t~i9

re~ponsibtht~’

of investigating each vanance petition

and making a recow.rnend~tion

to the Bthrd as tQihe diSposition of~the

~et1tIon

415 ILCS

5/37(a)(2000).~’~

~

.

.~..

~

~

Charleston is

seeking a variance’for its drinking water treatment plant (plant)

The

requested variance is fróm~

Subsection 611 .743(a)(i) of the Board’s primary drinking water•

standards.

35

111.

Adm.

Code 611.743.’

This provision mandates lower turbidity

levels in

filtered drinking water samples:

Charleston has requested the variance for a period of two

years.

Pet, at 2;

resp. at

1.2

.

In a variance proceeding, the burden is on

the petitioner to present proofthat

immediate compliance with Board regulations would

cause an.arbitrary or unreasonable

hardship,

which outweighs public interest in compliance with the regulations.

Marathon Oil v.

Environmental Protection Agency, 242111.

App. 3d 200, 206, 610 N.E.2d 789,

793

(5th Dist.

1993).

.

Pursuant to

Section

35(a)

of the Act, the Board finds that. Charleston has presented

‘These~tandardswere.adopted by”the Board in SD’A Update. USEPA Regulations (July

1.

1998 through ~Décemb~r~

31,

1998~R99-12 (i~i1y

~

1999):~:

:

.:::

.~:

..~

2

C.ha4~on’

s

petition will be cited as “Pet

at

“,

the Agency’s recommendations will be

cited~

as “Rec

at

~

Charieston’s response to the hearm~offi~er

order will be cited

as

~~::

‘~~•~‘•‘~

:..

:.

~

~

~

‘.

:.

---

3

requirements of subsection (a) or (b) of this Section or Section

611.250

(b) or (c) by December 31, 2001.

a)

Conventional filtration treatment or direct filtration.

~..

For systems using c~nvëntiona1filtratio~or

dfrect

filtration, the tutbidity level mus~

be less than or

equal to’O.3 NTUin:at least

95pth~

measurements taken each month, j~ieasured

as

specified in Sections 611.531

and 611.533.

Thus,

without the relief provided in a variance,

Charleston will have to produce water

with

an NTU of 0.3 or less 95

ofthe time by

December 31, 2001.

Basedon Charleston’s

data from 1998-2001, its existing plant can only produce finished water with a turbidity of 0.3

NTU or less

70

of the time.

During that period,

the lowest monthly compliance rate with

the 0.3

NTU standard was just under 34.

.

Pet at

5,

9,

10

exh.

A.

COMPLIANCE PLAN

In order for Charleston to produce 0.3 ~NTU

combined finished water turbidities 95

of the time, it must build a new plant.

.

Charleston estimated that construction of the plant will

take

36 months but will not be complete by th~

eiid~

of Dëc~mber

2001.

Charleston began

prelinnuary englJleering work in December 2000 and finished

it

m May 2001

It is in the

process of design and permitting the new plant

that

it

began rn June 2001

and expects to

complete by April 2002

Charleston predicted that construction, startup,

and additional

permitting activities will take from May

2002 until December 2003

It estimated that the new

plant will cost

$8. 192

million, including $96,000

for preliminary design,

$796,000 fOr

design,

and $7.3 million for

construction.

Future annualized costs

are expected to be $1.6 million

including debt service and operating expenses.

Pet. at

5-6, 8~Charleston predicted that the

turbidity in

the water from

the new plant will be 0.1 NTU or less

95

ofthe time, thereby

exceeding the new standard.

Pet. at

8-9.

During the term of the variance, Charleston proposes

to comply with the current

turbidity requirement of 0.5 NTU Or le~s95

of the time at

Section 611

.250(a~(1).

of the

Board’s

regulations.

Pet. at

11.

Charleston’s new plant will

include a new rapid mixer;

a pre-sediinentation basin to

reduce turbidity; new lime softening contact units

for hardness and reduced turbidity; new

recarbonation basins for pH adjustment;

a new ozone contact basin to

control taste,

odor,

and

microbial contaminants; and new granular activated carbon filters to control taste,

odor,

and

turbidity.

Pet.

at 7-8.

~.

.

.

.

...

.

.

.

.

.

.

—

..

..

..

.

---

5

ever been detected in

the finished water.

Charleston claimed that the health risk to

its

consumers during the requested two-year term of the variance will be

minimal.

Pet,

at 9-10;

rësp. at2,

exh.B~

:

:

.

.

.

.

.

...

.

The

Agency generally agreed, mentioning that

Charleston has not had

an-putbreak of a

waterborne ..discas

ine~:it~.:c~~nt

.p1ai~t.was.

c9~istTUc~d

~

~

not

imp:Os.e

a significantfrisk tq.’the~publk~

or the envir?nment,.

Rec.~at8~

~

~

..~

~

.~:::..‘•~

•.~..

~

.~..

..

CONSISTENCY

~DE~L

LAWS:

.~

~

..

.

The

basis for Subsection 611 .743(a)(l) of the Board’s regulations is the “Interim

Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule”

(IESWTR).•

See

63

Fed. Reg.

69,478

(Dec.

16,

1998); codified at 40

C.F.R.

§

141.173 (2000).

Charleston and the Agency agreed that the requested variance may1~

granted

consistent with Section

1412(b)(10) of the Safe Drinking Water Act.

42 U.S.C.

Sec.

300g-

l(b)(10); pet.

at

12; rec.

at

8-9.

Thatsection provides,

in pertinent part:

A

State.

.

.

may allow up

to 2 additional years

beyond

the

effective date of the regulation

to comply with a.

.

.

treatment

technique ifthe.

.

.

State

~.

.

determines that additional time

is

necessary for capital improvements

.~B:othChär1esth.~.àñd:

the:A~ency’ag.re~d

tha1~cotistructingthe:new~plänt.is

.a capital..:t~.

im~rovéthent

necessary

to ~Otnply’.with

Subs~ct.ithi.6Ii74~(a~(1)~ftheBoard’:s.regulations.

Pet. at

12•

rec.

at 9.

:.

~

.

-.

.

,...

.

.....

...

.

.

.

. -~.

:

.~

~:

Illinois has not yet received federal primacy authorization for the IESWTR.

The

variance thus only provides relief from state turbidity standards.

CONCLUSION

The Board finds that, if the instant variance petition is not granted,

Charleston will

incur .an arbitrary orunreasonable hardship.

For This~

reason,. the Board will.grant

the..

requested variance,

subject to the conditions recommended by the Agency.

This opinion constitutes the Board’s

frndings of fact and conclusions of law..

ORDER

The Board hereby grants petitioner,

the City of charleston, a variance, from 35

Ill.

Adrn. Cod~61

L743(a~(1~

fo

içs e.~is~ing

drinki:g.w~~treata1ent

plant ~

Coles County, Illinois~.

subje~

to ~he~

g.~onditi~~ié~T

~

~.

~.

~

~

~t:~

..

---

7

Petitioner

.

.

y.~.

~

AuthOrized:

gent

~

~

~

~~::

.,::

‘:~‘.‘

~‘

.~:

.~:

~‘:

~.

~

~

:‘..~.

Title

.

.

Date

SectiOn 41(a) of the Environmental Protection

Act, provides that final Board orders may

be

appealed directly to the Illinois Appellate Court within 35 days after the Board serves the

order.

415 ILCS

5/41(a) (2000);

see also

35

Ill. Adm.

Code

101 .300(d)(2),

101.906,

102:.706.

Illinpis Supreme

Court Rule 335 establishes filing

requirements that apply when the

Illinois Appellate Court, by

statute, directly reviews adniin.istrative orders.

172

111. 2d R.

335.

The Board’s procedural rules provide that motions for the Board to reconsider or modify its

final orders may be filed with the Board within

35 days after the order is received.

35 ill.

Adin.

Code

101 .520;

see also

35

Iii.

Adm.

Code

101.902,

102.700,

102.702.

I, Dorothy

M. Gunn,

Clerk of the illinois Pollution Control Board,

certify that the

Board adopted the above

opinion and order on December 6, by

a vOte Of 5-0.

1

~

~

;‘.‘,:‘~j

.±:~‘

.

Dorothy M. Gunn,

Clerk

Illinois Pollution Control Board

---

Exhibit ‘B’

CITY OF

CHARLESTON

TURBIDITY RESULTS

CALENDAR YEARS 2002 AND 2003

MONTH/YEAR

# OF

SAMPLES

# OF SAMPLES

UNDER 0.344 NTU’S

COLLECTED

UNDER 0.344

NTU’S

(95

Req’d)

JAN 2002

327

320

97.9

FEB 2002

304

243

79.9

MAR2002

322

,

318

APR 2002

329

271

MAY2002

326

277

JUNE 2002

316

304

96.2

JULY2002

339

242

71.4

AUG 2002

313

152

48.6

SEPT 2002

333

243

.

73.0

OCT 2002

323

294

91.0

NOV 2002

292

292

100.0

DEC 2002

289

204

70.6

JAN2003

285

.

254

FEB 2003

265

255

MAR2003

286

286

APR 2003

282

282

MAY2003

280

277

JUNE 2003

265

263

JULY 2003

283

274

AUG 2003

301

301

SEPT 2003

287

286

OCT 2003

287

287

NOV 2003

248

247

DEC 2003

257

246

1.

Added

a

2.

Achieved 95

of readings under 0.544 NTU’s in all

22

months.

---

CITY OF CHARLESTON, ILLINOIS

WATER TREATMENT PLANT

IMPROVEMENTS

ENGINEER’S

PREPARED BY:

CRAWFORD, MURPHY & lILLY,

Springfield, Illinois

JUNE, 2003

---

INTRODUCTION

Executive Summary

The

City

of

Charleston,

Illinois

retained

Crawford,

Murphy &

Tilly,

Inc.

(CMT) to

evaluate

improvements

to

the

Charleston

Water

Treatment

Facilities

that

are

necessary in

order to

reliably

meet current

and

future water production

demand

and

address the

taste

and

odor

issues

confronting the

City

of,

Charleston.

In

addition,

future regulatory

restrictions, associated

with

the pending

turbidity

limit

of

0.3 NTU

promulgated under tile

Interim

Enhanced

Surface Water Treatment

Rule

(IESWTR)

could

present

compliance

related

problems

for

the

existing

facilities.

The

improvements

will

also

address

deficiencies

associated

with

certain

treatment processes that could impact the facility’s

ability to consistently,

safely and reliably meet applicable drinking water standards.

Included

in

this

Engineer’s

Design

Summary

is

a

summary

of

the

proposed

improvements

for

providing

increased

capacity

to

meet future

needs,

reliably

meet

required

drinking

water

standards

and

address problems

associated

with

taste and

odor.

Background

—

Existing

Facility

The City of Charleston has

been providing potable water for over 100 years.

The

existing water

treatment

plant

was

constructed

in

1964,

and

since

the original

construction

has

received

two

major

upgrades.

Several deficiencies have

been

identified

associated

with

certain

treatment

processes

that

could

impact

the

facility’s

ability to

consistently,

safely and

reliably meet applicable

drinking water

standards.

The

most

significant

deficiencies

associated

with

the

existing

treatment facilities are:

•

The existing raw water pumping

station structure is in poor condition.

•

The existing

raw

water

pumps

are

old,

are

near the end of their

useful

service

life,

and

should

be

replaced.

The two. pumps

are

both

constant

speed

type,

resulting

in

intermittent

operation

of the

treatment facilities

when water demand

is less than the capacity of the smaller pump.

Such

operation

has

been

shown

to

reduce

the

performance ‘of the

plant.

In

addition,

based upon future growth

projections the firm pumping capacity

will need to be increased to meet future demand.

•

The existing

raw water

intake

structure

is located in

an

area

of

the

lake

that

has

experienced

siltation.

The

conditions

at

the

existing

intake

structure

result

in

reduced

performance

with

only

the

highest

intake

screens

capable

of

providing

service.

This

condition

affects

both

the

quality and quantity of raw water available

to the treatment plant.

•

The

plant’s existing

piping

configuration

does

not allow for

positive flow

split

to

the

three

existing

lime

softening

basins,

resulting

in

unequal

distribution

of

the

hydraulic

loading

among

the

basins.

The

piping

configuration also is likely to result in

inaccurate flow measurement.

•

The existing

plant has only one. lime feed

system.

No

back-up system is

available, and

in the event of a system failure lime must be fed manually.

J\Ch~rlcston\O2O79OI\IProjMan\char1c~ton

design

summary.doc

I

---

•

The

existing

lime

softening

basins

are not

covered and are

exposed

to

the

elements.

Debris

that

enters

the

tanks

(leaves,

etc.)

causes

intermittent

plugging

of the

sludge

lines.

The

equipment has

needed a

high degree of maintenance.

•

‘

The

existing

recarbonation

basin

is

inadequately sized,

and the

current

piping configuration is likely resulting

in

short-circuiting.

•

The

existing

filters

have

shallow

wash

water troughs,

resulting

in

either

insufficient

cleansing of the filter media or

loss of media

over the

weirs

during backwashing.

•

The existing high service pumps require a high level of maintenance.

The

smallest

pump

will

not

meet

the

system

demands

and

is

rarely

used.

Under

certain

conditions

the

pumps

experience

priming

problems.

In

addition,

based upon future growth

projections the firm pumping capacity

will

need to be increased

to meet future demand.

•

The

existing

chemical

feed

building

does

not

currently

have

adequate

ventilation.

Also inadequate are visual and audible alarms for emergency~

situations.

•

A high

percentage

of electrical

and

control

equipment

at the

plant

is

in

poor condition.

Certain areas could be

considered potentially hazardous.

•

Taste and odor problems

have not

been resolved.

The

high

cost

to

maintain

the

existing

facility,

coupled

with

the

numerous

concerns

mentioned

above,

have

prompted

the

City to

construct a

new water

treatment plant that will

ensure adequate treatment

as growth

continues over the

next 20

years.

Construction

of

a

new plant

will

allow

the

existing

facilities to

remain in

service

while

new facilities are

built, with

no

lapse

in

water quality or

availability.

In addition,

the

end

result will

be a

totally new facility

with state-of-

the-art technology.

Design

Basis

The following is

a

summary of the

basis of design

associated

with the

proposed

WTP improvements.

The following values are based upon design year 2025.

Current minimum dailydemand

1.00 MGD

Current average daily demand

1.60 MGD

Design maximum daily demand

4.50 MGD

Design minimum daily demand

1.00-1.50 MGD

Design average daily demand

3.25

MOD

Raw water data

collected

from January 2000 to September 2002 was

analyzed

to verify

the

percentage of time

raw water

is

pumped to the

existing

treatment

plant for various

flow

ranges.

This

data

is

presented

in

Table I

—

Raw Water

Data January 2000 —August 2002.

The design

maximum daily demand of 4.50

MOD

is at the

request of the

City to

maximize the

economy of scale when

constructing

a

new water treatment plant.

J:\CharIcston\O2O79O1~IPrOjMan\CharlCStOfldesign sununary4oc

2

---

CMT

discussed the

maximum

daily demand

of 4.50

MGD

with

IEPA personnel

during the early planning and design phases of the project.

IEPA stated that 4.50

MOD

appears to

be conservative and more than adequate and that if this was an

SRF Loan project they would not be inclined

to approve a design flow as high as

4.50

MGD.

As

such,

the

design

maximum

daily demand

shall be

4.50

MGD.

Plant hydraulics

were

designed at 4.50

MGD.

A copy of the

hydraulic profile

is

shown in

Figure

1.

S

The

design

minimum

daily

demand

simply

extends

the

range

of the

current

minimum daily demand.

The

design

average

daily

demand

uses

the

average

of

the

current

peak

to

average

ratio

from

the

last three

years,

which

is

1.3812,

and

applies

it to the

•

design

peak of 4.50

MGD

to

obtain

the

design average

daily

demand of 3.25

MGD.

Table I

-

Raw

Water

Data January 2000

—

August 2002

~i

nOW

Tr~+~I

Fr~r

~

,

.

.

Time Period

0/

10

Occurrence

0/

f~

,

,O

~

a

~i

~

Accumulated

01

£

~

i~ortime

1.0

9

0.92

0.92

100.00

1.00-1.05

7

0.72

1.64

99.08

1.05-1.10

12

1.23

2.87

98.36

1.10-1.15

16

1.64

4.52

97.13

1.15 -1.20

22

2.26

6.78

95.48

1.20 -1.25

30

3.08

9.86

93.22

1.25

-1.30

37

3.80

13.66

•

•

90.14

1.30 -1.35

52

5.34

18.99

86.34

1.35 -1.40

64

6.57

25.56

81.01

1.40 -1.45

.

52

5.34

30.90

74.44

1.45 -1.50

58

5.95

36.86

•

69.10

1.50

-1.55

56

5.75

42.61

63.14

1.55 -1.60

56

5.75

48.36

57.39

1.60 -1.65

58

5.95

54.31

51.64

1.65

-1.70

56

5.75

60.06

45.69

1.70

-1.75

66

6.78

66.84

39.94

1.75 -1.80

59

6.06

72.90

‘

33.16

1.80

-1.85

62

6.37

79.26

27.10

1.85 -1.90

54

5.54

84.80

•

20.74

1.90

-1.95

40

4.11

88.91

15.20

1.95

-2.0

36

3.70

92.61

11.09

2.0

-

2.05

18

1.85

94.46

7.39

2.05 -2.10

1 8

1.85

96.30

5.54

2.10

-

2.15

12

1 .23

‘

97.54

3.70

2.15

-

2.20

1

1

1 .13

98.67

2.46

2.20

-

2.25

6

0.62

99.28

1.33

2.25

-

2.30

4

0.41

99.69

0.72

2.3

3

0.31

‘

100.00

0.31

974

100.0

J:\Charleston\020790l\tProjMan\charleston design summary.doc

3

---

SUMMARY OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS

A

summary

of

the

proposed

improvements

is

discussed

below.

Process

Chemistry

is

indicated

in

Figure 2

—

Process

Diagram.

Figure 3

is

a

Process

Flow diagram indicating process flow through the proposed treatment plant.

RAW

WATER PUMP STATION

AND INTAKE

Raw

Water

Pumps

Description:

Raw Water

Pumps

are

required

to

pump

untreated water from

the

reservoir to

the

Head

Tank at the

proposed

treatment

plant.

The difference in

elevation

of the

normal pool at the

reservoir and

water

level in the Head Tank results in

a high

(static) head pumping application.

The

Raw

Water Pumps

proposed

are vertical

turbine

pumps

piped

in

parallel.

Three

pumps

are

proposed

with

one

pump

serving,

as

a

backup

should

any

single pump

need to be taken out of service.

The

pumps

will

be

mounted

on a

concrete slab and

in

a wet well.

The controls,

VFD’s and electrical

appurtences

shall be housed in

a

new adjacent electrical building.

The location of the proposed

Raw Water Pump Station

is adjacent to the existing

raw water pump station.

Raw Water Line Description:

A new

14

inch raw water line from

the proposed

raw water pump

station

to the

proposed

water treatment plant

location will

be

constructed

by

the

City

of

Charleston

prior

to

the

raw

water

pump

station

construction.

S

.

,

.

Raw

Water Intake Description:

.A new raw water.intake

is also proposed.

The

new raw water

intake

will

be

constructed

adjacent

to the

existing

intake

in

the

same

general vicinity

of

the

water

supply.

The

intake

will

include

one

intake

screen at a single elevation.

Prior to construction, the

City

of Charleston will

have silt removed from the intake

basin.

S

Raw Water Pumps Design Criteria:

Numberof Pumps

Three (3)

Horsepower (each)

150

Type of Pump

.

Vertical Turbine

Maximum Flow rate per pump

2.75 MGD

Turndown per pump

1.10 MGD

Raw Water Pump Station Rating

5.0 MGD

HEAD TANK

.

Description:

A

Head

Tank

will

be

installed

at the

beginning

of the

treatment

process to serve as a

chemical

application

point

for

Sodium

Hypochlorite and

Alum.

The

Head

Tank

also

serves

to

prevent

air

entrainment

in

the

darifier,

backflow ofwater and

is used to visually observe raw water.

J:\ChariestOn\O2O79OIMPCOJMSn\charICSEOndesign summary.doc

4

---

Design Criteria:

Number of Head Tanks

One (1)

Height

34

Feet

Diameter

6.0 Feet

Retention

@

4.5 MGD

1.59 Minutes

CLARIFIER-SOFTENER

0

•

Description:

The

softening

process

consists

primarily

of

the

clarifier

and

recarbonation vessels.

A

ClariCone

reactor

softening

clarifier is

one of the

primary processes

for

the

proposed

treatment

plant

improvements.

This

reactor

is

designed

to

treat

hardness,

turbidity,

iron,

manganese, color,

and odor.

Water enters

the

lower

chamber of the clarifier through dual inlet pipes,

which allows for optimum control

•

ofwater velocity.

Operators increase

the velocity of incoming water by throttling

‘down

a

motor

operated

valve

on

the

larger

of

the

two

influent

pipes,

which

increases the velocity through the smaller influent pipe.

Lime

and anionic

polymers

are

added

in the

clarifier where

high

stoichiometric

efficiency

results from thorough

mixing as water swirls

around

fixed

mix

blades

that protrude

from

the

perimeter of the

clarifier.

As

water rises

and ‘the

cone-

shaped section of the

clarifier increases,

a

circular pattern

develops

with water

velocity decreasing.

Particles then

coagulate to form

a

sludge

blanket.

Excess

sludge

overflows

into

an

adjustable

central

concentrator

and

is

drawn

off

as

required.

Waterjets are provided to assist in

increasing the velocity and swirling

if required.

‘

By

increasing

the

pH of the

water to optimum

levels,

calcium

and

magnesium

precipitate out of the water.

Typically,

a

reduction of radium of approximately 80-

90

is achieved through this process.

S

Design Criteria:

Number of Clarifiers

Two (2)

Diameter,

36.5 Feet

Height

29

Feet

Volume (Each)

.

99,976 Gallons

Rise rate at max. diameter

1.49 gpm/SF’

Rise rate at sludge surface

.

‘1.71

gpm/SF

Retention ~

4.5

MOD

63.98 Minutes

CARBONATION VESSELS

Description:

Carbonating

the

water

reduces

scaling

and

corrosion

in

downstream

unit

processes

and

the

distribution

system

by lowering

the

pH to

approximately 9.0.

Water flows into the center of the top of the vessel and flows

downward in a

spiral.

Carbon

dioxide

is stored

outside

of

the

building

in

a

horizontal

storage

tank and

added

near

the

base

of the

recarbonation vessels

through

fine bubble

diffusers

forcing

the

falling

water

to

mix with

the

rising

carbon

dioxide

gas

producing

a

recarbonation efficiency of almost 100.

J:\CharIeston\O2O79O1\tPrOjMan~ChaliestOfl

design ,ummary.doc

5

---

Design Criteria:

Number of CO2 Storage Tanks

One (1)

Capacity of CO2 Storage Tank

14 Ton

Liquid

CO2 Feed Rate

150 lb./hr/recarb tank

Number, of Recarbonation Vessels

Two (2)

Height

,

29 Feet

Diameter

9.0

Feet

Volume (Each)

8,320 Gallons

Retention @4.5

MGD

5.32 Minutes

Inlet Velocity

5.04 Ft/S

Throat Velocity

1.10 Ft/S

Ave.

Deceleration Velocity

0.15 Ft/S

Can Velocity

0.05

Ft/S

Note

that carbon

dioxide

may also be

added

during

the

backwash process

to

clean the

porous plates on the underdrains of the filters.

OZONE TREATMENT

Description:

Ozone is

proposed to oxidize the water for taste

and odor control.

Ozone shall be

generated

on site by vaporizing

stored

Liquid Oxygen (LOX) to a

gaseous stage (GOX) and then converting the oxygen to ozone.

LOX shall be

stored

outside

in

a

1,500

gallon

storage tank.

The, LOX

shall flow

through

ambient

vaporizers, also located outside of the

building,

and

LOX

shall

be converted to

GOX.

The

GOX

shall

flow

inside of the

building

to pressure reducing

stations

on

the

ozone

generators.

The

ozone

generators

shall convert

GOX into ozone at the

production

rates

discussed

herein.

The

ozone

shall

then

flow

outside

of the

ozone generator room to the two pump/injector skids.

The

ozone,

with

makeup water at approximately

10

of treated

water,

will

be

pumped and injected directly into a

pipe upstream of an ozone contact tank.

The

makeup

water

will

be

supplied

just

upstream

of

the

injection

point,

using

carbonated

effluent.

The

ozone

contact

tank

will

be

sized

for

10

minutes

retention at 4.5

MOD.

Approximately five minutes of contact will

allow oxidation

to occur for

taste

and odor control

and

the

remaining five

minutes will

allow for

decay of ozone such that treated water into the filters will

have very little, if

any,

ozone residual.

Although

ozone will

not

be

used for

CT

credit for the

proposed

treatment plant,

10 minutes of retention time will also position the

City to use ozone’for CT credit

in the future should regulations allow and the City elect to do so.

Off-gases are vented

from

the

ozone

contact tanks

to

a

demister that removes

any water in the off-gas.

The off gas is

heated to prevent condensation before it

is sent to a catalyst chamber to destruct the ozone, decomposing the ozone

back

into oxygen.

A blower then safely discharges the

oxygen

into the

atmosphere.

All

of

the

off

gas

components

shall

be

pre-assembled

on

a

single

skid,

and

installed

in the ozone generator room.

J:\Charlestoe\0207901\tPmjMan\charlestondesign sununary.doc

6

---

A supplemental

air system

is

also proposed

to

increase

the

nitrogen content

in

the GOX prior to conversion to ozone.

The supplemental air system shall consist

of two air compressors with filters, controls and other supplementary equipment.

Design

Criteria:

S

For taste

and

odor

control,

a

range

of 3.5-ppm

average

to

5-ppm

maximum

ozone is typical.

S

S

Use 4.25

ppm, which

is the average of 3.5 and 5.0

ppm.

4.5 MGD x 8.34 x4.25 ppm

=

159 lb/day ozone, say 160 lb/day ozone

The concept

is to use multiple pieces of equipment (two) combined

to generate

and

deliver

.160

lb/day,

with

each

individual

piece

of

equipment

capable

of

accommodating the approximate minimum flow of 1.0 MGD

up to 2.25

MOD.

Liquid Oxygen Storage

Number of Storage Tanks

One (I)

Type

Vertical

Steel Pressure Vessel

Capacity

1,500 Gallon

AmbientVaporizers

Number ofVaporizers

S

,

Two (2)

Ozone Generators

Number of Generators

Two(2)

Ozone

Production (per generator)

140 ppd@7

100 ppd

@

10

80 ppd

©

12

Nitrogen Boost System

Number of Compressors

Two (2)

Pump/I niector Skids

Number of Skids

Two(2)

Pumps per skid

‘

Two (2)

Treated water per pump/injector

781 gpm

Injectors per skid

One (1)

Ozone

ContactTank

Number Contact Tanks

Two

(2)

Diameter

11 ‘O”

Height

29 Feet

Retention

©

4.5 MOD

10.12 Minutes

Ozone Destruct Unit

Number of Destruct Units

Two (2)

Number of Blowers

Two

(2)

Horsepower per Blower

I

HP

I:\Cbarleston\O2Ol9OlMProjMan\charleston design

suniniarydoc

7

---

DUAL MEDIA DECELERATING FLOW FILTERS

S

Description:

The proposed

filters are center feed

decelerating flow filters,

which

utilize

an

underdrain

system

equipped

with

porous

plates

to

support

the

filter

media.

Twofeet of 0.50

mm sand and 5 feet of granular activated carbon (GAC)

are proposed for final polishing of the water.

S

Backwashing of the

filters

shall be

conducted by using

a

combination of air and

water.

A

positive

displacement

blower

shall be

used

to

deliver

the

air.

The

quantity of air delivered shall be

measured by using

a meter on

the discharge of

the

blower

and

controlled

by modulating

a

butterfly

valve

on

the

vent

of the

blower discharge piping system.

S

A

separate

reservoir

shall

be

constructed

directly

below

the

filters

to

store

backwash

water.

Because

the

backwash water will

not

be

supplied

from

the

clearwells,

the

amount of chorine

in

the

backwash water can

be controlled

and

may vary from approximately 0—5.0-ppm chlorine, depending upon the operators

requirement.

S

15 gpm/sfx 254.47 sf= 3817 gpm

3817 gpm x 15 minutes

=

57,255 gallon

backwash reservoir required

Backwash Water Reservoir

Depth

(with

1 ‘-0” freeboard)

9.30 ft

Width

.

12-6”

Length

106-7”

Capacity

92,675 gallons

92,675 gallons available

57,255 gallons required

Design Criteria:

Number of Filters

Four (4)

Height

21.

Feet

Diameter

18 Feet

Surface Area

©

Underdrain

254.47 SF

Filter Loading, 4~5

MGD with 4 Filters

3.07 gpm/SF

Filter Loading, 4.5 MOD with

3 Filters

4.09

gpm/SF

Sand

2 Feet

Granular Activated

Carbon

5

Feet

The

CO2

system

for

recarbonation

shall

also

be

piped

to

the

filter

effluent/backwash influent to clean

and remove

biological growth

(if any) from the

porous plates.

BACKWASH

PUMPS

Description:

Backwash

pumps are required to provide a

maximum of 15 gpm/sf

backwashing

of the filters with the flow varied

by variable

frequency drives

Note

that 8 gpm/sf shall be normal when used

in conjunction with air scour.

15 gpm/sf x 254.47 sf

=

3817 gpm

8 gpm/sf x 254.47 sf

=

2036

gpm

J:\Charleston\020790I\lProjMan\charlestondesign sunims,y.doc

8

---

Design

Criteria:

Number of Backwash Pumps

Two (2)

Capacity (Each)

1270 —3817 gpm

Type

S

Split Case Centrifgual

AIR SCOUR BLOWER

S

A

positive

displacement blower

shall

be

used

for

air scour

in

conjunction

with

backwashing with water from the

backwash pumps.

Rate of air will

be controlled

by a

PLC by reading flow rate

from an air flow

meter and throttling

a vent valve

on the discharge side ofthe pump.

S

3—5 SCFM per SF of filter area is

required.

S

5 SCFM/SF x 254.47 SF

=

1272.35

Say

1275 SCFM

Design

Criteria:

Number of Blowers

One (1)

Type

Positive

Displacement

Horsepower

150 HP

Air Flow

0— 1275 SCFM

CLEARWELLS

Description:

Clearwells

are

used

for

the

storage

of

finished

water

at

the

treatment plant and allow for sufficient contact time for chemicals fed

prior to the

distribution system.

To

meet the

requirement for

a

minimum of two

clearwell

ncompartmentss~,two

separate clearwells

shall be

provided.

The

primary clearwell

shall be used

on a

daily

basis

and

only

taken

out

of

service

for

an

emergency

or

planned

maintenance and shall be a 500,000-gallon aboveground steel clearwell.

The

second

clearwell to

be

used

only

during

an

emergency

basis

or planned

maintenance of the

steel

clearwell

shall be

a

concrete clearwell

located directly

below the filters.

Design Criteria:

Number of proposed clearwells

Two (2)

Primary Clearwell:

Construction

Steel, aboveground

Diameter

85

Feet

Height

.

14 Feet

Sidewater Depth

12 Feet

Capacity

500,000 gallons

T10/T

0.7

Method

used to obtain T10/T

“Ribbon

Flow”

i:\CharIcstos~O2O79O1\IProjMan~charleston

designsummary.doc

9

---

Backup/Emergency Clearwell

S

Construction

S

Concrete, below filters

Height

10.30

Feet

Sidewater Depth

9.30 Feet

S

Capacity

153,560 gallons

~~rr

5

0.7

Method used to obtain T10/T

“Serpentine Flow with Baffles”

CT calculations for both

clearwells are included AttachmentA.

HIGH SERVICE

PUMPS

S

Description:

High

service

pumps

are

used

to

pump

treated

water from

the

clearwells to the distribution system.

Design Criteria:

Number of Pumps

Three (3)

Capacity

—

One Pump

1.75 MGD

Capacity

—

Two Pumps

2.75

MGD each

Type

S

Horizontal Split Case Centrifugal

CHEMICAL FEED SYSTEMS

The

following

chemical

feed

systems

shall

be

provided for the

proposed

water

treatment plant

improvements.

Chemical

feed systems

were

sized

using

water

production

criteria of

1.0

MGD

minimum,

3.0

MOD future

average and 4.5

MGD

maximum.

The dosage range varies per chemical.

Unless stated

otherwise,

Day

tanks

were

sized to

hold

30

hours

of chemical

while

bulk storage

tanks

were

sized

for

30

days

storage,

both

at average

dosage and

maximum

day

water

production.

Chemical

Feed

Pumps

were

sized

to

pump

maximum

dosage

at

maximum

water production withturndown to accommodate

minimum dosage at

minimum water production.

Sodium Hypochlorite

Description:

Sodium

Hypochlorite

is

required for disinfection.

Multiple

points of application

shall be

provided as follows:

•

Head Tank

• Clarifier No. I

• Clarifier No. 2

• Filtered Effluent to Concrete Clearwell

• Filtered Effluent to Steel

Clearwell

• Filter Effluent to Backwash Reservoir

• Downstream

of

High

Service

Pumps,

prior

to

distribution

System

Note that both

chem feed

pumps to the

clearwells will

not be required at

the

same

time.

As

such,

the

pump

discharge

lines

are

manifolded

together so that a

backup pump is provided.

J:\Charleslon\0207901\II’rojMan\charlestondesign

summsry.doc

10

---

Design

Criteria:

12.5

Solution

Pumped

Neat

—

No makeup Water

Flushing water provided

Dosage Range

Day Tank

Bulk Storage Tank

Number of Chem Feed Pumps

Chem

Feed

Pump Capacity (Each)

0.45

—

5.4 PPM

1—200 Gallon

2—3000 Gallon

Seven (7)

0.70 -.8.4 gal/hr

Alum

Description:

Alum

is

used

as

a

primary

coagulant

in

surface

water

treatment and the

lime softening

process.

The

application

point is at the

Head Tank.

Design

Criteria:

S

Pumped

Neat

—

No Makeup Water

Flushing Water Provided

Day Tank

Bulk

Storage Tank

Number of Chem Feed Pumps

Chem

Feed Pump Capacity (Each)

2—200 Gallon

2—3000 Gallon

Three (2

+

I

backup)

0.35

—

15.64 gal/hr

Lime

S

Description:

Lime

is

used

for,softening

of the

water.

A hydrated

lime

system

is

proposed

along

with

a

silo

capable. of storing

a

bulk

truck.

delivery.

The

application

point for

lime is

at the

bottom of the

clarifier.

Three

years

of historiôal

data for. lime

usage

was

reviewed

and

it

was

determined that approximately 1400 pounds of lime per million gallons of

finished water is required.

Design Criteria:

Type of System

Type of Application

Application Point

Silo Storage

Number of Silos

Storage

©

4.5 MGD

Number of Slurry

Feed

Pumps

Pump Feed Rate (Each)

Packaged Hydrated Lime

Slurry

Clarifier No. I &

No. 2

160,000

lbs

One(I)

S

25 days

Three (2

+

I backup)

10- 100 gallons/hr

Anionic Polymer

Description:

Anionic

polymer

is

used

as

an

aid

in

flocculation

and

typically fed at the

bottom of the clarifier.

Dry

polymer will be

measured

and manually fed into mix tanks.

S

J:\Charleston\0207901\IProjMan\eharleston design surnmary.doc

11

---

Design Criteria:

Carrier/Flushing Water

Application Point

Clarifier No. I

& No. 2

Mix Tanks Mixer

2—330 gallon

Chem Feed Pump Capacity (Each)

0.21

—

9.6 gal/hr

Fluoride

.

S

Description:

Fluoride

is

one 1½.

HP

mixer per tank

and

required

by

regulation.

S

Design Criteria:

Application Point

Carrier/FlushingWater

Day Tank

Bulk Storage

Numberof Chem Feed Pumps

Chem

Feed Pump Capacity (Each)

Combined

Filter Effluent

One (1) —30 Gallon

300 Gallon

Totes

Two

(1

+

I backup)

0.15—0.99 gal/hr

Carbon

Dioxide

S

S

Description:

Carbon

dioxide

is

used

for

pH

control

and

stabilization of

the

water.

It

is

fed

at

recarbonation

vessel

through

diffusers.

Carbon

dioxide

can also be

fed

at the

backwash

supply line to clean

the

porous

plates

on

the

filter underdrains.

Three

years of historical

data for

CO2

usage

was

reviewed

and

it

was

determined

that

approximately

400

pounds of CO2per million gallons of finished water is required.

Design Criteria:

Type

Application

Application point

Number of Storage Tanks

Tank Type

Storage Capacity

Storage

@

4.5 MOD

Storage

©

2.0 MOD

Number of Feeders

Feeder Type

S

Feeder Capacity Range

Cationic

Polymer

S

Description:

Cationic

Polymer

is

the influent of the filter.

Stored

Liquid

Compressed Gas

Recarbonation Vessels

One(I)

Insulated, Refrigerated,

Steel

28,000 lbs

15 days

35 days

Two (2)

Electric Throttling Valve

With Mass Flowrneter

200

—

1800 lb/day (each)

used

primarily as a filter aid and fed

at

3:\Charleston\0207901\lProjMan\charleston designsuinniaiy.doc

12

---

Design Criteria:

Application Point

Day Tank

Bulk Storage

Number of Chem FeedPumps

Cham

Feed Pump Capacity

Ammonia

Description:

Ammonia

is

used

disinfection

by-products (DBPs).

Design Criteria:

S

Application Point

Day Tank

Bulk Storage

S

Number of Chem Feed Pumps

Chem Feed Pump Capacity (Each)

Raw Water Influent

Filter No. I

& 2 Influent

Filter No. 3

& 4 Influent

1

—30 Gallon

300 Gallon Totes

Four (3

+

I backup)

0.04

—

1.95 gal/hr

as

a

disinfection

aid

to

prevent

High Service Pump Discharge

1

—22 Gallon

300 Gallon Totes

Two (1

+

I

backup)

0.05

—

1.23 gal/hr

Polyphosphates

Description:

Polyphosphates

are

used

for

corrosion

control

in

the

distribution system.

Design

Criteria:

Application Point

Day Tank

Bulk Storage

Number of Chem Feed Pumps

Chem Feed Pump Capacity (Each)

High Service

Pump Discharge.

1

—22 Gallon

300 Gallon Totes

Two (I

+

I

backup)

0.06

—

1.04 gal/hr

Calcium Thiosulfate

Description:

Liquid

Calcium

Thiosulfate

is

used for

ozone

quenching

should accidental overfeed of ozone occur.

Ozone Contact Tank No. I & No. 2

Effluent

I —5½

Gallon

300 Gallon Totes

Two

Instrumentation

and Controls

(I & C) will

be provided at the

new treatment plant.

A Supervisory

Controls

and Data

Acquisition

(SCADA)

system

will

be provided.

The system

will

receive data from proposed

treatment plant and the two

existing

water tanks

in

the

distribution system.

All

data will

be

sent to

a single computer

console.

Design Criteria:

Application Point

Day Tank

BulkStorage

Number of Chem Feed Pumps

Chem

Feed Pump Capacity (Each)

1.0

—

5.0 gal/hr

Instrumentation

and Control

J\Charleston\0207901\IProjMan\charlestofl design

sunsnsaiy.doc

13

---

CT CALCULATIONS FOR

500,000

GALLON ABOVEGROUND STEEL CLEARWELL

AND

153,560

GALLON CONCRETE (EMERGENCY) CLEARWELL

i:\Charlestoe\0207901\tProjMan\charlestondesign

susnniary.doc

14

---

City

of Charleston

Water

Treatment Plant

SWTRCT Calculations

Flow Rate

(mgd)

Temperature (F)

Ammonia

added

after

clearwell

Unit Process:

—

Mn. Operating Volume (gal.)

Baffling Condition (TI 0/T)

Flow Rate (gpm)

TDT (mm.)

T10 (mm.)

Chlorine:

Residual (mg/L)

Plant CT (mg-min/L)

pH

Temp.

C

Req’d. Giardia

CT

Req’d. Virus CT

Giardia

Log Enact.

Virus Log

Inact.

Chloramine:

Residual (mg/L)

Plant CT

(mg-min/L)

pH

Temp. C

Req’d. Giardia

CT

Req’d. Virus CT

Giardia Log Inact.

Virus Log

Inact.

Chlorine dioxide:

Residual (mg/L)

Plant CT (mg-min/L)

pH

Temp.

C

Req’d. Giardia

CT

Req’d. Virus CT

Giardia Log Inact.

Virus Log

Inact.

Total Disinfectants:

Giardia Log Inact.

Virus Log

Inact.

4.500

32.9

(0.5 C)

Head tank

Clarifier

Recarb

1.0~

3,125

0.00

0.00

o.oo

8.0

0.5

277

12

0.00

8.0

0.5

0.00

8.0

0.5

0.000

0.000

0.3

3,125

0.00

0.00

0.25

0.00

10.0

0.5

0.00

10.0

0.5

0.00

10.0

0.5

0.000

0.000

0.5

3,125

0.00

0.00

0.25

0.00

10.0

0.5

0.00

9.0

0.5

0.00

9.0

0.5

0.000

0.000

Filters

3,125

0.00

0.00

3,125

80.00

56.00

0.25~~

0.00

168.00

9.0

9.0

0.5

0.5

390

552

12

12

0.0000

0.91 30

0.0000

56.0000

0.00

0.00

9.0

0.5

3800

2883

0.0000

0.0000

0.00

9.0

0.5

0.00

9.0

0.5

0.000

0.000

0.00

9.0

0.5

0.913

56.000

CompleteTreatment Credit:

Giardia Log Removal

Virus Log Removal

Clearwell

Total Plant

0.9130

56.0000

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000

0.913

56.000

2.500

2.000

Total

Log

~

~~i:

---

S

,~

City

of Charleston

Water

Treatment Plant

SWTR

CT Calculations

Flow Rate (mgd)

Temperature (F)

Ammonia added after clearwell

Unit Process:

Mm. Operating Volume (gal.)

Baffling Condition

(TI

OJT)

Chlorine:

Residual

(mgIL)

Plant

CT (mg-min/L)

pH

Temp.

C

Req’d. Giardia CT

Req’d. Virus CT

Giardia

Log

lnact.

Virus Log lnact.

Chloramine:

Residual (mg/L)

Plant CT (mg-mmn/L)

pH

Temp.

C

Req’d. Giardia CT

Req’d. Virus

CT

Giardia Log

Inact.

Virus Log Inact.

Chlorine diodde:

Residual (mg/L)

Plant

CT (mg-mmnfL)

pH

Temp.

C

Req’d.

Giardia CT

Reqd. Virus CT

Giardia Log

Inact.

Virus Log

Inact.

Total

Disinfectants:

Giardia Log

Inact.

Virus Log Inact.

Flow Rate (gpm)

TDT (mm.)

T10 (mm.)

4.500

32.9

(0.5 C)

Head tank

Clarifier

1.0

0.3

3,125

3,125.

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.00

8.0

0.5

277

12

0.00

8.0

0.5

0.00

8.0

0.5

0.000

0.000

0.00

10.0

0.5

0.00

10.0

0.5

0.000

0.000

0.25

0.00

10.0

0.5

Recarb

0.5

3,125

0.00

0.00

0.25

0.00

10.0

0.5

0.00

9.0

0.5

0.00

9.0

0.5

0.000

0.000

3,125

0.00

0.00

0.25~~

0.00

103.19

9.0

9.0

0.5

0.5

390

552

12

12

0.0000

0.5608

0.0000

34.3975

0.00

0.00

9.0

0.5

3800

2883

0.0000

0.0000

0.00

9.0

0.5

0.00

9.0

0.5

0.000

0.000

0.00

9.0

0.5

0.561

34.397

Complete Treatment

Credit:

Giardia Log Removal

Virus

Log Removal

Total Plant

0.5608

34.3975

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000

0.0000

Filters

Clearwell

3,125

49.14

34.40

0.561

34.397

2.500

2.000

Total Log I—--

---

,.

‘

EL.

7

~

EL.

723.00

.

.

16”

FILTER

NftUENT

—

~

S

EL

724.75

EL.

724.29

\

1

E

.

7

90

~

..

:$—

~i.

~

~

.~

..

~

~J

.

~

~•~~=•

~

/....

~

..L ~..it

..

...

..........

...

..

..

...2.~

7~.

~

..

S

~..

:r

~..L.~al°°76

.

72a

..-.....-

.-.-,.-.....

.....

......

~..

t”””””.

S

~II~:T~-:~J.

I

J

EFFFLUENT

-

-

N

.~

~

16

717.42

“~c~

.

I

c.

71533

I

S

“

I

.

S

..

.

..

.......

..

..

-

..

../“

~.

..

=.1~

~

..~(

.....

..

...

~.

......~.

S

16”

CLARIFIER,2fTLUENT

,7

S

N.~

-16”

OZONE

“-—

-

S

CONTACT

71233

N

16”xlO” IN

TO

VESSEL

INFUJENT

~

711.91

-

---v-,

7.~

“N

S

~719.O0I

‘-P

‘

-

I

710

S

SI

20”

N

I

BACKWASH

N

WASTE

70R

N

20

FILTER

‘f..

.

..

“..

N

-

..

.....

~.

-

..

..

..

EEELUI.J-IEAUER

S

1th~R~~

~

703.92

N

S

C’

705

75

5

-

~t~’ T

S

\,~

5

8”

CLARIFIER

S

1

INFLUENT

.

~

~•ioi.7~

I

.

.

S

‘-P

1 6”ø

FiLTER

-L.4---~-~

~

S~

~

-~

$

~

699.98

.~

-

$

B.O.V

h...

BACKWASH

I

S

\

.

S

—~

—

S

/

i-..

B.0.V.

696.75

\

~

B.O.V. 696.75

~

B.O.V.

696.75

A-,

B.O.V. 696.75

.695

/

r

BACKWASH

WATER

695

..

..-..

..

-.--.,

—

-..-.-..

.-

..

--‘

-...-.

..

-

..

..

-

~“E~v

A~i”ö

-

..

..

-

WATER

INFLUENT

~

699~98

.

S

CONCRETE

CLEARWELL

......

..

...

..

..

..

......

......

..

..

........

..........

-

..

.......L1

-

..

~..

-

.

~

HEAD

TANK

SOFTENER

RECARBONATION

VESSEL

OZONE

CONTACT

-20”

EFFL

COMBINED

UENT

TO

FILTER

CLEARWELLS

I

I

A..

588.20

1

I

20”

BACKWASH

WATER

TO BACKWASH SUPPLY PUMPS

650

660

-

675

.

e’7~

CLEAR

WELL

7flfl.flrl

20”

CLEARWEU.

EFF. —“i

TO HIGH

SERVICE PUMPS

LEGEND

H.W.L ~

4.5

MCI)

PLANT

FLOW

J:\Chadeslon\

Fill:

F1CURE1.dwg

UPDATE

BY:

rmurphy

SURVEY

8001

#

DATE:

Fri

6/6/03

S:QQprn

XREF

OWO:

CIntinfo.dwg

tb.dw~

REV~IONS

NUMB~~

BY

ATE

0

1

2

ThIS

BAR

IS

EQUAL

TO

2”

AT

FULL

SCALE

(34x~2).

I-

2

4

~1

ft.

I-

2

‘U

I..

4

UI

I-

UI

I-

4

2

0

I-

UI

-l

4

I

C.)

Lu

-a

IL

0

0

-i

=

z52

00

l-2

42

0_i

~I

‘-gL~

~

ug~

~JS

DESIGN

BY:

RiB

DRAWN

8Y

RDM

CHECKED

BY:

APPROVED

BY:

DATE:

JUNE,

2003

—

JOB

No:

FIGURE

1

-‘.730

730.75

730

710

TANK

710

SHEET

OF

SHEETS

---

TYPICAL

RAW WATER

pH

TURBID/fl’

HARDNESS

CALCIUM

MAGNESIUM

ALKALINITY

COLOR

IRON

MANGANESE

FLUORIDE

TOC

RAW

WATER PUMPS

HEIGHT

DIAMETER

INFLUENT

PIPE

NET

DOWNFLOW

VOLUME

RETENliON

NET

DOWNFLOW

AREA

DOWNFLOW

VELOCITY

8.3

20

200

130

70

150

100

0.3

0.1

0.2

7

.34

FT.

6

FT.

20

INCH

DIA.

4,97.3

GAL.

1.59

MIN.

26.09 FT2

0.27 FT/SEC

HEIGHT

SURFACE

AREA

(EA.)

VOLUME (SA.)

TOTAL

RETENTiON

RAPID

MIX

SLUDGE

CONTACT

CLAP/RCA liON

RISE

RATE

AT MAX.

RiSE

RATE

AT

SLUDGE

SURFACE

RISE

RATE

1W RAPID

MIX

SLUDGE

DEPTH

CLARIRCAlION DEPTH

DUAL INLETS

LARGE

SMALL

29

FT

1046 FT2

99,976 GAL.

63.98 MIN.

0.84 MIN.

26.86 MIN.

36.28 MIN.

1.49 GPM/FT2

1.71 GPM/FT2

37.85 GPM/FT2

14.67

FT~

7.33

FT.

‘Z~ITY

cf

c~I—LARL_.6STZDNJ

WATER

PURIIIQATIcDN

PRQQ~S~

~6SIQN

CLARICONE EFFLUENT

CARBONATION

VESSEL EFFLUENT

OZONE CONTACTOR

16”

—

2.49 FT/SEC 0 1563 GPM

8”

—

9.97

FT/SEC

0 1563 GPM

SPIRAL DOWNR...OW

CARBONATION VESSEL

(2 UNITS)

HEIGHT

DIAMETER

INLET

(SQUARE)

INLET

VELOCITY

THROAT

VELOCITY

AVG.

DECELERA77ON

VELOCITY

CAN VELOCITY

CONE VOLUME

CAN VOLUME

TOTAL

VOLUME

RETEN

liON

29

FT.

9 FT

16”xlO”

5.04 FT/SEC.

1.10 FT/SEC.

0.15FT/SEC.

0.05FT/SEC.

7,614 GAL.

706 GAL

8,320 GAL.

5.32 MIN.

SPIRAL DOWNFLOW

OZONE CONTACTOR

(2UNrrS)

HEIGHT

DIAMETER

INLET

(SQUARE)

INLET

VELOCITY

DECELERA liON

VELOCITY

VOLUME

RETENTiON

29

FT

11.0

FT.

16”x12”

3.48

FT/SEC.

0.04 FT/SEC.

15,815

GAL.

10.12

MIN.

CONCR~

i

CLEARWELL

(1UNfl~

FINISHED WATER

HEIGHT

DIAMETER

SURFACE AREA 0 UNDERDRAIN

BOTTOM LOAD—NORMAL

BOTTOM LOAD-I

~

FILTER MEDIA:

0.50 MM SAND

GRANULAR

AC11VA TED

CARBON

MAXIMUM

HEADLOSS

MAXIMUM WASH RATE

0 BOTTOM PLATE

O MEDIA SURFACE

OWEIR

21

FT.

18.0

FT.

254.47FT2

3.07

GPM/FT2

4.09

GPM/FT2

2.0

FT

5,0

FT.

3.21

FT.

3817 GPM

15GPM/FT2

20.23 GPM/FT2

27.68 GPM/FT2

RIBBON

FLOW

CLEARWELL

(1

U~fl

VOLUME

153,560

GAL.

VOLUME

500,000

GAL.

SIZE

22’x106’

DIAMETER

85

FT~

WATER

DEPTH

9~3

FT.

WATER

DEPTH

12 FT

DESIGN

T

1O/T

0.7

DESIGN

T 1O/T

0.7

J:\Chcideslorr\

FILE: FIGURE2dw9

UPDATE

BY:

rrnurphy

SURVEY

BOOK

~

DATE:

Fri

6/6/03

5:Olpm

XREF

OWO:

Clntinfo.dwg

Lb.dwg

IMAGE

FILES:

_______

REVISIONS

NUMBER

BY

DATE

0

1

2

THIS

BAR

IS

EQUAL

TO

2~

AT

FULL

SCALE

(34x22).

I-

2

4

-I

I-

2

ZS2

UI

‘~

00

~

-2

l-~

u)~

4

C

Ui_i

UI

~1—

~

—

~z

~

~F

Ui

Cl)

~

~CI)

0_i

;

Lu

~

C)

~

20

(110.

UI

-I

4

I

C.)

1111

____

DESIGN

BY:

RTB

DRAWN

BY:

KSI

CHECKED

BY:

APPROVED

BY:

DATE:

JUNE,

2003

JOB

No:

02079—01

FIGURE

2

pH

TURBIDITY

HARDNESS

CALCIUM

MAGNESIUM

ALKALINITY

COLOR

IRON

MANGANESE

FLUORIDE

TOC

10.3

0.5

100

50

50

25—50

5

0.01

0.01

0.1

6

pH

TURBIDITY

HARDNESS

CALCIUM

MAGNESIUM

ALKALINITY

COLOR

IRON

MANGANESE

FLUORIDE

TOC

9.0

a

5

100

50

50

10—50

act

0.01

1.0

5

pH

TURBIDITY

HARDNESS

CALC1UM

MAGNESIUM

ALKALINITY

COLOR

IRON

MANGANESE

FLUORIDE

TOC

9.0

0.5

100

50

50

10—50

01

0.01

1.0

4

pH

TURBIDITY

HARDNESS

~‘AL~IUM

MAGNESIUM

ALKALINITY

COLOR

IRON

MANGANESE

FLUORIDE

TOC

9.0

0.05

100

50

50

;0—50

0.01

0.01

1.0

3

14”

HEAD

TANK

VESS~

_

HGH

I

SER~~E

PUMPS

SODIUM

TO

OZONE

HYPOCHLORITE

S

2O’~

RIBBON FI_O~

DISTRIBU11ON

COI’ffACTOR

FILTERS

C’EARW~.L

SYSTEM

4~5 rvIQED

rvlAXIMUIvI

DB~IQN

JLC)W

18

rl.

CEI~ffER

FEED

HEAD TANK

.

S

DECELERA11NQ FLOW FILTERS

(1 UNIT)

.

(4 IJNfl’S)

36’—6’

DIAMETER

CLARICONE

W/

RADIAL

FLOW WEIRS

AND STATIC

MIX

BLADES (2 UNITS)

SHEET

OF

SHEETS

---

HEAD

TANK

W4TAKE

SCREEN

VERTICAL TI

RAW WATER

TO DISTRIBUTION

SYSTEM

-~

OMAX

-45MGO-3125~,m

0/2

-2.25

MGO

-1563gpm

0/3

-

ONE FILTER

OUT

OF

SERVICE

- t5 MGO

-1042 ~m

.—

PROCESS

WASTE

~

COLLECTION

MANHOLE

E)GS11NG

LAGOON

NO. 2

EX~flN0

LAGOON

NO.3

TO

SANITARY

SEWER

•1

HV—291

HV—292

c~4ts2

LAGOON

~i-

i

LUENT

PUMP

STATION

°

I-~J;

~

u~

i~J

S

S

DESIGN

BY:

RIB

DRAWN

BY:

RB

CHECKED

BY:

APPROVED

BY:

DATh

JUNE.

2003

.100

No:

02079—01

FIGURE

3

J:\Charleston\

FILE: F1GURE3.dwg

UPDATE

BY:

rrnurphy

SURVEY

BOOK

~

DATE:

Mon

6/9/03

8:33am

XREI’

DWG:

Clntinfo.dWg

tb.dwg

IMAGE

FiLES:

______

REVISIONS

NUMBER

-

BY

DATE

0

1

2

ThIS

BAR

IS

EQUAL

TO

2’

AT

FULL

SCALE

(34x22).

0

(N

00

-2

42

‘I-Ui

-I

.~

.4

-

1-

2

4

-I

I-

2

UI

I-

4

UI

I-

UI

I-

4

2

0

I.-

U)

UI

-I

4

I

C.)

C

0

-I

IL

Cl)

Cl)

Lu

0

0

0.

9/3

SHEET

OF

SHEETS

-S~l