CE484Project_v2

Groundwater Treatment Facility Design Report

CarpinteriaSanta Barbara County, California

OWNER/APPLICANT:WATER AGENCY

CONSULTANTSALEXANDER BAKKEN

KEVIN GIBSONEVAN ROSCA

Groundwater Treatment Facility Design ReportCarpinteria, Santa Barbara County, California

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION.……………………………………………………………………………………………………………3

A. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF REPORT…………………………………………………………………………..3

B. PROJECT LOCATION DESCRIPTION.………………………………………………………………………….3

II. FINDINGS AND STANDARDS………………………………………………………………………………………….4

A. FINDINGS………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..4

B. STANDARDS……………………………………………………………………………………………………………4

III. WATER AND LAND DEMANDS………………………………………………………………………………………5

IV. GROUNDWATER TREATMENT FACILITY PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM………………………………6

V. GROUNDWATER TREATMENT FACILITY PROCESS COMPONENTS…………………………………7

A. WATER PUMPS……………………………………………………………………………………………………….7

B. PRIMARY DISINFECTION…………………………………………………………………………………………7

C. ULTRAFILTRATION………………………………………………………………………………………………….9

D. SLUDGE HANDLING……………………………………………………………………………………………….10

E. REVERSE OSMOSIS…………….………………………………………………………………………………….11

F. BRINE DISPOSAL………………………………………………………………………….………..………………13

G. ION EXCHANGE……………………………………………………………………………………………………..14

H. ADVANCED OXIDATION PROCESS………………………………………………………………………….16

I. SECONDARY DISINFECTION…………………………………………………………………………………..17

J. PIPING…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..18

VI. LABOR…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………19

VII. TREATMENT FACILITY/OFFICE BUILDING…………………………………………………………………….19

VIII. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS……………………………………………………………………………………………19

IX. COST SUMMARIES………………………………………………………………………………………………………20

A. CHEMICAL COST……………………………………………………………………………………………………20

B. CAPITAL COST AND OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE COST………………………………..21

X. LIFE PERIOD AND COST OF WATER……………………………………………………………………………..22

XI. REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….23

2


XII. INTRODUCTION

A. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF REPORT

The primary purpose of this report is to provide the Water Agency with a preliminary

design for a groundwater treatment facility. Since the State of California is

promoting the replacement of the State Project Water (SPW) as a means to produce

potable water, it is feasible to state that groundwater is a possible alternative.

The scope of this report is to provide a viable schematic treatment design that

addresses the constituents of concern and cost analysis of the intended design. The

constituents of concern formerly mentioned refers to those that are a potential

threat to public health. It should be noted that the calculations of the quantitative

sizing and cost of the equipment is presented in the attached Appendices.

B. PROJECT LOCATION DESCRIPTION

The groundwater location is roughly half a mile northwest of Carpinteria. The star in

Figure 1 shows the approximate location of the intended groundwater treatment

facility. After geotechnical evaluation, the typography of the land has been

characterized as simple: there are no land or soil characteristics that are outstanding

that may exhaustively interfere with the construction and implementation of the

groundwater treatment facility components. Additionally, the typography exhibits a

slight slope that is suitable for an outfall system adjacent to the coast when the

treatment facility is oriented beneficially.

Figure 1. Groundwater treatment facility location

3


XIII. FINDINGS AND STANDARDS

A. FINDINGS

The data obtained from the groundwater analysis is presented below in Table 1.

Additionally, based upon groundwater well monitoring, there will be a sufficient

supply of groundwater for the intended service area.

Table 1. Groundwater characteristics

Contaminant Inflow Condition

Turbidity 1 NTU

Total Organic Carbon (TOC) Low

Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) 1,000 mg/L

Nitrate (measured as Nitrogen) 50 mg/L

Soluble Manganese 0.80 mg/L

1,4-dioxane 10 ppb

pH 6.80 mg/L

Alkalinity 100 mg/L as CaCO3

B. STANDARDS

Table 2 presents the water quality standards based upon the Environmental

Protection Agency’s (EPA) maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) and maximum

contaminant level goals (MCLGs), and California Water Quality Monitoring Council’s

standards.

Table 2. Water quality standards

4


Contaminant MCL MCLG

Turbidity < 1 NTU -

TOC < 2 mg/L -

TDS 500 mg/L -

Nitrate (measured as Nitrogen) 10 mg/L 10 mg/L

Soluble Manganese - 0.05 mg/L

1,4-dioxane 1 ppb -

pH - 6.5 - 8.5

Alkalinity - -

XIV. WATER AND LAND DEMANDS

The service area population is 5,000 people. Assuming an average usage of 100 gallons

per day per capita with a 20% contingency, the water demand of the service area is 0.6

million gallons per day (MGD). However, due to the physical and chemical

characteristics of the groundwater’s constituents reverse osmosis (RO) will be employed

during treatment. As part of RO, water is rejected, or in other words, wasted, and so

the actual capacity of the groundwater treatment facility would need to be

approximately 0.95 MGD in order to satisfy the service area population and counter the

RO rejection.

Considering the equation , in which Q is the water demand in MGD and A is the

land demand of the treatment facility in acres, the land demand would approximately

be 0.93 acres. At a cost of $300 per square feet (ft2), the land demand would cost $12.1

million. Additionally, there will be an assumed rate of $5,000 per year to maintain (i.e.

watering and landscaping) the land.

XV. GROUNDWATER TREATMENT FACILITY PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM

5


Considering the groundwater’s constituents of concern, the groundwater treatment

facility will require advanced treatment in order to adhere to the water quality

standards presented in Table 2. Figure 2 shows the intended process flow diagram.

Figure 2. The groundwater treatment facility process flow diagram

Table 3 presents each treatment processes with their respective target constituent and

the resultant concentration in order to satisfy the water quality regulation

Table 3. Treatment processes and target constituents

Contaminant Treatment Process Resultant AdjustmentTurbidity UF 0.5 mg/L

TOC - -TDS RO 550 mg/L

Nitrate (measured as Nitrogen) RO, IX 45 mg/L

Soluble Manganese UF 0.75 mg/L

1,4-dioxane RO, AOP 9 ppbpH - -

Alkalinity - -

XVI. GROUNDWATER TREATMENT FACILITY PROCESS COMPONENTS

6


A. WATER PUMPS

The intended groundwater treatment facility will utilize two Watertronics

WATERMAX 7000 pumps. Each pump has the capacity up to 800 gallons per minute

(gpm) or up to 1,152,000 gallons per day (gpd), which can easily support the

intended 0.95 MGD influent. Even though one pump is sufficient, it is beneficial to

maintain an additional one for the sake of redundancy and safety. The pump will

enable the conveyance of the 0.95 MGD from the groundwater source to the

treatment facility. Each pump is $2,500, and the operation and maintenance for

these pumps will be $10,000 per year, which includes energy costs. The yearly cost

of the two pumps will be $15,000.

B. PRIMARY DISINFECTION

Sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl) will be injected into the raw water flow for primary

disinfection. Considering the data obtained from the analysis of the groundwater

source, the total organic carbon concentration is very low, and so it is feasible to

state that disinfection byproducts will not be an issue. A purpose of primary

disinfection is to kill or inactivate bacteria, viruses, and other potentially harmful

organisms in the raw water flow. The term “inactivates” refers to the oxidation of

the organisms’ DNA structure. Due to the former oxidation, organisms are unable to

reproduce, thereby inhibiting growth that may otherwise interfere with the

treatment mechanisms of the facility. Another purpose of primary disinfection is to

oxidize taste-, odor-, and color-causing compounds, such as manganese. The

oxidation of manganese results in manganese dioxide, which is a dark precipitate.

The advantages of using sodium hypochlorite as a disinfectant are storage and

transportation simplicity and disinfectant residual production.

By adding sodium hypochlorite to water, the following reaction occurs:

. The hypochlorous acid (HOCl) product is the most

7


active chemical species for disinfection of the reaction. The chlorine of the

hypochlorous acid is the active oxidizing agent that contributes to the inactivation of

pathogens and the oxidation of soluble manganese.

The sodium hypochlorite will be mixed

into the water flow by an in-line static

mixer. The proposed in-line static

mixer will be Koflo Flanged Static

Mixer Series 275 as shown in Figure 3.

The former mixer will allow for

sufficient chemical blending with

minimal maintenance, no operation,

and without energy input. As a result

of sodium hypochlorite addition to facility’s influent, manganese dioxide will form.

The manganese dioxide precipitate will be removed from the water flow via

ultrafiltration (later discussed). The cost of Koflo Flanged Static Mixer Series 275 is

$1,019 per unit. Assuming the mixers need to be replaced four times a year, the

annual cost will be $4,079.

The sodium hypochlorite will be purchased from ChemDirect. The sodium

hypochlorite will be injected as a 12.5% by weight (or 15% by volume) solution.

Assuming 2 mg/L of sodium hypochlorite is sufficient for inactivation and oxidation

purposes, roughly 8 gpd or 36.2 kg per day will need to be injected into the water

flow. Considering the former quantities and using the sodium hypochlorite from

ChemDirect, which is $3.65 per gallon, the annual cost of sodium hypochlorite for

primary disinfection is $10,658.

After primary disinfection, the water flow may need to be filtered through a granular

activated carbon (GAC) filter in order to remove residual free chlorine that may

Figure 3. Koflo Flanged Static Mixer Series 275 for sodium hypochlorite chemical blending

8


interfere with the RO process. Due to the preliminary nature of this report, a size

and price of a GAC would be inaccurate. Studies must be performed once the plant

is constructed and implement to accurately size GAC filters.

C. ULTRAFILTRATION

Ultrafiltration (UF) is an osmotic pressure process that will be used to treat the

groundwater supply. The UF functions by pressuring a water flow through a media

that retains constituents. The UF of the intended groundwater treatment facility will

remove manganese dioxide precipitates and turbidity. The UF will reduce the load

of the RO process

Due to the 66% recovery of the

RO system (discussed later),

and 95% recovery of UF, the

UF system will be sized at 0.95

MGD. The UF system

proposed will be Dow™

IntegraPac™ Skid IPD-77-16 as

shown in Figure 4. The former

UF is capable of treating 1

MGD. This unit operates at a

max pressure of 93.75 pound

per square inch (psi), whereas the RO membrane selected for the groundwater

treatment facility operates at a max pressure of 600 pounds per square inch gauge

(psig). The IPD-77-16 model contains a larger membrane than the IPD-51. The D

signifies that it is certified for municipal water treatment, and 16 means that there

are 16 membranes in each skid. The UF system is capable of filtering out solutes

larger than .03 microns. There will be no bypass for MF/UF filters, meaning that the

system must be regularly backwashed. The operating manual suggests backwash

Figure 4. Dow™ IntegraPac™ Skid IPD-77-16

9


every 20-60 minutes, and so 40 minutes is a safe assumption for slow TDS

concentration, which is exhibited by the intended groundwater supply. The IPD-77-

16 skid system does not include a pump. Each skid will require a pump capable of

delivering 313 GPM at just below 90 psi. Dow Water and Process is located in

Michigan, but they likely have a warehouse and representatives in Southern

California, which is beneficial to consider when replacement or repairs might be

necessary. The total capital cost for the UF treatment process is $724,000. The total

annual operation and maintenance for the UF treatment process is $16,342.38.

D. SLUDGE HANDLING

Sludge produced by the UF will be conveyed by a series of pipes to a sludge drying

bed. The purpose of the sludge drying bed is to reduce the mass that will need to

transported by providing a space for the evaporation of water. Since there are no

contaminants in the water that would classify as hazardous waste, the sludge

generated from the backwashing of the UF filters can be disposed of in landfills,

lagoons, or applied to agricultural fields. Current practice in the US is to size sludge

drying beds with dimensions of 15–60 feet (ft) wide by 50–150 ft long, and vertical

side walls. Furthermore, ~6 inch (in) of sand is placed over ~1 ft of a coarser gravel.

Due to the minimal concentration of turbidity and total organic carbon of the

influent, the sludge drying bed will be 20 ft by 60 ft beds of 1 ft thickness, and 1 ft

high walls. The facility will have 2 sludge drying beds. Using the cost concrete to

create the sludge drying beds will be $12,224.00.

E. REVERSE OSMOSIS

10


Reverse osmosis (RO) is a process by which the natural tendency of water to flow

from a low concentration region to a high concentration region is reversed using

pressure. By forcing water from the high concentration to the lower concentration

one will dilute the concentration of the lower concentration even more. The typical

pore size of RO is between 1 and 10 Angstroms or 100 and 1000 picometers. The

pores in RO membranes are only large enough to let water in, however some

squeezing of certain ions can occur. Nitrate is one of these ions. RO typically has a

nitrate rejection value of 70%. Since the source has 50 mg/L, the amount of nitrate

leftover after the RO process is 15 mg/L. The MCL and MCLG for nitrate is 10 mg/L,

therefore the RO alone is not sufficient to adhere to the regulated level. In order to

ensure sufficient nitrate removal ion exchange (IX) will be employed (discussed

later). It is because RO membrane cleaning is arguably easier and typically cheaper

than IX column regeneration, that put IX will be after RO.

The proposed RO is a turnkey skid system. The design has been proven that once

the skid arrives it simply needs to be adjusted to operating conditions. The chosen

vendor addresses these adjustments and all warranty concerns. The selected

vendor, AMPAC USA has a 100,000 gpd RO skid designed for municipal brackish

water treatment. The groundwater treatment facility will utilize 6 skids in order to

supply 600,000 gpd. AMPAC USA is selected because they are located in the Los

Angeles area, and so the proximity to the facility is approximately 100 miles. This

drastically decreases shipping costs and should any system failures occur, repairs

would be addressed promptly. The estimated total cost of the 6 skids is

$1,706,184.00. After purchasing 5 additional membranes. The total capital cost for

the skids and excess membranes is $1,710,133.50.

11


The skids will utilize Dow FilmTec BW30-400

membranes as shown in Figure 5. The

membranes are fouling resistant and certified

for municipal brackish water treatment.

However, the free chlorine tolerance is less

than 0.1 part per million (ppm), therefore

pretreatment with GAC may be necessary

following primary disinfection as discussed in

the Primary Disinfection section. Each

membrane has a daily flow of 10,500 gpd, therefore it is assumed that each skid

contains 10 membranes, for a total of 60 in use at a time. The groundwater

treatment facility will need a total of 65 membranes in case of membrane failure.

Every 3 to 7 years the filters will need to be replaced, given the low level of turbidity

and total organic carbon, an assumption of 5 years is feasible, and will cost

$51,343.50, or $8,557.25 per year after first set of membranes, which is included in

the capital cost estimation.

The groundwater treatment facility is designed under a RO 66% recovery. Therefore

the size of the UF treatment prior to the RO system will be 0.95 MGD. The cost

analysis assumes a conservative estimate that the energy usage will be 1.75

kilowatt-hour per kilogallon (kWh/kgal). Given the groundwater treatment facility

size and Southern California Edison electricity price of $.09/kWh, the total annual

energy cost is $34,516.13 per year.

Chemical cleaning of the RO membranes will take place when a 10% decrease in

effluent volume occurs, or when a 20% decrease in effluent quality occurs. The

groundwater treatment facility design assumes that the former will occur every

other month. The membranes will be cleaned in place, and therefore will be

cleaned one skid at a time. Cleaning will be performed at night when water demand

Figure 5. Dow FilmTec BW30-400 membrane

12


is typically at its minimum. Because the facility will be chemically cleaning regularly

and the water exhibits low turbidity and relatively low total dissolved solids, the

design assumes that the total cleaning time will be minimized, making a total of 5

hours for each of the two cleaning chemicals.

The capital cost for RO cleaning chemicals will be $21,600. The operational and

maintenance cost for RO cleaning chemicals will be $720/year. The total capital cost

for the RO treatment process is $1,731,733.50. The total operation and

maintenance for the RO treatment process is $43,793.38.

F. BRINE DISPOSAL

A result of RO implementation is brine. Since the intended RO system exhibits a 66%

recovery, there will be 0.32 MGD brine rejection that will need to be disposed of. In

order to handle the rejection, the groundwater treatment facility will utilize an

ocean outfall pipe. The outfall system will exhibit a diffusion design in order to

reduce the impact on the local marine environment. The will be injected at various

points along a pipeline that runs a couple of miles out into the ocean. The former

action will be needed because if all the brine is discharged at a single point source, it

will cause drastic change in the salinity concentration, thereby making it detrimental

to the aquatic life at that particular location.

The construction of a new outfall with diffusers has been found to be $5,500,000 per

MGD for facilities treating one MGD or less according to Watereus.org. Since the

size of the intended groundwater treatment facility is 0.6 MGD, the total cost of the

outfall would be $3,300,000. However since this report was prepared for seawater

reverse osmosis (SWRO) and not brackish water reverse osmosis (BWRO), the

recovery rate of our facility is twice that of discussed model. Therefore, it is feasible

to assume the real cost for outfall system for the intended groundwater treatment

13


facility is half, or $1,650,000. The former amount is categorized as capital cost and

includes equipment and construction costs.

G. ION EXCHANGE

To ensure sufficient nitrate

removal after RO treatment,

an ion exchange system will

be employed. The proposed

ion exchange system will be

Res-Kem’s Zeo-Tech Nitrate

Removal ZTN78 model as

shown in Figure 6. A single

unit for the model has the

capacity to treat up to 460

gpm, which is adequate for

the facility’s intended 416 gpm; however, for redundancy and safety purposes, it is

beneficial to have two units. The ZTN78 model is includes, but not limited to, a brine

tank for resin regeneration solution storage, flow sensors, inlet and outlet pressure

gauges, and sensor initialed regeneration. The former features allow for simple

operation and maintenance, thus reducing operator training requirements.

The ion exchange system functions by containing a resin that has a great affinity for

anions. This affinity causes the resin structure to retain the anions, thereby

removing them from the water flow. Once the ion exchange system as achieved its

nitrate-removing capacity, brine must be ran through the system to regenerate the

resin.

Considering the data obtained from the analysis of the groundwater source, sulfate

constituents are minimal or non-existent, and so there will not be an issue of nitrate

Figure 6. Res-Kem Zeo-Tech Nitrate Removal ion exchange ZTN78 model (multiple units)

14


ions competing with sulfate ions for the exchange sites on the resin. Bearing the

former expectation in mind, it is recommended that a Strong Base Anion Type II

(SBA-2) resin be selected. SBA-2 resin has a high capacity for anions, and therefore

regeneration is less frequent. The fundamental reaction for the SBA-2 is as follows:

where X- may be hydroxide or chloride ions and An- is the intended nitrate ions. With

regards to the treatment facility at hand, as the water flows through the ion

exchange system, nitrate ions dislodge the hydroxide or chloride ions from the resin

structure, thereby adhering to the resin structure and freeing the hydroxide or

chloride ions. The hydroxide or chloride ions are then washed with the ion exchange

effluent. A hydroxide or chloride solution will need to be held in a brine storage tank

for when regeneration is necessary.

The ZTN78 model consists of a 78 in vessel diameter, 83 – 100 ft3 resin volume, and

4 in inlet/outlet pipe size. The continuous flow will be 3 gpm/ft3. The brine storage

tank for each ion exchange unit will be cylindrical with a diameter of 72 in and a

height of 46 in. The ion exchange resin regeneration frequency will be contingent on

the resin’s nitrate-removing capacity; additionally, the resin will need to be replaced

depending on its effectiveness after a particular number of years of operation. The

two former parameters may be determined after an operational time period and

noting the information provided by the flow sensors and pressure gauges.

Each ion exchange unit will cost $105,000, therefore the two ion exchange will be

$210,000. An additional $2,500 will be considered for repair and maintenance

expenses. The Strong Base Anion Type II resin is priced at $0.90 per liter. Since the

resin volume may be assumed to be 100 ft3 and be changed four time a year, the

annual cost for resin for one unit will be $10,193. Additionally, the volume of the

ion exchange brine tank will be 109 ft3, the total brine volume may be assumed to be

15


consumed once a week, and the resin unit price for resin is $0.60 per liter.

Considering the former parameters, the annual brine cost for one ion exchange unit

will be $96,280.

H. ADVANCED OXIDATION PROCESS

In the intended groundwater treatment facility, an advanced oxidation process of

ultraviolet (UV) radiation and hydrogen peroxide will be employed. UV radiation is

effective for the facility’s influent due to the low turbidity levels. A disadvantage to

UV radiation is that when turbidity levels are high, the particles in the water can

deflect the UV light, thereby reducing the effectiveness of the treatment. However,

due to the data obtained from the groundwater analysis, high turbidity levels will

not be typical.

Hydrogen peroxide will be added to the water first, and then UV light will help

catalyze the dissociation of H2O2 into hydroxyl radicals (OH*). These hydroxyl

radicals are strong oxidizing agents, which are capable of destroying many organic

and inorganic contaminants. The primary purpose of this AOP is to target the 1,4-

dioxane present in the influent groundwater. When UV light interacts with the

hydrogen peroxide, the follow reaction occurs .

The key components for a UV/H2O2 system design include the hydrogen peroxide

dosage, UV lamp, irradiation intensity, reactor contact time, and a control system to

maintain the temperature and pH. The hydrogen peroxide will be injected into the

water flow prior to entering the AOP tank where the water will be irradiated with UV

light. The AOP tank will have dimensions of 6 ft by 14 ft, with a depth of 10 ft. The

former dimensions were calculated for a flow of 0.6 MGD, and a retention time of 15

minutes (min). The tank will be made out of concrete, with walls of one foot

thickness, which means 568 cubic ft of concrete will be needed to create the tank.

16


Concrete will be purchased from CHENG Concrete at $4.00 per cubic ft of concrete,

and therefore the price to make the AOP tank will be $2,272.00.

When continuous contaminant removal is required, low-pressure high-output lamps

are recommended. The facility will utilize 5.5 Watt 2 ⅛” UV Lamps (ACE no. 12132-

08). The pricing is $566.79 per lamp. There will be two rows of the lamps, and one

lamp per two feet of length (14 ft), for a total of 14 lamps.

The hydrogen peroxide must be transported and stored in stainless steel, aluminum,

or polyethylene containers. This is because spontaneous ignition and/or combustion

can occur with hydrogen peroxide when it comes into contact with certain

flammable substances (wood/paper), organic substances (alcohols, acetones,

aldehydes), and metals (lead, chromium, sodium, potassium, nickel, and gold,

among others). The facility will be using a 0.29 g/L stock solution of hydrogen

peroxide that is created by mixing 30% H2O2 with reagent grade water. The dosage

of hydrogen peroxide used will be 5 mg H2O2 per liter of water. The hydrogen

peroxide will be purchased from Zhengzhou Qiangjin Science And Technology

Trading Co., Ltd at $350.50 per metric ton.

I. SECONDARY DISINFECTION

Prior to public distribution, the treated groundwater is conveyed to a clearwell

reservoir for storage and chlorine contact time purposes, which may be referred to

as secondary disinfection. The chlorine contact time allows for further bacteria,

viruses, and other potentially harmful organisms inactivation.

According to EPA and California Water Quality Monitoring Council’s standards, a 3-

log inactivation of giardia cycts needs to occur for secondary disinfection; a 3-log

inactivation refers to a 99.9% inactivation. In accordance with EPA Concentration x

Time (CT) tables, in order to achieve a 3-log inactivation of giardia cycts by free

17


chlorine of the treated groundwater, the CT value is 56 min-mg/L when 1 mg/L of

free chlorine is added.

Since sodium hypochlorite will be used for primary disinfection, sodium hypochlorite

will also be used for secondary disinfection. Similar to primary disinfection, a Koflo

Flanged Static Mixer Series 275 as shown in Figure 3 will be used to mix the sodium

hypochlorite. The cost of Koflo Flanged Static Mixer Series 275 is $1,019 per unit.

Assuming the mixers need to be replaced four times a year, the annual cost will be

$4,079.

To obtain 1 mg/L of free chlorine, approximately, 4 gpd or 18.2 kg per day of sodium

hypochlorite will be injected into the water flow. Considering the former quantities

and using the sodium hypochlorite from ChemDirect, the annual cost of sodium

hypochlorite for secondary disinfection is $5,329.

Bearing in mind the CT value of 56 min-mg/L when 1 mg/L of free chlorine is added,

the detention time of the clearwell approximately one hour. Since the detention

time is one hour, the volume of the clearwell will be 3,345 ft3, and therefore the

clearwell will be 11 ft x 18 ft x 17 ft. Assuming 1 ft thick walls, the total volume of

concrete needed is 376 ft3. It can be assumed that the cost of concrete may be $93

per cubic yard (yd3) since that was national average of concrete in 2013; therefore,

the cost of the clearwell will be $1,295.

J. PIPING

The piping for the facility is not proposed in the report due to the unknown exact

typography of the land. Depending on the typography of the land, pipes may be

sloped appropriately at a certain length to utilize gravity and ensure beneficial water

flow. The amount of excavation should be monitored to accomplish the former. By

using gravity as beneficially as possible, one can lowering the expenses spent on

18


pumping costs, while reducing the risk of water surges, cavitation due to pressure

differentials, and water hammers.

XVII. LABOR

For the operation of the facility, it is safe to assume three workers, and the facility will

be operated 24/7. The workers will work three different shifts on a weekly

rotation: 12:00 am - 8:00 am, 8:00 am - 4:00 pm, and 4:00 pm - 12:00 am. They will all

be paid the same annual salary of $80,000, which leads to an annual labor cost of

$240,000.

XVIII. TREATMENT FACILITY/OFFICE BUILDING

The groundwater treatment facility will consist of the main treatment facility, where

materials will be stored and the equipment/machinery will be constructed, and well as a

one-story office building. The costs for constructing these buildings were estimated

based on the average cost per square footage for constructing office buildings in Los

Angeles, which should be a very conservative estimate, as the location of the

groundwater treatment facility isn’t actually in downtown Los Angeles. The office

building will be one story, and 200 ft by 300 ft, for a total of 60,000 square feet. At

$186.21 per square feet, the estimated cost for constructing the office building is

$11,172,600. There will be an assumed annual rate of $10,000 for building repairs and

maintenance.

XIX. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

Additional parameters and components should be considered for the intended

groundwater treatment facility; however, they are not part of the scope of this

preliminary report. These parameters and components include, but are not limited to,

emergency and safety measurements, parking lot construction for office building,

worker benefits, supplemental flowmeters, pressure gauges, comprehensive

redundancies of equipment components, automatic and manual valves, cost of

19


equipment and chemical transportation, additional energy expenses, and

implementation of Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) programs.

XX. COST SUMMARIES

A. CHEMICAL COST

A summary of the utilized chemicals is presented in Table 4. The unit prices of the

chemicals were derived from the corresponding vendor discussed in Section V.

Table 4. Chemical cost summary

Chemical Usage Unit PriceQuantity per day

Quantity per year

Total Yearly Cost

12.5% Sodium Hypochlorite

Primary and Secondary

Disinfection$3.65/gal 12 gal 4,380 gal $15,987

Strong Base Anion Type II Resin

Ion Exchange $0.90/liter - 11,324 liter $10,192

Brine Solution Ion Exchange $0.60/liter - 160,466 liter $96,280

Food Grade Citric Acid Monohydrate

Reverse Osmosis $850/ton - 324 kg $475

EDTA Reverse Osmosis $235/kg - 54 kg $245

Hydrogen PeroxideAdvanced Oxidation

Process$350/ton 11,360 g 4.2 tons $15,453

Total: $138,631

B. CAPITAL COST AND OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE COST

20


A summary of the capital cost and operations and maintenance cost is presented in

Table 5. The construction and installation costs accounts for 50% of the cost of the

equipment and offices; additionally, the permitting accounts for 3% of the total costs

of equipment and office.

Table 5. Capital Cost and Operations and Maintenance Cost

Process Capital Cost Yearly O&MPumping $5,000 $10,000

Primary Disinfection $1,428 $14,734Ultrafiltration $724,000 $16,342

Sludge Handling $12,224 $2,500Reverse Osmosis $1,731,734 $43,793

Outfall $1,650,000 -Ion Exchange $218,800 $108,996

Advanced Oxidation Process $12,160 $14,160Secondary Disinfection $2,519 $10,405

Total Process Cost $4,357,865 $220,931

Land $12,138,887 $5,000Labor $240,000 -

Offices $11,172,600 $10,000Construction and Installation $9,944,165 -

Permitting $465,914 -Total Housekeeping Cost $33,961,566 $15,000

Total Treatment Facility $38,319,431

XXI. LIFE PERIOD AND COST OF WATER

21


The cost of producing potable water from the groundwater supply with the intended

groundwater treatment facility design was calculated by computing the present values

of the capital cost (assumed to be present) and operations and maintenance cost with a

projected useful life of 30 years and an interest rate of 7%. Using a net present value

analysis, the cost of producing 1000 gallons is $6.29.

The current cost of producing 1000 gallons in Los Angeles is approximately $3.75. The

cost estimate of the report is larger; this may be due to the advance nature of the

groundwater treatment facility and the conservative cost estimations made throughout

the report.

XXII. REFERENCES1

Pump

1 References appear in the order used in the report rather than alphabetical order and the italicized phrases refers to the section reference is used

22


"WaterMax 7000." Watertronics. Web. 10 Dec. 2014.

<http://www.watertronics.com/watermax-7000>.

Primary and Secondary Disinfection

"Inline Static Mixers, Series 275." Inline Static Mixers. Web. 10 Dec. 2014.

<http://www.koflo.com/static-mixers/flanged-industrial-mixers.html>.

Sodium Hypochlorite Supplier

"ChemDirect." ChemDirect. Web. 10 Dec. 2014.

<http://chemdirectusa.com/SodiumHypochlori

Ultrafiltration/Reverse Osmosis

Web. 10 Dec. 2014.

<http://msdssearch.dow.com/PublishedLiteratureDOWCOM/dh_0912/0901b80380912

86a.pdf?filepath=liquidseps/pdfs/noreg/795-50111.pdf&fromPage=GetDoc>.

Outfall System

Web. 10 Dec. 2014.

<https://www.watereuse.org/sites/default/files/u8/WateReuse_Desal_Cost_White_Pap

er.pdf>.

Concrete

"Concrete Price Considerations- Cost of Concrete." Concrete Prices. Web. 10 Dec. 2014.

<http://www.concretenetwork.com/concrete-prices.html>.

Advanced Oxidation Process

"12132-08 5.5 Watt 2 1/8" UV Lamp."Laboratory Glassware and Scientific Equipment

from Ace Glass, Inc. Web. 10 Dec. 2014. <http://www.aceglass.com/html/detail/12132-

08.php>.

23


CT Tables

Web. 10 Dec. 2014.

<http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/mdbp/upload/2001_01_12_mdbp_pro

file_benchpt4.pdf>.

Office Building"Models." RSMeans. Web. 10 Dec. 2014. <http://www.rsmeans.com/models/warehouse/california/los-angeles/>.

24

CE484Project_v2

Documents

Transcript of CE484Project_v2