Conference Papers

The utility industry is changing at a rate that is faster than ever before. Increased regulatory pressure, higher level of service expectations from ratepayers, and an increased range of available technology and solutions to meet organizational missions are resulting in a need to continually develop and improve utility operations. For the most mature utilities there are often processes in place to facilitate this development organically. For less mature organizations, foundational processes need to be identified and created prior to addressing these new challenges. For utilities, understanding the current maturity of their organization is key to identifying a path to organizational development. Maturity assessments are he primary way to clearly understand the present in order to prepare for the future. In 2014 Winston-Salem/Forsyth County (WSFC) Utilities was facing a defining moment for their organization. The utility was experiencing historically low levels of service, facing USEPA regulatory action, and undergoing a change in leadership. New challenges were becoming more apparent and the institutional knowledge that the utility had historically relied on to make decisions was quickly disappearing. To understand a path to a successful future, the utility needed to develop a strategic plan to build the knowledge and skills to tackle these critical issues. Through the Collection System Improvement Program (CSIP), HDR collaborated with WSFC Utilities to develop this strategic plan. As a first step, a maturity assessment was performed with a diverse set of utility staff to provide a clear understanding of the organizations level of maturity around 12 core functions. The focus of the exercise included collection system operations. Functional areas of expertise were identified through a mix of utility input and industry benchmarking standards including the AWWA Utility Benchmarking Program. These functional areas include key areas of service delivery administered by the utility throughout the collection system: 1.Collection System Management 2.Condition Assessment 3.Capacity Assessment 4.Capital Delivery 5.First Response 6.FOG Management 7.Cleaning 8.Chemical Root Control 9.Easement Maintenance 10.Inspection — CCTV 11.Inspection — Force Mains 12.Construction & Repair These functions, and their associated maturity levels, were defined prior to maturity evaluation by the team. This was a critical step to allow for the objective assessment and goal setting for these functions by team members. Functions were assessed on a spectrum from Not Practiced — the least mature — to Continuous Improvement — the most mature. Maturity levels were defined under the following standards: - Level 5, Continuous Improvement — In addition to meeting the requirements of previous levels, new technology, processes, and approaches are regularly proposed and tested. - Level 4, Measured - In addition to meeting the requirements of previous levels, function is consistently delivered and performance is assessed against established performance goals. QA/QC occurs regularly. - Level 3, Defined & Standardized - In addition to meeting the requirements of previous levels, processes are defined and repeatable. Performance data may be collected but is not actively managed. - Level 2, Repeatable - In addition to meeting the requirements of previous levels processes are not formally defined, but informal standards exist. Limited QA/QC activity is performed. - Level 1, Reactive — Delivery of function is entirely reactive. Processes are established on a case-by-case basis. - Level 0, Not Practiced — The function is not performed by the utility. Target maturity levels were established by WSFC Utilities staff by reviewing level of service goals and connecting these goals to functional area maturity. This is a critical component of directing maturity assessment activities. By developing Target maturity levels, organizations are forced to make decisions about what they believe is achievable with available resources and required to optimize organizational outcomes. In the WSFC Utilities case, easement maintenance and inspection were determined to not require Level 5 maturity to meet the service goals of the utility. Once target maturity levels were established, an assessment of the maturity of the utility was assessed across all functional groups using a nested survey. This survey was administered to a combination of WSFC Utilities staff, members of the CSIP consultant team, and City of Winston-Salem employees from adjacent departments who work directly with the WSFC Utilities. Survey questions included qualitative assessments of the performance of utility functions that mapped directly to maturity levels, but not did not ask participants to specify a particular level. This allowed for a non-biased assessment of utility maturity without the implications of assigning a poor maturity rating. Understanding both target and current maturity levels allowed the team to understand what the gap between current performance and maturity goals were. Using this information, a strategic road map was developed to identify a path to increased organizational maturity through a series of operational initiatives. These initiatives included a range of strategies from implementing new processes and decision-making tools to improve utility performance to field training on the knowledge and skills needed to perform utility functions. Understanding the workload and path dependencies required to improve organizational maturity is key to managing expectations on the timeframe and level of investment required to reach target goals. After six years of assessing their own organization and working through the roadmap of initiatives, WSFC Utilities has made steady, lasting progress in advancing their organization. For all utilities, developing a clear vision and plan of action allows for the strategic investment in organizational development. By continually assessing organizational maturity, the effectiveness of these plans can be measured and adjusted to provide the most value to organizational staff and customers. For the most mature utilities this allows for the update of existing strategies and establishes a foundation for a consistent approach during mid and upper-level management changes. For less mature organizations, this process creates a path to targeted investment in most critical areas and a common vision of the future. Regardless of the position of any individual organization, maturity assessments are an effective way to understand and direct organizational development.

Background The Des Moines Wastewater Reclamation Authority (WRA) is made up of 17 metro-area municipalities, counties, and sewer districts in Central Iowa. They work together to protect public health and to enhance the environment by recycling wastewater and being the preferred treatment facilities for hauled liquid wastes. The Des Moines WRA has grown to be the largest wastewater treatment organization in Iowa and that has historically led to one major problem finding enough qualified employees to operate and maintain the treatment facility that serves half a million residents. In 2008, the Des Moines Wastewater Reclamation Authority (WRA) became one of the first municipalities in Iowa to take advantage of a Department of Labor (DOL) apprenticeship program by Iowa Association Municipalities (IAMU). The apprenticeship program was started because the WRA was struggling to find certified operators to hire. The job required that operators have an Iowa Grade 2 Wastewater Certification, and when a qualified candidate realized that they would be working overnights or evenings, they typically turned down the offer. With an apprenticeship, there are defined milestones that must be achieved in a timely manner, which allowed WRA managers to hire under-qualified candidates that would be required to complete the apprenticeship. Program Details The apprenticeship program is three years long in duration, it requires each apprentice to complete six thousand hours of on-the-job training and pass seven community college treatment and maintenance classes (with a C grade or better). Additionally, they must achieve their Iowa Grade 1 Wastewater Certification within the first year of employment, Class A CDL within two years and their Iowa Grade 2 Wastewater Certification by the third year. New hires that have pervious experience in the wastewater treatment field can receive previous experience credit for up to fifty percent of the on-the-job training hours. New employees that have already completed the any of the seven required classes will receive credit for them. With the acceptance of previous experience credit and classes previously taken, more experienced employees can be fast tracked while less experienced are allowed ample time to learn the ins and outs of working in the wastewater industry. When starting the apprenticeship program, WRA management created the position of Wastewater Training Specialist, in part to assist in the in the training of new Wastewater Operator Specialist employees. The first two apprenticeships classes (2009 & 2011) were held in conjunction with IAMU. The required classes were held at the facility with apprentices completing correspondence classes at Kirkwood Community College (Cedar Rapids, IA). After the 2011 apprenticeship class, the WRA brought the administration of the program internal and started to send apprentices to classes at Des Moines Area Community College (DMACC). DMACC just recently (2012) started to offer water and wastewater treatment classes in a traditional community college fashion with online, in-person or blended classes. According to Craig Hennager and Lori Card of DMACC, 'Apprenticeship students at times were 50% of the enrollment in the overall program. They kept the academic program viable as we grew and developed additional curriculum, establishing ourselves in Iowa as Water and Wastewater training leaders. Together we are making a difference.' Apprenticeship Success Since the inception of the apprenticeship program, there have been a total of thirty-seven apprentices. Of that total number, 30 have completed the program, with 23 still employed at the WRA. An additional five are currently in the program which leaves only two out of 37 that started and did not complete the program. As the program has continued, the WRA has discovered that the learning did not end at completion of the Apprenticeship Program. Out of the 30 to complete the apprenticeship, 19 have eventually achieved Iowa Wastewater Certifications 3 or 4 which is above and beyond the scope of the program. WRA's leadership in workforce development has helped staff advance their training and certification, DMACC to establish their Water Environmental Technology 2-year AA degree, and the local partner organizations like the Des Moines Water Works have followed suit to create an apprenticeship program for their water treatment operators. This program has been vital to the important job of providing qualified staff for the largest wastewater treatment facility in Iowa that is crucial to serves approximately 500,000 residents in Central Iowa.

This paper and presentation will survey and analyze the latest lawsuits and regulatory developments affecting the beneficial use of biosolids to provide wastewater and residuals professionals current information that will help inform their decisions on risk, liability, management, and planning. Slaughter and Silton regularly defend land application in litigation, and they are currently working on behalf of a major land application contractor-and its farm partners-to challenge a Pennsylvania locality's attempt to restrict land application. The speakers will discuss the challenges posed by local ordinances, tort litigation, and the ongoing campaign to regulate per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). This talk will outline potential risks, while also highlighting potential strategies for managing land application and discouraging attacks on beneficial use in the face of a changing legal environment and local communities that may be hostile to land application. Slaughter and Silton will first address the interplay between state and local regulation by exploring several case studies involving local attempts to restrict or ban land application. Their discussion will cover California, where decade-long litigation over a local biosolids ban resulted in a trial and settlement striking down the ban. City of Los Angeles v. Kern County, 2017 WL 1292822 (Tulare Co. Super. Ct. Mar. 14, 2017). Among other things, the Kern trial resulted in findings that land application poses few risks after hearing evidence concerning minimal concentrations of PFAS in soil and groundwater beneath a farm where biosolids had been land applied for decades. The speakers will also address recent developments in other states, including Pennsylvania, where the speakers are currently challenging application of a local waste ordinance to land application. Second, the speakers will survey risks to land application posed by tort law suits. Cases in which plaintiffs' lawyers have alleged nuisance conditions caused by land application will be discussed, including the important decision of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Gilbert v. Synagro Central, LLC, 131 A.3d 1, which ruled that farming with biosolids is a normal agricultural operation entitled to protection under Pennsylvania's Right to Farm Act. The speakers will also discuss a case brought in Maine, Stoneridge Farms v. 3M, in which a dairy farmer alleges that land application resulted PFAS contaminating his land, groundwater, and dairy cows. This case was voluntarily dismissed but portends a new generation of tort litigation seeking to challenge land application. Third, the talk will assess the regulatory landscape for land application. Legislators and regulators, at the behest of many advocacy groups, have turned their focus to trace chemicals that may be found in biosolids, including PFAS. Silton and Slaughter will highlight recently regulatory developments and their implications for POTWs, biosolids service providers, and farmers. The presentation will conclude with how stakeholders in land application-POTWs, contractors, and farmers-can collaborate to reduce their risks and navigate a challenging, dynamic legal and regulatory landscape.

The California Association of Sewerage Agencies Regulatory Workgroup prepared a guidance document in 2022-23 for wastewater agencies who produce biosolids and contract out land application services. The document is aimed at producers of Class B biosolids and it aims to help agencies oversee their contractors in a manner compliant with 40 C.F.R. § 503, i.e. EPA 503 regulations. The purpose of the document is not to address all the elements of an Environmental Management System, nor is it to substitute the best practice guidance from the National Biosolids Partnership. Rather, this document provides a simple distillation of duties retained by a generator of biosolids when the land application of the biosolids is handled by an outside contractor. EPA 503 regulations promote a spirit of cradle-to-grave involvement in biosolids handling on the part of the generator, yet the regulations leave room for interpretation. This is especially complicated for tasks that have been contractually transferred to the biosolids handler and are beyond the operational control of the generator, yet the generator remains responsible in principle. Further complicating interpretation is that EPA 503 does not clearly list generator duties for land application beyond sampling and analysis, leaving the reader to find duties throughout the full legal code. The document describes how the utilities should provide oversight via desktop review and in the field, before, during, and after land application. Aspects of the contractor's operation that can be reviewed via desktop include field permits, trucking routes, crops to be grown, and timing of application. Also, outreach to landowners and local regulators can be conducted in office. It is important to note that EPA 503 promotes communication between the generator and the landowner to ensure that the landowner is aware of the land application practice occurring on their fields. The document describes how a utility can conduct effective site visits to verify that land application practices are consistent with federal, state, and local (county) regulations. Site visits are also encouraged after application to verify the crop being grown at the site. Perhaps most importantly, the guidance describes agronomic loading rates. It provides definitions, calculations, and guidance related to biosolids analysis, soil analysis, field loading, and crop uptake. The guidance addresses how climate and soil type will affect assumptions. The guidance helps agency staff demystify and interpret field reports from a land applier. Finally, while the guidance document describes the limitations of contracts in abdicating a generator's duties, it nevertheless includes example contractual language to help agencies develop strong agreements. In general, the guidance is meant to help both new and experienced agencies monitor their biosolids land application practices. This talk will step through the guidance document and discuss input and nuances for the various recommendations. This talk will be useful to agency staff persons and biosolids contractors alike, as well as consultants and regulators. While the guidance was developed in California, it is applicable to all states.

Background and Project Goals Reduced acceptance of wastewater solids at landfills, paired with increased disposal tip fees, are a problem noted by wastewater utilities across the nation and one that has worsened in the past two years throughout the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast. A biosolids landfill study was conducted for a wastewater utility that treats 220 million gallons of wastewater per day, generates 105,000 wet tons of solids per year, and covers a service area with a population of nearly 900,000 residents. Approximately 18% of production is managed through landfill disposal. Regional landfills have enacted limitations on the utility over a two-year period that range from reduced tonnage and disposal times to complete cessation of acceptance. In response, a biosolids trends analysis project was initiated with a focus on landfill challenges and subsequent disposal policies. The primary purpose of the project was to establish the sustainability of landfill as a routine outlet for the utility's solids, and if regional capacity exists for potential emergency situations. A secondary goal was to provide understanding of the causes of extreme landfill heating (subsurface internal temperatures 250 °F up to 1500 °F) and slope failures at landfills — challenges that landfills reported as the main cause of biosolids volume restrictions. The project included interviews with industry experts to investigate causes of extreme landfill heating and slope failure, and surveys of regional landfills to understand limitation policies and identify potential disposal opportunities. Project Findings The most noteworthy finding of the project is that 'existing' approved landfill capacity can change from week to week. Verbal reports regarding capacity and acceptance by landfill representatives is unreliable. Figure 1 shows the monthly solids production volume that would go to landfills if other management programs failed in comparison to the ever-changing 'available' and 'approved' capacity reported by regional landfill representatives. The graphic shows approved capacity at the start of the project in January 2020 (6,380 wet tons per month) compared to approved capacity in August 2020 (2,910 wet tons per month). Also displayed is the available capacity reported during project interviews conducted from March to June 2020 (11,815 wet tons per month) versus capacity landfills were willing to accept post-completion of the project in October 2020 (4,190 wet tons per month). Total approved monthly landfill capacity dropped by 54% over the course of eight months and actual capacity secured at regional landfills post-project was 65% lower than what was indicated by representatives during project surveys. When interviewed for the project, representatives from six landfills reported available capacity but only one provided an approval to the utility beyond one load per day. Additionally, four landfills reduced existing approvals to 'emergency use only' though this was not indicated during landfill interviews. Even more surprising was three of those same landfills had also reported an abundance of available capacity to the County the year prior in a pledged long term 10-year plan submission. The reasons cited to the utility consistently involved wet waste restrictions and alleged connection between biosolids and extreme landfill heating and/or slope instability. In fact, all sixteen landfills participating in surveys noted operational changes and disposal restrictions based on those issues — with only two experiencing either challenge at their site. Another key finding from the project, based on interviews with industry experts, is that biosolids are not a direct standalone cause of either of these landfill challenges. Industry experts reported that extreme landfill heating and slope instability challenges are both caused by a combination of operational, biological, and chemical factors. Saturated waste masses do increase the chances of both landfill challenges — a primary reason the landfill limits are targeting reduction of 'wet wastes' as a preventative measure. While biosolids do add to the wet waste ratio, experts reported that a ratio of 20% wet waste to 80% municipal solid waste (MSW) is acceptable as long as sound operational practices are in place. Despite this, Waste Management is enforcing a strict 5% wet waste limit as a company policy and others (i.e., Republic, Advanced Disposal) are set at 10 - 15% in a conservative effort to avoid either challenge. Although the exact mechanisms are still under investigation, primary contributors to extreme landfill heating include poor liquid management, inefficient landfill gas collection systems, and exothermic reactions between wastestreams. Elevated temperatures can lead to drastic operational challenges including melting of leachate and landfill gas collection system piping, rapid decomposition and settling within the waste mass, and geysers of leachate due to pressure built up (Figure 2). One of the most interesting findings about extreme landfill heating is that one cause is the reaction between ash (i.e., fly ash, MSW incinerator ash) and organic wastes. The oxides in the ash mixed with organic material (including biosolids) can cause exothermic reaction over time — and lead to pockets of subsurface trapped heat. In other cases, subsurface extreme heating is occurring at landfills that used mixtures of ash and organics as an alternative daily or intermediate landfill cover, leading to a disproportionate ratio of reactive wastestreams in the deep waste mass. Extreme landfill temperatures can lead to slope instability and/or failure but are only one of the reported causes. Figure 3 shows a portion of a 12-acre slope failure at a landfill due primarily to inadequate design and stability analysis. As in the case of elevated temperatures, limiting biosolids acceptance is not the key answer to assuring slope stability. Sound operational handling practices including mixing wet wastes with solid wastes, spreading wet wastes out, and avoiding wet waste disposal at the toe of slope or at the interface of two landfill cells — can help to ensure safe disposal of wet wastes including biosolids. Conclusion As more is discovered about the mechanisms of the reactions leading to extreme heating and root causes of massive slope failures are identified — the industry is shifting recommendations away from over-saturating landfills, encouraging more focus on segregation of wastestreams that could lead to exothermic reactions, and homing in on how important it is to properly mix and spread out wet wastestreams. As a result, landfills are taking precautions by setting even stricter than recommended wet waste ratio limits and in some cases ceasing acceptance altogether. The utility is bearing the results of this with the most recent restrictions effectively reducing the approved disposal sites from eight to three sites over a period of three months. The main takeaway is that even a large utility, one with 900,000 resident's dependent on their facility, can essentially be refused disposal of solids, and landfill approvals can change at any moment — making landfill disposal an unreliable long-term biosolids management plan.

The intern program at South Platte Renew was formalized in 2019 to highlight the work of professional engineers in the water/wastewater field. Over the last four years, the program has evolved into a comprehensive experience for junior to senior level university and college engineering students to showcase the diverse engineering and problem-solving opportunities available within a professional setting. Experiences range from construction inspection, design and planning, budgeting, technical and process optimization, lab work, and piloting treatment technologies. In providing several resources and contacts, students can explore different facets of the wastewater field and experience the unique offerings from a public entity. Along with classic engineering technical skills, interns are shown the political drivers and challenges that must be considered when working as a government agency. Students are also given the opportunity to grow their professional networks, complete vital trainings, and build resumes with applicable experience. The main goal of the SPR Intern Program is to engage young engineers in the diverse work of wastewater in hopes to inspire them to join the workforce in the public sector. This presentation highlights the efforts and methods by SPR to build and maintain an intern program and how others can benefit from a university-to-organization pipeline. The framework and planning documents can be customized for the 3-month internship based on the organization's needs and focuses for that year.

Liquid biosolids land application programs have successfully operated in North America for decades. Land application of biosolids is an economical way for farmers to improve crop production and soil health while reducing greenhouse gas emissions and the landfilling of biosolids. However, with growing populations and increasing wet weather events, some programs have more recently experienced operational challenges surrounding hauling, land application, and inadequate storage. This has encouraged some programs to explore alternatives to their traditional biosolids management practices. Lystek THP is a biosolids management solution that uses thermal hydrolysis to transform biosolids and residuals into a concentrated and pathogen free liquid fertilizer product. It is a cost-effective way to extend liquid storage and reduce management stresses in facilities with existing dilute liquid land application programs. The patented process produces a concentrated (13-16% solids) EPA Class A biosolids fertilizer, LysteGro. This concentrated liquid fertilizer is applied via sub-surface injection, ensuring cleanliness when compared to traditional surface methods. Injection application increases soil contact, ensuring efficient nutrient use, and mitigation of run-off potential. The liquid product also allows for efficient loading and off-loading, as well as odor mitigation at the plant and throughout transportation. Notably, the concentrated liquid biosolids fertilizer contains added potassium (K), a key nutrient that is present in only very low quantities in other biosolids. The addition of potassium ensures the product can be used as a full replacement for conventional mineral fertilizers - providing significant value to the farmer. Benefits of this biosolids fertilizer application are realized over multiple years due to the slow-release nature of the nutrients in the product and improvements in soil health. Micronutrients, including zinc and copper, as well as macronutrients, including calcium and sulfur, important for crop growth are inherent in biosolids. This provides farmers with an accessible and sustainable option for these nutrients that would typically be expensive to purchase in the mineral fertilizer form. The addition of organic matter to soils helps improve overall soil health - including improved water holding capacity, soil structure and tilth, increased microbial activity, as well as increased resilience to severe weather conditions. We will discuss two relevant case studies: St. Cloud, Minnesota, and the South Huron Valley Utility Authority (SHUVA) in Brownstown, Michigan and the operational improvements they have realized as a result of a reducing residual biosolids volumes by implementing a concentrated Class A liquid biosolids fertilizer program. The City of St. Cloud's Nutrient, Energy, and Water Recovery Facility was looking to pursue a Class A treatment technology as part of its Resource Recovery and Energy Efficiency master plan to prepare for possible future regulatory changes. Facing storage capacity issues with their previous dilute liquid Class B program, they were also looking for solutions that could reduce their biosolids volume. St. Cloud's Class B biosolids application program had been successfully managed and operated for many years by City staff, with a receptive farming community for biosolids. Lystek was selected by the City of St. Cloud to supply the Class A biosolids treatment technology. The system became operational in the plant by September 2018 and St. Cloud has continued to operate their successful land application program using their existing infrastructure and equipment, without the addition of any new buildings or biosolids storage. They have seen a dramatic 70% reduction in their biosolids volumes and associated trucking, correspondingly reducing their biosolids program's transport greenhouse gas emissions by 70%. The program itself has also become easier to manage as the City of St. Cloud saw decreases of 85% in their overtime hours associated with land application. The estimated cost savings of producing and managing a concentrated liquid fertilizer at St. Cloud are approximately $12 million over the 20-year life cycle when compared to alternative solutions. The South Huron Valley Utility Authority (SHVUA) was seeking a solution to manage their dilute liquid biosolids program at their wastewater treatment plant serving a population of 90,000. The existing low-solids, lime stabilized Class B biosolids program was severely limited by insufficient winter storage and the WWTP was required to implement a costly contingency option of dewatering and hauling to landfill. Switching to a concentrated liquid fertilizer program has provided the SHVUA WWTP with a solution to reduce biosolids volumes by over 50%, effectively doubling that plant's storage capacity, while also producing a Class A biosolids fertilizer for local agricultural use. This change has ensured operational security and eliminated the need to dispose of 'excess' biosolids in landfills, allowing the Authority's resource recovery program to advance. Additionally, the plant was able to eliminate the use of lime stabilization and the associated chemical costs, as well as necessary storage clean out activities. The Lystek THP module processing footprint was small enough that it could be installed in an existing building with unused space, maximizing the use of existing infrastructure. Concentrated liquid biosolids fertilizer programs allow for efficient biosolids management through integration with conventional wastewater treatment plant equipment and processes. This program can greatly reduce a WWTPs volume of biosolids and required storage infrastructure, remove the need for complex management systems and infrastructure, and decrease trucking costs, all while providing a desirable fertilizer product.

The City of Oceanside California operates and maintains three critical ductile iron force mains installed during the 1970's and 1990's, the 42' Combined Sewer Line, the 24' Mission Ave Force Main, and the 24'/36' Land Outfall. The six-mile-long Land Outfall conveys effluent from the San Luis Rey Water Reclamation Facility (SLRWRF) at the northern end of the City to the La Salina Wastewater Treatment Plant (LSWWTP) near the ocean outfall. The two other pipelines are approximately 3 miles long and begin near the intersection of Mesa Drive and Garrison Street, run parallel to the Land Outfall, and flow toward the SLRWRF. Past failures on the Land Outfall prompted the City to create a condition assessment project to evaluate these force mains as well as construct improvements on appurtenances and create access points for inspections. Due to the topography, portions of the force mains are in gravity flow conditions, which complicated the condition assessment plans along with the fact that portions of the mains run along and under the City's major roadway and through culturally and biologically protected lands. The condition assessment team, consisting of Arcadis and Infrastructure Engineering Corporation, utilized multiple steps and technologies in a phased approach to collect the most relevant data using a cost-effective approach including the following:
Development of Base Maps. The team compiled information on the existing pipelines into a base map including location, flow data, baseline soil corrosivity, desktop geotechnical data, planning level biological and cultural studies, conservation easements, connection details, and plan and profile views.
Up-Front Capital Improvement Projects. The team identified several locations to prioritize as an immediate need for replacement including air valves on the Land Outfall and lining of the 24' gravity portion of the Mission Avenue Force Main. The City also indicated that they intended to rehabilitate the 42' combined sewer from the interconnect to Mission Avenue Lift Station and preferred not to inspect that section of line. •.
Development of Condition Assessment Plan. A Condition Assessment Plan was written that included the proposed following assessments:
Acoustic screening using Smart Ball on the Mission Avenue Force Main to identify gas pockets and the potential for internal corrosion failure.
Broadband Electromagnetic (BEM) testing on the Land Outfall, Mission Avenue Force Main, and Combined Sewer Line to establish baseline wall thickness data, inspect locations in high corrosivity soil locations, and inspect high points.
Internal Electromagnetic testing using Pipe Diver on the Land Outfall including area with a river crossing and a large passenger railroad crossing.
Additional soil corrosivity opportunistic testing at excavated areas.
Internal Electromagnetic testing using Pipe Diver on the Mission Avenue Force Main and Combined Sewer Line to analyze the river crossings (this was later removed from the project due to the difficulty in accessing the lines, lack of redundancy and high risk at Mission Avenue Lift Station related to flow diversions). As part of the condition assessment plan for the internal inspections, flow conditions were analyzed on paper and specific actions were detailed regarding operations of the Mission Avenue Lift Station and the SLRWRF effluent pumps to maintain 2 feet per second of full pipe flow during the inspections as well as depressurizing and repressurizing for the Land Outfall Pipe Diver inspection. Flow diversion plans were also created to restrict industrial customers that discharge directly into the Land Outfall. There were intentions of performing a dry run to simulate the required flow conditions prior to performing the Pipe Diver inspection as well as having all of the air valve repairs completed, but due to weather impacts on the construction and the inconvenience of customers having to hold their flows, the flow test was not performed. During the Land Outfall inspection of the river crossing section, the team was able to control the flow at 2 feet per second (fps) for the two Pipe Diver runs after some unanticipated trial and error of partially closing a valve downstream to fully fill the pipe after it was depressurized. The testing lasted longer than anticipated but was successful. However, the Land Outfall section at the railroad crossing was more challenging and the team was not able to turn the downstream valve and maintain full flow at 2 fps and the test was abandoned. Analyzing the data collected from the successful inspections on the Land Outfall was inconclusive to determine the condition of the railroad crossing portion of the force main. BEM testing at the beginning and end of the railroad segment did not show any wall loss internally at the crown or any external corrosion. However, various soil analysis performed along the full force main length did not correlate with some of the observed external pitting, and some pipe segments were found to have polywrap to protect the pipe from external corrosion and some did not. Even more concerning, the results from the river crossing Pipe Diver inspection showed many small areas of corrosion up to 50% wall loss that seemed to be from corrosive soil hot spots and or deteriorated polywrap or no polywrap present. It would have been easy to give up and say that based on the two BEM test points the railroad crossing was in good condition but since it was such a large crossing and included passenger trains, the team felt it was worth further exploration to prevent a failure in the area. The City and condition assessment team worked closely together to perform additional hydraulic evaluations, perform a dry run to get the required flow conditions prior to conducting the inspection, and writing up a detailed protocol to follow on inspection day. With this advance effort, Pipe Diver was successfully deployed and provided meaningful data. The data showed multiple localized areas of corrosion up to 70% wall loss. Approximately 1,500 feet of pipeline was recommended for immediate replacement at a planning level cost of $1,454,700. Lessons learned are that you should do all possible up front planning and modeling, including dry runs if flow conditions may be difficult to achieve, to support a successful internal condition assessment, and selecting point inspections based on base map data may not provide a full picture of pipeline conditions if external corrosion hot spots exist and the pipeline has not been consistently protected. Additional inspections are recommended for Mission Avenue Force Main and the Combined Sewer line. At this time, the City is evaluating if the Mission Avenue and Combined Sewer Force Mains may need increased capacity or be taken out of service as part of decommissioning the LSWWTP. Additional inspections will be planned in conjunction with parallel pipeline construction as necessary.

Background Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTPs) in South Carolina and Georgia have been historically dependent on landfill disposal for the management of the wastewater solids generated through their respective treatment processes. In Georgia and South Carolina nearly 65% of wastewater solids are sent to landfill. In recent years, landfills in both states have undergone policy changes that include steep increases in tipping fees for wastewater solids and a reduction in wet waste acceptance. The reduction of wet waste acceptance limits the percent wet waste (>40% moisture) accepted into landfills. In Georgia, landfills are required to develop a detailed Sludge Management Plan (SMP) if they accept more than a 5% wet waste to 95% Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) ratio. The changing landscape surrounding landfill disposal creates significant challenges for WWTPs in both states. The uncertainties resulting from these changes have served as the impetus for four WWTPs (two in Georgia and two in South Carolina) to evaluate new biosolids management technologies, beneficial use markets, and management methods. Objective Four utilities located in Gainesville, GA, Douglasville, GA, Beaufort, SC, and East Richland, SC underwent Biosolids Regulatory and Market Assessments for their respective WWTPs. The assessment worked to identify opportunities and challenges resulting from state regulations, local markets, and corresponding economics, associated with managing various biosolids products under consideration. Comprehensively, the Regulatory and Market Assessments for all of the utilities serve as a guide to the biosolids beneficial use and disposal outlets and management methods to achieve the following three objectives. 1. Identify permitting pathway for several biosolids products and management methods in Georgia and South Carolina; 2. Identify beneficial use and disposal outlets in the region for the respective baseline products generated by each WWTP; 3. Identify beneficial use and disposal outlets in the region for proposed products; and 4. Define market details including market capacity, storage requirements, and revenues and expenses associated with product management. Methodology The Biosolids Regulatory Assessments included a detailed review of existing Federal and state biosolids beneficial use and disposal regulations, as well as future regulatory federal and state regulatory considerations. Encompassed in the Market Assessment for each utility, the baseline solids management program was examined to understand existing practices and costs associated with solids disposal. Information about the local market preferences and demand for the biosolids products being considered for each utility was gathered through market research and interviews with potential market outlets. Collected data was used to identify the opportunities, challenges, and outside-the-gate program expenses (those expenses associated with product management only) associated with each market/product combination. The data from each utility was further analyzed to develop an idea of the current biosolids beneficial use and disposal trends relating to the management of several biosolids products in both South Carolina and Georgia. Four main products were evaluated including Class B digested cake, Class B and A/EQ alkaline stabilized cake, Class A/EQ compost, and Class A/EQ thermally dried granules. Findings and Current Status Assessment findings reveal that the development of beneficial use programs, both self-managed programs (SMP) and Third-Party Contractor (TPC) managed programs are available and viable in South Carolina and Georgia. Listed below are the main recommendations and findings that were consistent for each Market Assessment: 1. High Level of Interest in Class A/EQ Thermally Dried Granules: In each Market Assessment, thermally dried granules scored higher than other products due to the high level of interest noted in outlet surveys as well as the increased product flexibility within several different markets. Although interest level is high, many interested market outlets require a high-quality product, which is typically generated from rotary drum dryers. 2. Availability of Off-Site Stabilization Facilities: Off-site stabilization facilities are currently available with more coming online in the coming years. The majority of stabilization facilities in Georgia and South Carolina are composting facilities which product Class A/EQ compost for several markets. 3. On-Site Storage Requirement: 3 months of on-site storage is highly recommended, regardless of which market/product combination is pursued. The increase of on-site storage presents each utility with increased flexibility and resiliency. A summary of the selected products, most promising markets, relative outside-the-gate costs, opportunities, and considerations are summarized in Table 1. Furthermore, a summary of the regulatory considerations for Georgia and South Carolina can be found in Table 2. The Market Assessment findings indicate the current market conditions are strongly favorable for beneficial use of Class A/EQ compost and dried granule biosolids products. The presentation will further discuss the relative outside-the-gate costs associated with the management of each product as well as growing trends relating to the beneficial use of biosolids in this region.

PURPOSE New England communities will soon need to fund nutrient reduction projects to meet stricter regulatory requirements. Since 2011, jurisdictions within Falls Lake watershed in North Carolina have been regulated under a similarly stringent Nutrient Management Strategy for nitrogen/phosphorus. Jurisdictions found meeting these requirements difficult or infeasible. We discuss how a coalition of rural towns, larger cities, and counties collaborated to fund water quality improvements and coordinated with State regulators toward solutions that work for all. DESCRIPTION MS4 communities, such as those within the Charles River, Mystic River, and Great Bay Estuary watersheds, must significantly reduce phosphorous and nitrogen loads to meet Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) requirements of the Clean Water Act. Funding these costly nutrient reduction efforts, against competing priorities of replacing aging drainage infrastructure and building climate resiliency, will benefit from a collaborative and innovative approach. Since 2011, jurisdictions within the Falls Lake watershed in North Carolina have been regulated under the Falls Lake Nutrient Management Strategy ('Falls Rules'). Through phased implementation, the Falls Rules aim to reduce nutrient inputs to the lake from wastewater discharges, agriculture, state and federal facilities, and stormwater runoff from new and existing development. For the first stage of the Existing Development Rules, each jurisdiction was required to eliminate their nutrient load from development that occurred between 2007 and 2012 - a significant challenge given that site conditions and development plans were not closely tracked during this period. Achieving 'fair' nutrient load reduction estimates became difficult or infeasible for some communities, and the Rules were delayed. As a venue to discuss solutions to Falls Rules implementation challenges (among other benefits), most regulated entities within the affected watershed participate in the Upper Neuse River Basin Association (UNRBA), a regional non-profit organization focused on promoting water quality and facilitating constructive conversation among stakeholders. To support reasonable adjustments to the Falls Rules and promote the long-term health of the lake, UNRBA has conducted its own watershed and water quality monitoring and modeled various regulatory and management pathways to water quality improvement. Among these pathways, UNRBA, together with local regulatory and academic input, conducted a series of studies to expand the approved set of nutrient removal credit practices for both municipalities and private property owners. However, it was not feasible to meet nutrient reduction targets with credits alone. So, the group also designed the Interim Alternative Implementation Approach (IAIA), which focuses on a collaborative, voluntary, investment-driven participation to meet individual compliance while achieving water quality improvement. Through UNRBA's transparent process, the design of the IAIA earned support from numerous stakeholders, including regulators, and is in the process of being administratively included as an approach to achieving compliance with Stage 1 of the Rules. As the Falls Rules were going into effect in 2011, a group of five jurisdictions in the region recognized the need for increased, sustainable funding and embarked on a joint effort to create stormwater utilities to begin collecting stormwater user fee revenues. These fees fund current and future program requirements, especially those related to Rules compliance. The collaborative approach leverages efficiencies in utility administration and representation in interactions with regulators and ensures a consistent approach to applying the Rules' requirements. All five jurisdictions are currently active members of the UNRBA, contributing toward funding UNRBA's work and participating in the technical and administrative decision-making processes. BENEFITS OF PRESENTATION This case study presents many transferrable approaches and lessons learned to benefit other municipalities and non-profit organizations facing stringent TMDL requirements in New England and beyond. CONCLUSION Policy and funding collaboration among five jurisdictions and a non-profit organization resulted in an alternative compliance mechanism with TMDL rules set out by the State of North Carolina.

Green infrastructure and source control technologies are increasingly accepted as a best practice for reducing stormwater impacts on water quality and aquatic habitat in urban areas. However, impacts continue to grow in many watersheds within the United States even as progress is being made on other sources of water pollution (NRC, 2009). Stormwater management practices have been improved at the site level, but they are not being implemented on a large enough scale to offset water quality degradation caused by urban and suburban land use trends (WEF Stormwater Institute, 2015). Philadelphia is one city implementing green infrastructure on a large scale as a key component of its approach to manage urban stormwater and combined sewer overflows. The Philadelphia Water Department will complete its tenth year of program implementation in 2021. This paper will cover the status of the program, provide statistics on the types and locations of green infrastructure that have been implemented, and summarize performance monitoring data collected from systems operating in the field. PWD submitted its Combined Sewer Overflow Long Term Control Plan Update in 2009, as required by its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits. In 2011, a modified version of that plan was approved for implementation through a Consent Order and Agreement (COA) with the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection. The COA specifies combined sewer overflow reductions, pollutant load reductions, and implementation of green stormwater infrastructure targets intended to improve water quality in local watersheds and the Delaware tidal estuary. As the program approaches the ten-year milestone, it has implemented stormwater management features managing surface runoff generated by approximately 1,100 acres of impervious urban surfaces (Figure 1). Stormwater management features have been implemented through a variety of programs and on a variety of land uses (Figure 2). These include projects on private property initiated by code requirements governing redevelopment. Projects have been implemented on public property, including streets, sidewalks, and public facilities. Finally, projects have been implemented through incentives for private property. Post-construction monitoring data from selected sites indicate that systems are generally meeting or exceeding design performance expectations (Figure 3).

The South Shore Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) began operations in 1968 in the city of Oak Creek, Wisconsin. The plant receives wastewater from the southern, far western, and far northern portions of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District (MMSD) as well as diverted waters from the Jones Island Water Reclamation Facility. In addition to residential wastewater, South Shore receives the majority of diverted industrial wastewaters in the MMSD service area. In 1974, South Shore was expanded and upgraded to provide secondary treatment utilizing an activated sludge process. The plant has conventional barscreens, grit removal tanks, primary clarification, activated sludge basins, final clarification and sodium hypochlorite disinfection. South Shore currently has a maximum treating capacity of 250 million gallons per day (MGD) and a peak flow of 300 MGD. Average flows are maintained from 65-85 MGD. Description of Problem South Shore has an extensive collection and tunnel system that creates anaerobic/anoxic conditions during warmer months. This results in elevated levels of hydrogen sulfide (2.0 mg/l - >5.0 mg/l) as well as organic volatile fatty acids (250mg/l - 400 mg/l) entering the plant. Elevated levels of soluble BOD (300mg/l -400mg/l) and COD (900-1400 mg/l) entering the plant are also typical. Ortho-phosphorous and nitrogen deficiencies are typically below the recommended BOD5:P ratio of 100:1. It is suspected that elevated ferric chloride dosing concentrations prior to the primary clarifiers designed to aid sedimentation may be contributing to this situation. It is also suspected that this overall combination of factors is leading to an overgrowth of filamentous bacteria in the activated sludge basins that further effects sedimentation in the secondary clarifiers. Since filamentous bacteria have been demonstrated to overgrow where an organic acid concentration of >100 mg/L and a sulfide concentration of >1-2 mg/L exist it is logical to assume that a reduction in these two factors may reduce filamentous growth and lead to improved settling.

Figure 1 Corrective Action Treatment Method In July of 2020, Streamline Innovations and Veolia North America partnered with Veolia Operations to perform a study to determine if a REDOX Process could reduce sulfides, and decrease filamentous bacterial populations to improve settling and reduce bulking. The REDOX process utilizes a patented liquid organically bound iron that is dosed in combination with an oxidant, in this case 50% peroxide. The REDOX reaction that takes place is as follows: Overall Reaction The hypothesis of the trial was centered on the premise that reducing total sulfide and volatile fatty acid levels using a vigorous REDOX process, filamentous growth would not have sufficient food leading to a reduction in their prevalence and improved settling of solids in the activated sludge basins and secondary clarifiers. The treatment goals were to maintain total sulfide levels at <0.8 mg/l. A Hach spectrophotometer was used to verify sulfide levels in the wastewater. H2S atmospheric levels were also monitored before and after treatment to verify gaseous reductions in hydrogen sulfide before and after treatment to further document the efficacy of the REDOX process. The detention time between REDOX chemical injection and water testing was around 1.5 hours under normally occurring flows. Total sulfide tests were conducted every 6 hours from the primary influent and 1-2 times per day from the injection manhole. An average dosage of 80 gallons per day of organically bound iron and 500 gallons per day of 50% peroxide were dosed into the headworks.

Conclusions
Sulfide levels decreased after treatment and maintained averages of 0.25 mg/l. After approximately 5 days, filamentous populations began to drop in the activated sludge basins (Averages ranging from 3.5-4.5 down to 1.5-2.0). Nuisance. Odors in the preliminary building, grit chamber and primaries were also noted to have improved. At the time of this submittal the destruction of hydrogen sulfide, a notable food source for filamentous organisms, correlates with a significant reduction in 021N and Thiothrix sp. filaments to manageable levels. A reduction in hydrogen sulfide corrosion in the front of WRF is also expected and will be studied. As of the writing of this submittal, there have been no deleterious effects to the overall operations of South Shore WRF using the described REDOX treatment approach. Since this chemistry has been used in scores of wastewater plants, none are expected. Additional research on the reduction of iron chloride use in the primary influent is ongoing and is expected to paint a more complete picture on microorganism species richness and diversity impacts and sludge volume index (SVI) metrics. Further studies to understand the organic acid concentrations before and after treatment are currently underway.