Monitoring and Dispersion Modeling to Become Good Neighbors

PROBLEM STATEMENT/PURPOSE: Prince William County Service Authority (PWCSA) owns and operates the H.L. Mooney Advanced Water Reclamation Facility (AWRF) in Northern VA. The AWRF is nestled in a residential community with parks and a walking path along the property line. The AWRF first implemented odor control in 2001, and subsequently upgraded the system in 2011 to provide odor control for preliminary treatment and solids thickening processes. To further reduce odors at the AWRF's property line and beyond, PWCSA is completing a design-build project that includes the assessment of odors at the AWRF through sampling and dispersion modeling, evaluation of odor control technologies, and the design and construction of the chosen system. The purpose of this abstract is to present the odor sampling, monitoring, and extensive dispersion modeling that led to the current design (2022) and future construction (2023) of a 95,000 CFM centralized odor control facility at the AWRF.

BACKGROUND:
The AWRF is located in Woodbridge, VA, approximately 30 miles outside Washington, DC and is in close proximity to several livable communities, nature parks, and walking paths. The AWRF is designed to treat 24 million gallons per day (mgd) average daily flow with current flows in the 14 to 16 mgd range. The AWRF has an existing packed tower chemical scrubber odor control system that treats odors from preaeration, screening, grit removal, and gravity thickening processes at the AWRF. Odorous air from solids dewatering and incineration are routed out of a high stack for improved dispersion. However, odor control improvements are needed to reduce odors within the AWRF site and reduce odor excursions into neighboring residential communities and walking paths outside the AWRF property line.

METHODOLOGY:
In the summer of 2021 odor sampling was conducted at various source locations throughout the AWRF to characterize the odors onsite coming from untreated sources and assess the treatment of the existing odor control facility. Odor sampling was completed during summer months to obtain samples under worst-case conditions (warm weather, higher anticipated odors). The sampled untreated process sources included the equalization basins, primary clarifiers, aeration basins, solids processing building odor exhaust (untreated odors routed to the high stack), and the incinerator exhaust stack. In addition to the untreated odor sources, sampling was also completed on the chemical scrubber inlet and outlet to assess the system performance. The odor sampling completed included: -US EPA Surface Emission Isolation Flux Chamber -Grab samples collected for olfactory odor analysis by ASTM E679 -Odor speciation using ASTM D194 -Reduced sulfur compounds using USEPA Method TO-15 (GC/FPD detector) -Field measurement of H2S using Acrulogs and Jerome 631X H2S meters -Ammonia, Amines, and Dissolved Sulfide with Colorimetric Detection Tubes -Temperature and pH Sampling data was evaluated and used to characterize the types and concentrations of odor species present at the AWRF, and to determine the odor emission rates from each odor source for use in the dispersion model.

RESULTS:
The results of the sampling showed the solids processing building exhaust to have the highest dilution to threshold (D/T) value, followed by turbulent zones of the primary clarifiers, anoxic stages of the aerobic basins, and quiescent zones of the primary clarifiers. The chemical scrubber exhaust results showed the system to be effectively reducing odors from the treated sources. The speciation sampling resulted in the detection of four odor compounds including hydrogen sulfide, methyl mercaptan, dimethyl sulfide, and dimethyl disulfide. Ammonia was also detected in samples from the solids processing building. D/T results were used to develop the odor emission rates (OERs) for each odor source. OERs were developed by translating sampled values into odor units per second (OU/sec) based on airflow and odor magnitude. The OERS were used as inputs for the baseline emissions model, also known as the AERMOD dispersion model. Meteorological data for the AERMOD dispersion model was sourced directly from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration archives for representative observation sites. The most recent three years of available data (2018–2020) were used in this analysis and surface data was obtained from the Quantico Marine Corps Airfield, which is 8 miles south of the AWRF. The resultant impacts calculated by AERMOD are expressed in odor units per cubic meter of air (OU/m3) and can be compared directly to the sampled D/T values. Several scenarios of modeling were completed to evaluate existing conditions, identify the most impactful sources of odor dispersion, and assess potential treatment solution results for the sources. The baseline dispersion model, or existing conditions scenario, showed the predicted impacts from the sampled odor sources on site and their impact outside the AWRF fence line. Figure 1 provides the baseline scenario potential impacts. The worst-case D/T concentrations predicted to reach a given area are shown with the color/label. Based on the baseline scenario, the odor source impacts of the AWRF would be noticeable, and potentially a nuisance, for all areas above 7 D/T (shown in yellow in Figure 1). This includes the communities to the north and east of the AWRF, which have maximum odorous impacts of 7 to 10 D/T. The wide impact of the 3 D/T contour extends beyond the frame of this view, which suggests that the AWRF could potentially contribute to ambient odors greater than 1 mile from the fence line. Individual sources were modeled and showed the solids processing building exhaust and the aerobic basin anoxic zones to have the greatest D/T dispersion impact. Before additional treatment options were evaluated, an odor impact criterion, or D/T fence line goal, was developed with PWCSA during several workshops. Virginia odor criteria are plant-specific, and a survey of Virginia plants showed criteria generally range from 5 to 10 D/T with different averaging time requirements. It was determined that the impact goal should be one that minimizes the risk of negatively impacting neighbors but is balanced with controlling increased cost that will be incurred if goals are excessively tight. For PWCSA, the recommended goal of 100 percent compliance with 7 D/T (1-hour impact goal) at the fence line was used for the evaluation of the model. Once the odor impact criterion was determined, six (6) additional modeling scenarios were developed to evaluate the impacts from treating/reducing odors from the untreated sources. The scenarios were as follow: 1.Treatment of solids processing building exhaust (assumed 90% D/T reduction from solids processing) 2.Coverage and treatment of the primary clarifier odors (assumed 95% D/T reduction from solids processing) 3.Combination of 1 and 2 (treatment of solids processing and primary clarifier odors) 4.Combination of 2 and treating EQ basin odors (assumed 50% D/T reduction from EQ basins) 5.Combination of 2 and covering and treating odors from the aerobic basin anoxic zones (90% reduction of odors from anoxic zones) 6. All control alternatives combined The different modeled scenarios showed the greatest odor reduction results for control scenario 6 (all sources treated), followed by control scenario 3 (primary clarifiers and solids processing building treated). Although control scenario 6 reduced the 7 D/T line impact slightly more than control scenario 3, both scenario results show benefit and bring the 7 D/T line close to the fence line. The model predicted dispersion results from scenario 3 are shown in Figure 2. All six of the scenario results will be shown in the presentation.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:
The sampling and modeling results were used to identify the primary clarifiers and solids processing building as additional sources for odor control treatment at the AWRF. Once the sources were determined, a capacity assessment was completed on the existing system which showed it did not have sufficient capacity to treat the additional sources. A complete treatment technology evaluation was completed for the AWRF based on the airflows, odor species present, and required treatment for dispersion. Ultimately, the team decided to move forward with a new centralized chemical scrubber facility re-using the existing vessels and a new vessel to meet the design capacity of 95,000 CFM. Chemical scrubbers were chosen based on the sampling results, odorous airflow capacity requirements, and site space constraints. The presentation will provide insight and potential project path solutions for other utilities looking to evaluate the odor impacts from their treatment facilities on neighboring communities, experiencing odor complaints, or wishing to evaluate dispersion modeling uses.