November 21, 2011

Wastewater Master Plan – Status Update

City of Portsmouth, New Hampshire

Topics for Discussion

• Review of Master Plan Effort

• Regulatory Status

• Pilot Effort to Verify Technology Selection

• Regional Cooperation

Wastewater Master Plan Components

Collection System CSO LTCP

Wastewater Treatment Facilities

Combined Sewer Overflow Long Term Control Plan

Combined Sewer Overflow Long Term Control Plan - Contract 3B

Combined Sewer Overflow Long Term Control Plan - Cass Street Area

Secondary Treatment on Peirce Island – Within Fence Line

Phased Compliance Strategy Peirce Island/Pease

• Secondary treatment at Peirce Island within existing fence line by late 2016

• WMP team identified innovative technologies with potential to reduce footprint of upgrade requirements

• Preliminary engineering, including on-site testing of potential technologies will be completed to assist with final technology selection

• Expanding Pease over time as regulatory and economic conditions permit

Regulatory Status

• Current EPA Consent Decree- Wastewater Master Plan - Completed- Upgrade Peirce Island According to Schedule in Wastewater Master Plan- Complete Targeted Long Term Control Plan Sewer Separation Project- EPA Requires a Modification to the Existing Consent Decree to

Incorporate Wastewater Master Plan Schedule

• Peirce Island NPDES Permit Renewal Application Due December 31, 2011. Anticipating Secondary only however pressure is building to add Nutrient Removal to the Permit

• Pease Wastewater Treatment Facility NPDES Permit is pending. Anticipating Secondary only however pressure is building to add Nutrient Removal to the Permit

Regulatory Status (cont.)

• Modified EPA Consent Decree Schedule

• CSO- LTCP Completion by 2014- Contract 3A – Lincoln, Spring, Willow, Miller, Broad- Contract 3B – Richards, Rockland, Highland, Miller, Merrimac- Contract 3C – Streets off of Lincoln, Union, Wibird, Park- Cass Street Area

• Upgrade Peirce Island Completion 2016- Pilot Potential Technologies- Preliminary Design Vender Selection- Final Design- Construction

Pilot Study

Pilot Program Flow ChartWWMP Piloting EffortWWMP Piloting Effort

Pilot TechnologySelection Workshop

Review/Evaluate Potential

Treatment Technologies

WastewaterCharacterization

DataCollection

InitialPilotingPhase

Vendor Demonstration/

VerificationPhase

InitialPilotingReview

Potential Secondary Treatment

Technologies

WastewaterCharacterization

Needs

Demonstration Phase Data

Review (and Vendor Selection if Needed)

Preliminary Design

List of technologies

1. Biological Aerated Filter (BAF)

2. Sequencing Batch Reactor (SBR) with BioMag

3. Conventional Activated Sludge (CAS) with BioMag

4. Moving Bed Bioreactor (MBBR) & ActiFlo

5. Moving Bed Bioreactor (MBBR) & CoMag

6. Moving Bed Bioreactor (MBBR) & DAF

7. Membrane Bioreactor (MBR)

8. Conventional Activated Sludge (CAS)

Non-Monetary Evaluation Criteria

• Operational Track Record/Established Process

• Operability (No. of Processes/Complexity of Processes)

• Ability to Retrofit Conv. Secondary Treatment to Meet Future Nitrogen Limits of 8 mg/l

• Ability to Retrofit TN 8 to Meet Future Nitrogen Limits of 5/3 mg/l

• Constructability

• Site Layout Hydraulic Complexity

• Ability to Stay Within Fence Line for Secondary Treatment

• Ability to Stay Within Fence Line for Future TN Treatment

• Ability to Treat High FOG Levels

Table 11 – Option Evaluation Matrix

Option 1 - BAF

Option 2 - SBR w/

BioMag (Not Feasible)

Option 3 - CAS w/ BioMag

Option 4 - MBBR & ActiFlo

Option 5 - MBBR & CoMag

Option 6 - MBBR & DAF

Option 7 - MBR

Option 8 - Conventional

Activated Sludge

Evaluation Criteria Weight Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score Rating Score

Operational Track Record/Established Process 18 3 54 2 36 2 36 1 18 2 36 4 72 5 90Operability (No. of Processes/Complexity of Processes) 22 3 66 3 66 2 44 2 44 3 66 2 44 4 88Ability to Retrofit Conv. Secondary Treatment Meet Future Nitrogen Limits of 8 mg/l 20 1 20 5 100 1 20 1 20 1 20 3 60 4 80Ability to Retrofit TN 8 to Meet Future Nitrogen Limits of 5/3 mg/l 2 5 10 3 6 4 8 4 8 4 8 2 4 4 8Constructability 4 4 16 2 8 4 16 4 16 4 16 3 12 1 4Site Layout Hydraulic Complexity 8 4 32 3 24 4 32 3 24 4 32 4 32 1 8Ability to Stay Within Fence Line for Secondary Treatment 14 5 70 5 70 5 70 5 70 5 70 5 70 1 14Ability to Stay Within Fence Line for Future TN Treatment 4 2 3 3 3 5 1Ability to Treat High FOG Levels 14 3 42 4 56 3 42 3 42 3 42 4 56 3 42Total Weighted Criteria 310 366 268 242 290 350 334Capital Cost (estimated - in millions) $33.0 $37.0 $32.0 $34.0 $32.0 $42.0 $39.0Value Ratio (criteria/capital cost) 9.4 9.9 8.4 7.1 9.1 8.3 8.6Life Cycle Cost (in millions) $40.8 $46.7 $41.2 $47.4 $39.7 $53.3 $46.8Value Ratio (criteria/ life cycle cost) 7.6 7.8 6.5 5.1 7.3 6.6 7.1

Technologies Selected For Piloting

• Biological Aerated Filter (BAF)

• Conventional Activated Sludge (CAS) with BioMag

• Moving Bed Bioreactor (MBBR) & DAF

Physical Pilot

• Construct/Assemble Side by Side Pilot Units

• Treat Primary Effluent in Dry Weather, CEPT Effluent in Wet Weather

• Initial Focus on Secondary Treatment testing, then modify to achieve Total Nitrogen Removal

• Initial Pilot – 6 Month Period

Pilot Unit Construction Photos

Pilot Unit Construction Photos

Pilot Unit Construction Photos

Pilot Unit Construction Photos

Comparison of Consent Decree Estimated Costs

Cost Item

Opt

ion

1 -B

AF

Opt

ion

2 -S

BR

w

/Bio

Mag

Opt

ion

3 –

CA

S w

/Bio

Mag

Opt

ion

4 -M

BB

R

& A

ctiF

lo

Opt

ion

5 -M

BB

R

& C

oMag

Opt

ion

6 -M

BB

R

& D

AF

Opt

ion

7 -M

BR

Opt

ion

8 -C

AS

Capital $33.00

Not

Fea

sibl

e$37.00 $32.00 $34.00 $32.00 $42.00 $39.00

20 Year Present Worth O&M

$7.77 $9.71 $9.19 $13.37 $7.67 $11.32 $7.81

20 Year Life Cycle

$40.77 $46.71 $41.19 $47.37 $39.67 $53.32 $46.81

Note: All Costs in $ millions

Projected Sewer Rate ($ per Unit)

* Imposition of nutrient limits will require additional capital investment

02468

101214161820

Sew

er R

ate

($/U

nit)

2011

2017

$40M

2017

$60M

2017

$80M

WWTF Adder

Future Rate w/oWWTFCurrent Rate

One Unit = 748 gallons

Regional Cooperation

• Why Participate in Regional Cooperation– Pending City Permits will be impacted by the decisions the

Regulators make relative to the Great Bay and the Piscataqua River

– Recognition that complex environmental challenges are regional in nature

– As a Coalition we leverage resources and are more likely to have input in regulatory decision process

• Southeast Watershed Alliance

• Great Bay Municipal Coalition– Memorandum of Agreement with DES to improve scientific

understanding and ensure scientifically based, cost effective, community minded solutions are selected

– Adaptive Management Plan – Allows for an alternative approach to meeting water quality

Proposed Adaptive Management Plan

• The Proposed adaptive management plan allows new information to be incorporated into a watershed management plan. Allows for scientific research, monitoring, and implementation that provides an opportunity to build and measure. Specifically:

– Commits the communities of Exeter, Dover, Newmarket to a Total Nitrogen limit of 8 mg/L which will reduce DIN to pre-1990 levels

– Commits communities to participate in water quality monitoring program to improve scientific understanding of the issues

– Commits communities to participate in eelgrass and shellfish restoration efforts.

– Commits communities to participate in non-point pollutions reduction

• Proposed Adaptive Management Plan is Currently being Reviewed by the Regulators

Plan of Action

• Complete Targeted Sewer Separation – Underway

• Continue Regional Cooperation – On-going

• Pilot Emerging Technology - Underway

• Preliminary Design & Vender Selection- Completion 2013

• Final Design Completion - 2014

• Construction Completion - Aug 2016

Questions & Answers