Loading...
Water Treatment Plant Improvements July 1970SALINA, KANSAS WATER TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENTS Preliminary Engineering Report JULY 1970 T I L S O N COMPANY ENGINEERS } ARCNIT EC TS SALINA, KANSAS . WATER TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENTS PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT Robert C. Caldwell, Mayor Commissioners Leon L. Ashton Donald D. Millikan Carl R. Rundquist William W. Yost Norris D. Olson,'City Manager Ron Webster, Director of Utilities Dean L. Boyer, City Engineer R. S. Fassnacht, Supt. of Water Treatment Plant Lawrence Bengston, City Attorney Don Harrison, City Clerk 1649 JULY 1970 (70-78) 111WrtILS0N 6 COMPANY 11 ENGINEERS A0.CMECTS '/, SALINA, KANSAS WATER TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENTS PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this report is to present a plan for the reclamation of water softening plant waste, including sediment, in order to avoid plant discharges to the Smoky Hill River. The study includes recommendations,regarding the future expansion of treatment capacities in the plant as well as a solution to the waste problem. The report contains recommendations for reclaiming filter wash water; accumu- lating and calcining all treatment and settling basin sludge; concentrating and partially drying all desilting basin sediment and sludge; including cal- cining plant wastes not suitable for calcining. The recommended work is adaptable to stage or phase construction. The work 'involved in each phase is described and preliminary estimates of cost for each phase are presented. PRESENT DRAINAGE SYSTEM At the present time all plant wastes containing precipitates are discharged through the drainage system included in the initial construction of the water softening plant. These wastes are collected northeast of the plant structures and are discharged to the River through a 66 -inch storm sewer located in South Street. Sediment and sludge from the desilting basin, periodic drainage from the out- side sludge storage tank and by-passed river water are discharged to the River opposite the north end of the Chemical Building. All sewage from the Filter Building and the Chemical'Building is discharged to existing sanitary sewers. FILTER WASH WATER The water used to backwash filters is discharged in the plant drainage system. Although the frequency of backwashing varies with plant production, a con- siderable amount of treated water is wasted to the River each day. This water contains a small amount of carbonate precipitate carried over from the sec- ondary settling basin, and does not present a serious River pollution problem. However, both the wash water and the precip4.tates can readily be reclaimed by the improvements that are recommended. Reclamation of the wash water and the precipitates will be a substantial economic improvement over the present method of operation. 1 ;I It is proposed to construct a holding tank in the vacant area east of the High Service Pumping Station (see sheet No. 1). This basin will have a capacity of about 475,000 gallons. The precipitates in the filter wash water will be allowed to settle into the hopper bottom of the tank. The filter backwash water will be pumped back to the influent flume leading to the filters, since it has already passed through all treatment processes including primary recarbonation, settling and secondary recarbonation. The sludge will be pumped to the sludge storage tank south of the calcining plant. SECONDARY SETTLING BASIN Following primary recarbonation a considerable amount of cabonate precipi- tate collects in the bottom of the present secondary settling basin. The last time it was cleaned there was approximately 2 feet of sludge in the bottom of the basin, which was discharged to the River. This basin holds approximately 416,000 gallons. It is proposed to add a new drain line in the basin which will allow the top 8 feet of liquid in the basin to be discharged to the holding tank, from which it will then be repumped to the secondary recarbonation chamber and pass on to the filters. After the clear water has been removed the present drain valves will be opened, allowing the sludge and remaining water to be discharged to the holding tank and allowed to settle. The water will be pumped to the filters and the sludge to the sludge storage tank. Until such time as the proposed new secondary settling basin can be placed in service, the present secondary settling basin cannot be taken out of service for the length of time required to clean it in the manner heretofore described. Therefore it will be necessary to drain its contents at one time into the holding tank, wash out the basin and place it back in service. The precipi- tates will be allowed to settle in the holding tank and then the water will be pumped to the secondary recarbonation basin and the sludge to the sludge storage tank as previously described. UPFLOW BASINS Normally, all sludge being discharged from the present upflow basins is pumped directly to the sludge storage tanks for calcining. However, when it is necessary to drain the basins for cleaning or equipment maintenance or repair, the basin contents have been drained to the river. The new plan requires that they be drained to the holding tank and allowed to settle. The water will be pumped to the primary recarbonation chamber and the sludge to the sludge stor- age tank. This procedure will also be followed for the new upflow basin but slightly modified, since the holding tank will not contain the full volume of the new upflow basin. The effluent piping from the westernmost existing upflow basin will be inter- cepted and carried to the new secondary settling basin. This will permit only the other two existing upflow basins to discharge treated water to the present 2 I secondary settling basin, thereby limiting its settling requirment to 8 mgd and increasing its detention period from the present 50 minutes to 75 minutes. The increased detention period should greatly reduce the carry-over of precipitates to the filters. A new raw water pipe will be installed to carry water from the aerator to the new upflow basin. The new upflow basin will be designed for 8 mgd and will be approximately 75 feet in diameter. Its effluent will discharge to the primary recarbonation chamber in the new secondary settling basin. The sludge from the new basin will be pumped directly to the sludge storage tank for calcining, but a by-pass will be installed to permit draining of the basin to the new holding tank. NEW SECONDARY SETTLING BASIN The new secondary settling basin will be designed for a capacity of 12 mgd with a total detention time of 90 minutes. The primary recarbonation chamber will be at the basin influent end and the secondary recarbonation chamber at the effluent end. Launders and overflow weirs will be installed at the effluent end of the basin. This basin will also be equipped with a high-level drain to permit the top portion of the liquid to be discharged to the holding tank for repumping to the filters, following which the lower portion containing the sludge will be drained to the holding tank. The settled and recarbonated effluent will be carried to the filters through a new 42 inch pipeline routed as indicated on the drawings. SLUDGE PUMPING STATION AND PIPELINE A new sludge pumping station will be constructed adjacent to the holding tank for returning settled sludge to the existing sludge storage tank south of the calcining building. The station will be equipped with one or more sludge pumps, electrically driven and with manual control. The sludge transmission pipe will be routed east from the pumping station, thence south along the eastern portion of Fourth Street to the sludge storage tank. A by-pass connection will be installed near the storage tank to permit the sludge to be pumped, when required, to the gravity drain leading to the new silt holding tank. SILT HOLDING TANK It is recommended that sediment from the de:;ilting basin and all other plant wastes not suitable for calcining be collected and piped to a silt holding tank south of the present desilting basin. This will include drainage from the wet stage cyclone, the rotoclone and the Bird centrifuge in the calcining plant, the sludge storage tank and the desilting basin. (See Sheet No. 2.) .3 The present drain piping from the desilting basin goes north to a manhole and thence east and north to the River. By-passed river water also returns to the River through this drainage system. It is proposed to add a high-level drain in the desilting basin which will permit the upper portion of the water to be returned to the River, when the basin is drained, through the present drainage system. A separate drainage system will be added, sloped from the manhole near the sludge storage tank to the silt holding tank. This system will collect drainage from the calcining units, the sludge storage tank and the desilting basin. The silt holding tank will have a capacity of 150,000 gallons, which is ade- quate to contain about 1 foot of silt withdrawn from the desilting basin. It is suggested that silt be drawn from the basin at frequent intervals so that the dewatering equipment can be operated continuously, at least during the months that the desilting basin is in use. The silt holding tank will be equipped with a continuously operating thickener mechanism and sludge rake. Settled water from the top of the silt holding tank will be returned to the desilting basin effluent flume by a turbine pump. The silt will be drawn from the bottom by a sludge pump and processed through a filter mechanism to separate the silt from the water. The dewatered silt will be discharged to a dump truck or other conveyance to permit hauling away to land fill. The dewatering equipment will be housed in a masonry or steel structure adja- cent to the silt holding tank. Paved access to Fourth Street will also be provided. WIDENING OF FOURTH STREET It is recommended that, as a part of this project, Fourth Street adjacent to the Water Treatment Plant be widened by approximately 10 feet, as indicated on the preliminary drawings. This will improve traffic flow conditions on Fourth Street as well as providing more room for underground utilities. The widenin., process will involve an earth fill extending entirely across the River with a drainage tube through the fill to provide the required capacity for river flow. The fill will be downstream from the River intake structure and separated adequately from the structure to avoid interference. The top and the slopes of the fill will be sodded. Excavation from the proposed treatment plant structures will be used for a major portion of the earth fill. The widened portion of the street will be p_ovided with paving and curb and gutter. The electrical manhole near the river pumping station will be in the paved area. The poles adjacent to the electrical manhole will need to be moved to a location east of the new curb line. 4 ! CONSTRUCTION PHASES It is recommended that the proposed work be divided into appropriate sections to permit proper functioning as well as to facilitate financing. The work included in each phase should be as follows. Phase 1 Construction of the holding tank east of the high service pumping station, sludge pumping station and discharge pipeline, high—level drain in existing secondary settling basin and the required modification to the present sludge drainage system. Widening of Fourth Street. Phase 9 Construction of the silt storage and dewatering facilities and additions and modifications to the silt drainage system. Phase 3 Construction of the new solids contact basin, secondary settling basin, required additions and modifications to the drainage system, recarbonation system, and influent and effluent piping. S PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF COST PHASE 1 A. Construction Cost. Holding Tank $112,000.00 Widening Fourth Street 40,000.00 Construction Cost 152,000.00 Contingencies 15,000.00 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $167,000.00 B. Project Cost. Total Construction Cost $167,000.00 Engineering, Inspection, Legal, Administrative & Miscellaneous Costs 33,000.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST, PHASE 1 $200,000.00 PHASE 2 A. Construction Cost. Silt Dewatering Facility $181,295.00 Construction Cost 181,295.00 Contingencies 27,705.00 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $209,000.00 B. Project Cost. Total Construction Cost $209,000.00 Engineering, Inspection, Legal, Administrative & Miscellaneous Costs 41,000.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST, PHASE 2 $250,000.00 PHASE 3 A. Construction Cost. Solids Contact Basin $151,600.00 Secondary Settling Basin 149,900.00 Construction Cost 301,500.00 Contingencies 30,000.00 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $331,500.00 B. Project Cost. Total Construction Cost Engineering, Inspection, Legal, Administrative & Miscellaneous Costs Land and Right -of -Way TOTAL PROJECT COST, PHASE 3 SUMMARY OF PROJECT COSTS Phase 1 - $200,000.00 Phase 2 - 250,000.00 Phase 3 - 450,000.00 Total - $900,000.00 $331,500.00 59,000.00 59,500.00 $450,000.00 THE KANSAS STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH E. D. LYMAN, M. D., M. P. H. Director of Health August 4, 1970 Mr. Robert E. Crawford, P.E. Wilson & Company Engineers P.O. Box 28 Salina, Kansas 67401 Dear Bob: TOPEKA KANSAS In response to your telephone call of 29 July 1970 I discussed with my staff associates the possibility of the city of Salina receiving funds from the Federal Water Quality Administration for facilities to treat lime and silt sludges from the municipal water plant. I was encouraged by the information I received. Apparently, the city of Wichita was considering a recalcination plant in con- nection with their water treatment plant prior to the decision to dispose of lime sludge by deep well injection. At that time, late in 1969, Mel Gray made a telephone contact with the Kansas City regional office of the Federal Water Quality Administration for a preliminary opinion on eligibility for federal water pollution control funds. It was thought that Public Law 660 construction grant funds would be available for at least a portion of the project. The preliminary ruling placed the following facilities on the eligible list: sludge thickening basins or appurtenances ahead of the recal- cining unit, pumps and pipelines for waste sludge to a disposal facility and sludge disposal facility or lagoons. The idea was received from FWQA that the sludge disposal facility would have to be permanent rather than temporary and grant funds would exclude land costs for any portion of the project. At that time, it was felt that construction grant funds would not be allowed for any portion of the recalcining unit proper. We feel that a logical justification can be developed which would cover all portions of your project including your recalcining unit. It would likely be in the best interests of your client to make application for the entire project. We would be most happy to receive your application for the entire project since we feel that it would be of benefit to water pollution control in the Smoky Pill River. Fox,, A -L C� '10 ;I?7 fes: J In response to your telephone call of 29 July 1970 I discussed with my staff associates the possibility of the city of Salina receiving funds from the Federal Water Quality Administration for facilities to treat lime and silt sludges from the municipal water plant. I was encouraged by the information I received. Apparently, the city of Wichita was considering a recalcination plant in con- nection with their water treatment plant prior to the decision to dispose of lime sludge by deep well injection. At that time, late in 1969, Mel Gray made a telephone contact with the Kansas City regional office of the Federal Water Quality Administration for a preliminary opinion on eligibility for federal water pollution control funds. It was thought that Public Law 660 construction grant funds would be available for at least a portion of the project. The preliminary ruling placed the following facilities on the eligible list: sludge thickening basins or appurtenances ahead of the recal- cining unit, pumps and pipelines for waste sludge to a disposal facility and sludge disposal facility or lagoons. The idea was received from FWQA that the sludge disposal facility would have to be permanent rather than temporary and grant funds would exclude land costs for any portion of the project. At that time, it was felt that construction grant funds would not be allowed for any portion of the recalcining unit proper. We feel that a logical justification can be developed which would cover all portions of your project including your recalcining unit. It would likely be in the best interests of your client to make application for the entire project. We would be most happy to receive your application for the entire project since we feel that it would be of benefit to water pollution control in the Smoky Pill River. Fox,, A -L Mr. Crawford August 4 If you wish, you may make a tentative proposal or an exploratory letter to us requesting information on the eligibility of a specific proposal. We will attempt to secure the answer that the project would be eligible for federal water pollution control funding. Sincerely yours, Division of Environmental Health Amtr�A J. Howard Duncan, P.E. Chief of Water Pollution Control JHD:11 cc: North Central Area Salina Office