Indiana Rural Water Association Water Treatment Plant Design & Emerging Technologies Workshop INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA AUGUST 1, 2012

Agenda 8:00 – 8:30 am 8:30 – 8:45 am 8:45 – 8:50 am 8:50 – 9:50 am 9:50 – 9:55 am 9:55 – 10:40 am 10:40 – 11:00 am 11:00 – 11:05 am 11:05 – 11:45 am 11:45 am – 12:45 pm 12:45 – 12:50 pm 12:50 – 1:20 pm 1:20 – 1:25 pm 1:25 – 2:25 pm 2:25 – 2:40 pm 2:40 – 2:45 pm 2:45 - 3:15 pm 3:15 – 3:30 pm

Registration Welcome David Introduces Doug UV Disinfection Case Study Georgetown, Kentucky – Doug Ralston John Deogracias-Parkson Corporation David Introduces Kara and Eric Indiana’s Newest Filtration Facility – East Chicago – Kara Boyles and/or Eric Horvath Break David Introduces Bob and Bob introduces Carol Water Conservation, Why Should I Care? – Bob Henricksen/Carol Loggins Lunch David Introduces Paul New Regulations and How They Affect Your Utility – Paul Johnson David Introduces Jennifer, Derek & Dustin Hydraulic and Hydrogeological Modeling for Your System – Jennifer Bailey/Derek Urban/Dustin Graves Break David Introduces Jeff GIS, Know Your System – Jeff McCann Wrap Up/Final Questions

Georgetown, Kentucky • Population: ~30,000 • Home of TMMK – H2O from KY-AM

• Georgetown College – ‘72 Olympics, Ken Davis/Doug Collins

Case History – Georgetown Municipal Water and Sewer Service • Opened WTP in 1955 • State-of-the-art engineering design at that time • Operational layout typical for that era – – – – – – –

Intake pumping station at spring Flash/floc Settling Dual media filters rated at 2 gpm/sft Clearwell High-service pumps Disinfection with chlorine

Problems • Raw water spring became contaminated with gasoline requiring an emergency installation of air stripping towers for volatile organic reduction (1991) • Spring flow became too low to meet demands in middle 90s, requiring an interconnection between Frankfort and Georgetown • Chlorine gas used as the primary disinfection agent (potassium permanganate used as a pre-oxidizer for taste/odor control) • Gas stored in two 1-ton cylinders • Gas housed in open walled shed that would not prevent an accidental chlorine gas release to the atmosphere

Location • WTP located close to downtown Georgetown and on a roadway • Any catastrophic release of chlorine gas would be disastrous

Water Source (Royal Spring) • Contained potentially pathogenic viruses • Chlorine gas is ineffective against these types of contaminates • Possibility for viruses to pass through treatment process into the drinking water supply

“Ground Zero”

Aerial View of WTP

Projected Chlorine Gas Plume

Physical Limitations • Susceptible to street-level contamination • Impractical to perform maintenance on tube settlers • Algae growth

Solutions/Improvements

(2006 Project)

• Added a cover to settling tank due to close proximity to the street and to eliminate algae growth • Added new tube settlers and floc mixing units to the settling tank • Replaced two 1-ton cylinders of chlorine with on-site generation of either mixed oxidants or sodium hypochlorite • Added a new flow monitoring system • Added UV disinfection to post filtration waters for virus destruction – Kentucky’s first post-filtration UV disinfection system

Raising the Roof

Dome Installation

Protective Dome

Dome Interior

Hydrant Station

Chlorine Ton Cylinder Replacement Project

Alt 1: Bulk Delivery of 12% Bleach

Alt 2: Electrolysis of Salt Brine to Form 0.8% Bleach (NaClO)

Advantages of On-Site Hypoclorite Generation • Easy to use • Solution does not degrade – below concentration threshold for hazardous materials (1.0%) • Minimal bulk storage • Avoids shipments of hazardous chemical • Greatly reduces WTP operators’ exposure to hazardous materials

On-Site Generation of Sodium Hypochlorite Reduces Regulatory Concern

• Eliminates WTP storage of chlorine gas – EPA Risk Management Plan • WTP avoids exceeding HazMat thresholds – OSHA Process Safety Management • Reduces on-site hazardous substance inventory – EPCRS, 40 CFR 370

Start of MIOX Construction

Concrete Pour

Salt Brine Tank

Completed Installation

Salt Delivery

Reactor Cells and Control Panels

Hypochlorite Day Tanks

SCADA Monitoring of MIOX

1 LB Equivalent of Chlorine Gas

• 3.5 lbs of food-grade salt • 3.2 kW-hr/2000 amps • 16.8 gallons of 0.8% sodium hypochlorite solution

Disadvantages of On-Site Hypochlorite Generation • Significant capital costs • Energy costs • More maintenance intensive than gas chlorination • Greater chemical and maintenance cost compared to gas chlorination ($180/ton salt) • Typical ton cylinder cost = $.20/lb FAC; on-site generation = $.42/lb FAC

Product History • 1994-2005 – – – –

Early emphasis on public water systems Listed by NSF International and USEPA Extensive government-funded research MSR purifier developed

• MaximOSTM Today – Three new product redesigns with stateof-the-art features – Fast-growing enterprise with proven technology and established market base – Over 16 US patents

On-Site Generation (OSG)

MaximOSTM OSG Process

MaximOS™ On-Site Generator

Model Comparison Sodium Hypochorite

Operational Maintenance Requirements

• Salt reloading • Scheduled flow and chlorine production readings • Cell acid wash to remove buildup • Brine/water filter replacement • Periodic cleaning of tanks Time commitment is typically 5-10 hours per month

Liquid Barrier Hydrogen Safety System • Liquid barrier system does not rely on operator intervention to function • No moving parts that can fail • No power required for operation • Installation must be in accordance with MIOX specs

Installation (Jurupa, California) Jurupa Community Services District Well 9, 19,20 11201 Harrel Street Mira Loma, CA 91752 Contact: Jason Sabala Phone: 760.910.1253 System: SH25 Total Capacity: 25 lbs/day FAC Installation Date: July 2011 Application: Groundwater, final disinfection

Installation (Alton, Illinois) Fosterburg Water District 3216 Main Street Alton, IL 62002 Contact: Mark Voumard Phone: 618.259.0935 System: SM30 Total Capacity: 30 lbs/day FAC Installation Date: February 2011 Application: Surface water, final disinfection

Installation (Tams, Illinois) Southwater Inc. 27183 Sandy Creek Road Tamms, IL 62988 Contact: Bill Gurley Phone: 618.776.5274 System: SM60-2 Total Capacity: 120 lbs/day FAC Installation Date: September 2011 Application: Groundwater, final disinfection

Installation (Desert Center, CA) Mesa Verde, Riverside County PO Box 316 Desert Center, CA 92239 Contact: Steve Jones Phone: 760.227.3203 System: SH25 Total Capacity: 25 lbs/day FAC Installation Date: March 2012 Application: Groundwater, final disinfection

Installation (US Virgin Islands) Virgin Islands Water & Power Auth. #18 Sub Base St. Thomas, 00803, VI Contact: Roy Vanterpool Phone: 340.775.5873 System: SM60-3 Total Capacity: 180lbs/FAC Installation Date: Dec 2009

Installation (Churubusco, Indiana) Town of Churubusco 215 Home Ave. Churubusco, Indiana 46723 Contact: John Hart Phone: 260.693.9350 System: MM60 Total Capacity: 60 lbs/day FAC Installation Date: February 2009 Application: Groundwater, final disinfection

Installation (Crossville, Tennessee) Holiday Hills WTP 109 Holiday Hills Drive Crossville, TN 38555 Contact: Jerry Kerley Phone: 931.788.5515 System: MM180-2 Total Capacity: 360 lbs/day FAC Installation Date: July 2008 Application: Surface water, TTHM reduction, chlorine residual improvement, disinfection

Mixed Oxidant Solution – Superior Chemistry Known Benefits Superior Disinfection Improved Oxidation

Customer Experiences

Microflocculation Improved T&O

Reduced TTHMs

Biofilm Control

Enhanced Residual

What is Mixed Oxidant Solution (MOS)? • • • •

Primary oxidant in MOS is chlorine EPA classifies MOS as chlorine Data shows MOS is more effective than bleach Identifying other oxidant species is limited by analytical techniques

MOS Studied by Many • University of North Carolina – Inactivation studies (cell culture) and speciation • CDC Atlanta – Neo-natal mice studies on Crypto • University of Arizona – Crypto and EPA purifier protocols • University of Colorado, Colorado Springs – PCR crypto analysis • Montana State University – Biofilm studies • University of Arkansas – Poultry and USDA approval • Cal Tech and Jet Propulsion Labs – Speciation • Miami University, Ohio (Gordon) – Speciation • Dugway Proving Grounds – Biological warfare agents

Highly Effective Disinfectant Inactivation of Cryptosporidium Oocysts in Water by Chemical Disinfectants* Disinfectant

1CT

CT99 (mg/L x min)1

Reference

Free Chlorine

7,200+

Korish et al.

Monochloramine

7,200+

Korish et al.

Mixed Oxidants

3.0 NTU to 1.5 NTU – Filter run times increased from 45 minutes to >60 minutes, reducing backwashing frequency and resulting in reduction in number of membrane cleaning cycles per month

MOS Installation, Santa Fe, NM 10MGD (38,000 m3/ day), six well sites

• TTHMs – Reduced from >60 ug/L (with spikes >100 ug/L) to an avg 33 mg/L • Microflocculation – 60-66% reduction in alum dose, settling achieved in