OVSD - Ventura - City Of Ventura

Transcription

Ojai Valley Sanitary District (OVSD)
Recycled Water
Feasibility Study
Stakeholder
St
k h ld
Workshop
City of Ventura Corporation Yard
CarolloTemplateWaterrWave.pptx
October 9th, 2014
Project Team
Carollo Engineers
Lydia Holmes
Carollo Engineers
Elisa Garvey
Best, Best, and Kreiger
Shawn Hagerty
g y
Larry Walker Associates
Ashli Desai
Diana Engle
Carollo Engineers
Courtney Eaton
Padre Associates
Matt Ingamells
g
Hopkins Groundwater Consultants
Curtis Hopkins
2
Meeting Agenda
Topic
Time
Introduction
8:00 8:05
8:00‐8:05
Project Overview
Stakeholder Activity and Break
8:05‐8:40
8:40‐8:50
Discussion of Constraints
8:50‐9:10
Recycled Water Alternatives
9:10‐9:30
Discussion of Alternatives
9:30 9:50
9:30‐9:50
Next Steps
9:50‐10:00
3
P j t Overview
Project
O
i
4
Project explores feasibility of reusing the
OVSD effluent
• Use of OVSD
effluent by City of
Ventura
OVSD
WWTP
Avenue
WTP
Ventura
River
– Offset water
demands
– Provide new
potable water
supply
5
There are several project drivers for
considering reuse of the OVSD effluent
6
There are multiple objectives for the
Feasibility Study
• Identify
yp
potential recycled
y
water
users and demands
Potable
Water Supply
• Establish the constraints
on recycled water use
– Environmental
– Regulatory
R
l
– Legal
•E
Explore
l
opportunities
t iti
for recycled water use
within these constraints
Aquatic
Habitat
Industrial/
Commercial
Water Supply
Agricultural
Water Supply
7
Project Workflow
Define
Project
Kickoff
Meeting
Evaluate
Constraints
Identify/
Evaluate
Alternatives
Team
Workshop
Draft
Report
Final
Report
Stakeholder
#2
Stakeholder
St
k h ld
#1
8
We are here to involve you in this
process
What we want from y
you today…
y
 Listen
 Provide input on material
presented today
 Provide
P id iinputt on ffuture
t
work
9
B k
Background
d
10
Feasibility of reusing the OVSD effluent
was evaluated in 2007
• Three recycled
y
water
alternatives considered
– No Project
– 50% effluent diverted
for reuse
– 100% effluent diverted
for reuse
11
2007 Study identified potential recycled
water users
OVSD
WWTP
Public/
Institutional
Agriculture
Agriculture
Agriculture
Industrial
User
Industrial
User
12
2007 Study assessed the environmental
impact of OVSD effluent diversion
50% Effluent Diversion
for Recycled Water Use

•P
Potential
t ti l tto mitigate
iti t
environmental impacts
100% Effluent Diversion
for Recycled Water Use
x
•P
Potential
t ti l significant
i ifi
t
environmental impacts
• Diversion Flows
– 1.0 mgd max month /
g max day
y
1.75 mgd
– Industrial use – 92% of
max day demand
13
Written letters from stakeholders
opposed recycled water project
Agency
OVSD Board of
Supervisors
Use of
effluent
and
cost

Consistency Evaluation Significance
with NPDES
of
of change in
permit
Steelhead
river flow
impacts

NMFS
Santa Barbara
Channelkeeper
Surfrider
Stoecker
Ecological



Water
Balance










14
The City is revisiting OVSD reuse
because conditions have changed
• Need for new water supplies
• Need for integrated water management
• Costs for developing new water supplies
• Funding opportunities
15
R
Recycled
l d Water
W t Concepts
C
t
16
Steps for Evaluating Recycled Water
Identify
Supply
(Effluent)
Identify
Potential
Users
Group by
Treatment
Requirements
Recycled
Water
Demands
17
Ojai WWTP Effluent
Flow (2008 – 2013)
2.50
Flow, mggd
2.00
1.50
1.00
0.50
Monthly Variation in OVSD Effluent Flow
0.00
2008
2009
2010
2011
Month
2012
2013
2.5
2.0
Flow,, mgd
OVSD Effluent Flow by Year
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month
18
Recycled water concepts expand on the
2007 study
Oja
Ojai
WWTP
Effluent*
Agricultural
g
Irrigation
g
Landscape Irrigation
Industrial/Commercial Uses
*Compliance with Title 22 standards for unrestricted
reuse is assumed, but would need to be verified
as part of Title 22 Engineers Report
Ojai
WWTP
Effluent
Advanced Treatment
Potable
Water
19
Market analysis for irrigation and
commercial/industrial uses
Ojai
WWTP
Effluent*
Agricultural Irrigation
Landscape
p Irrigation
g
Industrial/Commercial Uses
20
Estimated demands for potential
recycled water users
180 160 Other Ind/Commercial
140 Public/Institutional
120 New Residential Development
l
100 80 Agriculture
60 Industrial Use
Industrial Use
40
40 20 2013
2012
2011
2010
0
2009
9
8
2008
2007
2006
2005
4
2004
2003
2002
‐
2001
Average Monthlly Use, ac‐ft//month
200
200 Year
21
Monthly
y Demand
Industrial demands do not follow typical
irrigation demands
Industrial
Demand
Agricultural
Demand
Jan
Feb Mar
Apr
May Jun
Jul
Aug Sep
Oct
Nov Dec
Month
22
Industrial customers have the most
potential for recycled water use
• Average
Demand
OVSD
WWTP
– 0.5
0 5 mgd
• Primary Uses
Industrial
Users
Industrial
U
Users
– Dust
Control
– Cooling
g for
pumps and
engines
23
Market analysis for direct potable reuse
(DPR)
Ojai
WWTP
Effluent
Advanced Treatment
Potable
Water
24
DPR demand is based on City demands
and system capacity
• City could use up to
all of OVSD
effluent for DPR
• Capacity depends
on flow that
can be diverted
from OVSD
g
discharge
OVSD
WWTP
Avenue
A
WTP
25
Stakeholder
Activity Break
26
Evaluation of the constraints sets the
framework for considering reuse
How much flow can be diverted for the beneficial
purpose of reuse without significant impact?
Reuse
Impacts
27
Activity – What are the constraints
associated with diverting OVSD effluent?
Constraint
Categories
• Legal
• Regulatory
• Environmental
Use your cards
to provide input
Legal
Regulatory
Environmental
• Other
Other
28
Identification/Discussion
of Constraints
29
Summary of Legal Issues
Comment
Per Land Lease Agreement, City
has right to use effluent
Potential diversion volume is within
groundwater portion of OVSD
effluent and does not present issue
with
ith d
downstream
t
riparian
i i rights
i ht
Environmental Flows Fundamental legal issue. Requires
technical analysis to support
protection of Steelhead habitat.
Legal Issue
Use of OVSD
Effluent
Downstream Water
Rights
30
Legal Issues Identified by Stakeholders
Issue
Who legally owns the water?
Terms and conditions of current NPDES permit for OVSD
Terms and conditions for Ventura County CUP (conditional
use permit) for OVSD
What are the water rights of Taylor Ranch?
Oth water
Other
t right
i ht h
holders?
ld ?
Downstream water users an impact on their riparian water
rights
Impact of Channel Keepers lawsuit
Legality
g y of lease agreement
g
31
Summary of Regulatory Issues
Legal Issue
Algae TMDL
Salt and
Nutrient
Management
g
Plan
Comment
• Potential opportunity to contribute to OVSD
compliance
• Concerns with relying on reuse for
compliance
•Concerns with potential future TMDL
revision
• Recycled
R
l d water use at iindustrial
d
i l user may
trigger SNMP requirement
• Recycled water use for potable supply
would not trigger SNMP requirement
32
Regulatory Issues Identified by Stakeholders
Issues
Restrictions on use of water as an effluent dominated
supply
County restriction based upon permits for treatment plant
State water resources and fish and game
WRC-state
R i
Regional
l Board
B d requirements
i
t off required
i d flflows as stated
t t d iin
OVSD permit
Could effluent be used for oil field water flood without Title
22 status?
NMFS Section 7 or 10(a) permitting requirements
regarding endangered steelhead
33
Issues
USFWS Section 7 or 10(a) permitting requirements for
threatened or endangered species
Who is going to pay for Title 22 compliance?
SWRCB to modify OVSD Permit regarding discharges
SWRCB on impact of reduced discharge on water quality
OVSD CUP change
h
OVSD NPDES Change
Water Right – State Board
TMDL nutrient issues
34
Issues
Basin plan degradation of beneficial uses
TMDL nutrient reduction
OVSDs discharge permit is tied to river water quality. As
part of that requirement (section A 22) specifically
addresses water levels. This has not been considered.
The TMDL has even more stringent limitations and
monitoring requirements.
Federal Nexus – ESA-Steelhead
35
Lower River and Estuary provides habitat
for several species
Tidewater Goby
Steelhead
Arroyo Chub
California Redlegged Frog
Western Pond
Turtle
Two-Striped
Garter Snake
Yellow
Warbler
Yellow-Breasted
Chat
Least Bell’s Vireo
36
Steelhead use lower river and estuary
• Upstream Migration
• Spawning
• May occur if flows
prohibit upper
reach access
• Migratory corridor
• Rearing habitat
• Juvenile
J
il rearing
i h
habitat
bit t
• Post-spawn adults
habitat
• Smolts habitat
37
Summary of Environmental Issues
Environmental
o e ta Comment
Co
e t
Issue
Species
Steelhead most sensitive to reduced flow
regime.
i
Habitat
Formal steelhead habitat survey has not
been conducted for lower river and
estuary.
Flow Regime
Flow condition for steelhead not well
established for lower river and estuary.
Water Balance Hydrologic balance not well established
for lower river and estuary
estuary.
38
Environmental Issues Identified by Stakeholders
Issues
Many months and some years the river does not need the
water so put it to productive use.
When the river needs the water then discharge the effluent.
San Antonio Creek is good steelhead habitat. Establish new
discharge point in San Antonio Creek, collect surplus water at
Foster Park diversion and treat in existing
gp
plant.
Use of water for recreation in lower river.
Fish-Irrigation.
How will the additional water reductions affect downstream
and estuary water quality?
How will they affect downstream and estuary dissolved
oxygen concentrations?
39
Environmental Issues Identified by Stakeholders
Issues
Reduction of critical habitat.
Degradation of estuary.
Endangered species.
B
Beneficial
fi i l use designation.
d i
ti
Groundwater changes.
Water column chemistry
chemistry.
Flow provides oxygenated water to regenerate the estuary
near the ocean.
Impact of reduced flow on riparian habitat
Impact of reduced flow on steelhead and other fish
Impacts on natural aquatic species (including plants and
animals)
40
Other Issues Identified by Stakeholders
Issues
How will we ((Aera)) know which source we are drawing
g from?
(raw versus recycled) so that we can manage accordingly?
Public awareness that water from City is not used for water
flood activities
activities.
Maintaining source if unable to use recycled water (summer ,
low flow etc.) will we be able to access other source (raw
water) for purchase?
Human factor – Willingness to talk, brainstorm, without
preconceived
i d lilimits.
it
Keep the stakeholder process open.
Impact on recreational,
recreational educational and other non
nonconsumptive use of the Ventura River
41
Other Issues Identified by Stakeholders
Issues
If OVSD’s WWTP went out of business in favor of Ventura’s
WWTP for instance would there remain a legal responsibility
of provide water to the river habitat?
C t off infrastructure
Cost
i f t t
born
b
by
b City
Cit to
t access effluent
ffl
t and
d
distribute it?
Unwilling partner OVSD.
42
Recycled Water
Alternatives
43
Possible concepts for recycled water
alternatives that work within constraints
• Lower diversion flow
– 0.25 to 0.5 mgd
• Seasonal diversion
– Flow based trigger for
diversion
Reuse
Impacts
44
To implement a diversion there are data
gaps that need to be filled
• Formal habitat survey
• Flow regime for steelhead
• Improved hydrologic
balance
– Additional data collection
– Water budget analysis
45
Seasonal diversion concept relies on a
flow based trigger for diversion
• Flowdiversion = Flowriver –Flowsteelhead
• Feasibility
y issues
– User that can accept variable
supply
– Variable treatment flow
– Sufficient flow for reuse to be
cost effective
Flowdiversion
46
Existing flow monitoring indicates some
potential for a seasonal diversion
47
Flow (mggd)
120
80
60
1‐Jaan
15‐Jaan
29‐Jaan
12‐Feeb
26‐Feeb
11‐M
Mar
25‐M
Mar
8‐A
Apr
22‐A
Apr
6‐May
20‐May
un
3‐Ju
17‐Ju
un
1‐JJul
15‐JJul
29‐JJul
12‐Au
ug
26‐Au
ug
9‐Seep
23‐Seep
7‐O
Oct
21‐O
Oct
4‐No
ov
18‐No
ov
2‐Dec
16‐Dec
30‐Dec
Estimated Ventura River Flow
downstream of OVSD Discharge
g
140
25th Percentile
25th Percentile
Wet
100
A
Average
Day of Year
50th Percentile
75th Percentile
Dry
40
20
0
1960 - 2013
48
4
2
1‐Jaan
15‐Jaan
29‐Jaan
12‐Feeb
26‐Feeb
11‐Mar
25‐Mar
8‐Apr
22‐Apr
6‐Maay
20‐Maay
3‐Ju
un
17‐Ju
un
1‐Jul
15‐Jul
29‐Jul
ug
12‐Au
26‐Au
ug
9‐Seep
23‐Seep
7‐O
Oct
21‐O
Oct
4‐No
ov
18‐No
ov
2‐Deec
16‐Deec
30‐Deec
Flow (mgd)
Estimated Ventura River Flow
downstream of OVSD Discharge - Scaled
20
18
25th Percentile
50th Percentile
16
75th Percentile
14
12
10
8
6
0.5 mgd
g
0.25 mgd
0
Day of Year
49
10% of Rivver Flow (mggd)
18
16
1‐Jan
n
15‐Jan
n
29‐Jan
n
12‐Feb
b
26‐Feb
b
11‐Marr
25‐Marr
8‐Aprr
22‐Aprr
6‐Mayy
20‐Mayy
3‐Jun
17‐Jun
1‐Jull
15‐Jull
29‐Jull
12‐Augg
26‐Augg
9‐Sep
p
23‐Sep
7‐Octt
21‐Octt
4‐Novv
18‐Novv
2‐Decc
16‐Decc
30‐Decc
Depending on hydrology, diversion flow
is small compared to river flow
20
Dry, 25th Percentile
Average, 50th Percentile
Wet, 75th Percentile
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Day of Year
50
Recycled water delivery to industrial use
Ojai
WWTP
Effluent
Pump
St ti
Station
Industrial
Pipeline
Use
 0.5 mgd year round diversion
Potential seasonal diversion
• Title 22 validation
• New pump station
18 raw water line
• New pipe to 18”
• Use of 18” raw water line (comingled with raw water
pp y for agricultural
g
users))
supply
• Use of existing turnout
51
Recycled water
delivery to industrial
use
• Title 22 validation
pump
p station
• New p
• New pipe to 18” raw
water line
• Use of 18” raw water
line (comingled with raw
water
t supply
l for
f
agricultural users)
• Use of existing turnout
Industrial User
52
Recycled water for direct potable reuse
Advanced Treatment
Ojai
WWTP
Effluent
Microco
filtration
Reverse
Osmosis
Engineered
g
Storage
UV/
H2O2
Brine
Treatment/
Disposal
Potable
Water
 0.25
0 5 mgd
0.5
53
Recycled water for direct potable reuse
• New conveyance of OVSD effluent
to the Avenue Water Treatment Plant
• Advanced
treatment
processes at
Avenue Water
T t
Treatment
t Plant
Pl t
• Use of existing
potable water
distribution system
54
Summary of Alternatives
Alternative
Industrial User
DPR
DPR
Flow (mgd)
0.5
0.25
05
0.5
Unit Cost ($/AF)
$
$500
$6,000 - $10,000
$6 000 - $8,000
$6,000
$8 000
55
Discussion on Recycled
Water Alternatives
56
Which reuse project would you support?
Use your card
to provide input
P j t
Project
57
Support/Opposition of Reuse Project from
Stakeholders
Issues
Do not support reclamation as presently proposed. Too many
variable unaddressed.
Support the 0.5 mgd options.
Move the existing facilities for treating the OVSD plant water
to potable to the Ventura WTP where you have more volume
and it would help the McGrath flooding problem
problem.
Storm water capture.
Do
o not
o suppo
support taking
a go
of O
OVSD
S rate
a e paye
payers
se
effluent.
ue
This
s
belongs to ratepayers.
Support the use of 0.5 mgd for industrial use providing all the
negative
ti impacts
i
t are overcome/avoided.
/
id d
The cost needs to be weighed versus the benefit.
58
Stakeholders
Issues
Very limited effluent reuse.
Water conservation.
Storm water diversion capture.
Support of the use of recycled water for Ag and industrial
uses Cost for potable seems out of reach
uses.
reach.
Whatever the City and other regulatory agencies decide.
Aera is willing to be a prudent customer in whatever capacity
the City decided.
For the City to attempt to recycle the OVSD discharge
appears un-economic for
f the small amount off water under
discussion.
59
Stakeholders
Issues
No project continues reuse for beneficial use.
Support seasonal recycled water use – costs seem
prohibitive.
prohibitive
Would like to see a scalping plant up in Ojai.
Industrial use seems reasonable.
reasonable Stormwater capture seems
more feasible.
Would not support any of the proposals. No cost benefit
analysis, nominal increase of water that could be offset by
other conservation efforts, unrealistic cost of delivering water.
Cost benefit ratio is too low.
low
60
Stakeholders
Issues
Cannot support reducing the current minimal flow in the
Ventura River. Heath of river depends upon this flow in dry
times.
Expanded industrial use is best alternative
Use the habitat created byy the discharged
g water to g
gain
mitigation credits to offset any habitat disturbance associated
with the Ventura River water supply or Santa Clara River
discharge.
discharge
61
N t St
Next
Steps
62
Next Steps
• Compile your comments into PowerPoint
presentation
• Post on City website
Define
Project
Kickoff
Meeting
Evaluate
Constraints
Identify/
f /
Evaluate
Alternatives
Team
Workshop
Draft
Report
Final
Report
Stakeholder
#2
Stakeholder
#1
63
Project and Contact Information
• Website
– http://www.cityofventura.net/water/rivers
• Contact
– Karen Waln
City of Ventura
(805) 677
677-4128
4128
kwaln@venturawater.net
64
E d
End
65

OVSD - Ventura - City Of Ventura

Transcription

Similar documents

Poly-Trace™ Capabilities

Raymond Jay Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (213

fact sheet - Bewaterwise.com

Flowform International Ltd - The Sustainable Water Industry Group

Everything you need for the holidays!

Environmental Art - Near North District School Board

Let`s Talk Trash

PLANETPALS Print Earth Globe

biodisc-bd-bl_kingspan-klargester

Powertrain 2020