WWTFSP App.F2 Wastewater Quality Projections

Appendix F2: Basis of Planning - Wastewater Quality
Projections
Version 2.0
July 2010
Prepared by:
Carollo Engineers, Inc.
Registration No. F-882
Dallas Water Utilities
Table of Contents
Wastewater Quality Projections
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0
Executive Summary .................................................................................................3

1.1
1.2
1.3
2.0
CWWTP Historical Wastewater Quality Data .........................................................5

2.1
2.2
3.0
Sampling Locations..................................................................................................... 13
Historical SWWTP Raw Wastewater Data and Trends .............................................. 14
Factors That Impact Future Wastewater Quality.................................................20

4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
5.0
Sampling Locations....................................................................................................... 5
Historical Raw Wastewater Data and Trends ............................................................... 5
SWWTP Historical Wastewater Quality Data .......................................................13

3.1
3.2
4.0
Wastewater Quality Historical Trends ........................................................................... 3

Factors that Impact Future Wastewater Quality............................................................ 4
Wastewater Quality Projections .................................................................................... 4
Wastewater Flow......................................................................................................... 20
Water Reuse ............................................................................................................... 20
Decentralized Wastewater Treatment......................................................................... 21
Land Use ..................................................................................................................... 21
Pretreatment Standards .............................................................................................. 22
Drinking Water Treatment ........................................................................................... 22
Summary.................................................................................................................23
Appendix A
Glossary of Acronyms and Terms............................................................24
Appendix B
References..................................................................................................25
Appendix C
DP Historical Influent Wastewater Characteristics.................................26
Appendix D
WRP Historical Influent Wastewater Characteristics .............................31
Appendix E
CWWTP Historical Influent Flow Data ......................................................36
Appendix F
SWWTP Historical Influent Wastewater Characteristics ........................37
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
2 of 43
Section 1.0
Executive Summary
1.0
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.1
Wastewater Quality Historical Trends
Approximately nine years (2000-2009) of historical wastewater data were reviewed to establish
wastewater quality trends. At Central Wastewater Treatment Plant (CWWTP), actual raw influent data is
limited as the sampling locations prior to January 2009 were located at the primary clarifier influent, which
includes the trickling filter solids recirculation stream. At Southside Wastewater Treatment Plant
(SWWTP), the raw influent data is influenced by the plant sewer and filtrate from the solids thickening and
dewatering facilities. Using the historical influent wastewater quality data is slightly conservative because
the recycle streams contribute considerable amount of total suspended solids (TSS), Five-Day
Carbonaceous Biological Oxygen Demand (CBOD5), and ammonia (NH3-N) loadings. The key findings
are as follows:
1.1.1
Influent Five-Day Carbonaceous Biological Oxygen Demand
For CWWTP elevated CBOD5 concentrations and loadings occurred during 2005 and 2006. Since the
end of 2006, the loading of CBOD5 has reduced significantly to 183,400 pounds per day (ppd) in 2007,
169,500 ppd in 2008, and 148,500 ppd in 2009. Although there is recently a clear trend downward, the
planning criteria should not reflect such a sharp decrease, as it may be temporary.
For SWWTP, increased average CBOD5 concentrations and loadings have occurred since early 2005.
The planning criteria should assume that concentrations will remain at these levels. During this elevated
concentration and loading period (2005-2008), the maximum month peaking factor was 1.27.
1.1.2
Influent Total Suspended Solids
For CWWTP, with the exception of a high average load in 2002 and low loads in 2008 and 2009, the TSS
values have been relatively stable, with a slight increase over the last nine years. The 2002 maximum
month load of 470,300 ppd, which resulted in a 1.43 peaking factor, appears to be an isolated incident
and should not be used for planning purposes.
For SWWTP, TSS values have shown an increase in the last four years. For 2006-2009 the average
concentration was 224 mg/L with a maximum month peaking factor of 1.28.
1.1.3
Influent Ammonia
For CWWTP, the influent ammonia load has remained near the average of 18,000 ppd with the exception
of 2008. The maximum month load has trended downward since 2001 while the average concentrations
have trended upward. For 2007-2009 the average concentration was 16.0 mg/L. For 2000-2009 the
maximum month peaking factor ranges from 1.10 to 1.27.
For SWWTP, influent ammonia loads have been steady, with an average load of 10,400 ppd from 20002009. The maximum month load has trended downward since 2001, while the average concentrations
have trended upward. For 2006-2009 the average concentration was 19.0 mg/L. For the years 20002009, the maximum month peaking factor was 1.30.
1.1.4
Influent Total Phosphorus
For CWWTP, influent total phosphorus (TP) was only available from 2007-2008. During this period, the
average influent total phosphorus concentration is 7.2 mg/L with a maximum month peaking factor of
1.32.
For SWWTP, influent total phosphorus was only available from 2007-2008. During this period, the
average influent total phosphorus concentration is 5.6 mg/L with a maximum month peaking factor of
1.15.
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
3 of 43
Section 1.0
1.2
Executive Summary
Factors that Impact Future Wastewater Quality
Several factors were evaluated that may impact future wastewater quality, including wastewater flows,
water reuse, decentralized wastewater treatment, land use, pretreatment standards, and drinking water
treatment. With the exception of wastewater flow, the impacts of the other factors on wastewater quality
were found to be negligible. For planning purposes, the assumption is that wastewater flows will continue
to decrease for the next several years due to water conservation efforts. Between 2010 and 2020, it is
projected that the annual average flows will then begin to increase as water conversation bottoms out
and population increases.
1.3
Table 1-1 summarizes the wastewater quality projections for this planning period.
Table 1-1: Summary of Projected Wastewater Quality

Parameter
CWWTP (1)
SWWTP (1)
Combined (2)
2030
2030
2030
Flows
Average Annual Flow (2) (mgd)
99
98
197
205
162
184
169,500
132,400
301,900
1.73
1.47
1.62
293,200
194,400
487,600
240
228
234
198,400
186,700
385,100
1.40
1.34
1.37
277,800
250,000
527,800
17.0
18.6
17.8
14,100
15,200
29,300
1.40
1.30
1.35
19,700
19,800
39,600
7.0
6.2
6.6
Average Load (ppd)
5,800
5,200
11,000
Load Peaking Factor
1.40
1.40
1.40
8,100
7,300
15,400
CBOD5
Concentration milligrams per liter (mg/L)
Average Load pounds per day (ppd)
Load Peaking Factor
Max. Month Load (ppd)
TSS
Concentration (mg/L)
Average Load (ppd)
Load Peaking Factor
NH3-N
Average Load (ppd)
Load Peaking Factor
Total Phosphorus

1
Projections based on future CWWTP/SWWTP flow split where a portion of flows from CWWTP will be
diverted to SWWTP. The loading rates reflect the combined concentration.
Based on WWTFSP Wastewater Flow Projections, TM Version 2.0, July 2010..(Ref. 135)
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
4 of 43
Section 2.0
2.0
CWWTP Historical Wastewater Quality Data
CWWTP HISTORICAL WASTEWATER QUALITY DATA
The CWWTP consists of two parallel trickling-filter treatment plants, referred to as the Dallas Plant (DP)
and White Rock Plant (WRP), followed by a combined activated sludge and effluent filter facilities.
Approximately one-third of the influent flow is treated at the DP, and the remaining flow is treated at the
WRP. Appendix C through Appendix E present data figures and tables that summarize the historical
CWWTP data collected for the DP and the WRP. The data for the two plants has been combined and
analyzed. Nine years (2000-2009) of wastewater quality data were obtained from DWU staff.
The wastewater quality projections assume that there are no changes to the current flow split ratio
between the CWWTP and SWWTP. The impact of future changes in the flow split ratio is discussed in
Section 4.0.
2.1
Sampling Locations
Actual raw influent data is limited because the sampling locations prior to January 2009 were located
downstream of the headworks facilities. This is significant since the primary clarifier influent sample
includes the solids recycle flow from the secondary clarifiers at DP and WRP and the Waste Activated
Sludge (WAS) from the Activated Sludge Complexes A and B. In the event that the trickling filters are
decommissioned and the WAS is redirected to the solids holding tank, solids recycle flow to the plants
would be reduced, resulting in lower TSS and CBOD5 values. Therefore, using the historical influent
wastewater quality data is slightly conservative. Figure 2-1 shows the sampling locations at CWWTP.
2.2
Historical Raw Wastewater Data and Trends
The following paragraphs detail the raw loadings of CBOD5, TSS, NH3-N, and total phosphorous
associated with various flow conditions. Prior to January 2009, the raw wastewater samples were taken
just upstream of the primary clarifiers. Therefore, the raw wastewater loading data is influenced by the
secondary solids recycle stream in the plant, as described in Section 2.1.
DWU Historical CWWTP Data, 1999-2009, provides the data for the tables, charts, and graphs. (Ref. 28)
2.2.1
Influent CBOD5
Figure 2-2 presents the CWWTP daily average influent CBOD5 loading from the DWUs operations data
for June 2000 to June 2009. From the daily values, a 30-day running average was calculated. Table 2-1
summarizes the calculated CBOD5 load peaking factors.
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
5 of 43
Section 2.0
Figure 2-1: CWWTP Sampling Locations
Legend: Sampling Locations

DRI1
DRI2
DPE
DSI
DSE
WRI1
WRI2
WRI
WPE
WSE
ASI
FCI
FCE
PE
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
Dallas Plant Raw Influent (2000-2008)

Dallas Plant Raw Influent (2008)
Dallas Plant Primary Effluent
Dallas Plant Secondary Influent
Dallas Plant Secondary Effluent
White Rock Plant Raw Influent (2000-2008)
White Rock Plant Raw Influent (2009)
White Rock Plant Secondary Influent
White Rock Plant Primary Effluent
White Rock Plant Secondary Effluent
Activated Sludge Influent
Filter Complex Influent
Filter Complex Effluent
Plant Effluent
6 of 43
Section 2.0
Figure 2-2: CWWTP Average Influent CBOD5 Loading

600
CBOD5 Loading, ppd x 1000
500
400
2005-06 Avg = 269
2000-04 Avg = 231
300
2007-09 Avg = 159

200
100
Jan-10
Jul-09
Jan-09
Jul-08
Jan-08
Jul-07
Jan-07
Jul-06
Jan-06
Jul-05
Jan-05
Jul-04
Jan-04
Jul-03
Jan-03
Jul-02
Jan-02
Jul-01
Jan-01
Jul-00
Jan-00
Table 2-1: CWWTP Influent CBOD5 Load Peaking Factors

Year
Average
Concentration
(mg/L)
Average Load
(ppd)
Maximum Month
Load (ppd)
Maximum Month
Peaking Factor
2000
184
215,700
253,300
1.17
2001
181
224,500
272,800
1.22
2002
209
259,400
320,500
1.24
2003
198
218,400
288,500
1.32
2004
205
239,500
265,200
1.11
2005
256
277,600
334,700
1.21
2006
255
259,600
325,600
1.25
2007
176
183,400
223,300
1.22
2008
197
169,500
210,800
1.24
2009
170
148,500
165,400
1.11
Average
203
219,600
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
7 of 43
Section 2.0
As shown in Figure 2-2 and Table 2-1, elevated average CBOD5 concentration and loading occurred
during 2005 and 2006. Since the end of 2006, the loading of CBOD5 has reduced significantly to 183,400
ppd in 2007, and 169,500 ppd in 2008 and 148,500 ppd in 2009. Although there is recently a clear trend
downward, the planning criteria should not reflect such a sharp decrease as this may be temporary. The
maximum month loading, based on the 2000-2009 average CBOD5 concentration of 203 mg/L, the
projected wastewater flow for 2030 of 113 mgd, and the peaking factor of 1.3, is 248,700 ppd, which is
lower than the historic maximum month. Based on those factors and for scenarios with no changes to the
current flow split ratio, a CBOD5 concentration of 205 mg/L and a maximum month load of 334,700 ppd
(1.73 peaking factor) are recommended for planning purposes. For scenarios in which more flow is
diverted to SWWTP the concentration and maximum month load peaking factor will remain the same, but
the load will be reduced relative to the amount of flow diverted to SWWTP.
2.2.2
Influent Total Suspended Solids
The CWWTP daily average influent TSS loading from the DWUs operations data for June 2009 is
presented in Figure 2-3. From the daily values, a 30-day running average was calculated. Table 2-2
summarizes the calculated TSS load peaking factors.
Figure 2-3: CWWTP Average Influent TSS Loading

900
800
700
TSS Loading, ppd x 1000
600
500
2000-04 Avg = 275
400
2005-06 Avg = 252
2007-09 Avg = 210
300
200
100
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
Jan-10
Jul-09
Jan-09
Jul-08
Jan-08
Jul-07
Jan-07
Jul-06
Jan-06
Jul-05
Jan-05
Jul-04
Jan-04
Jul-03
Jan-03
Jul-02
Jan-02
Jul-01
Jan-01
Jul-00
Jan-00
8 of 43
Section 2.0
Table 2-2: CWWTP Influent TSS Load Peaking Factors

Year
Average
Concentration
(mg/L)
Average Load
(ppd)
Maximum Month
Load (ppd)
Maximum Month
Peaking Factor
2000
239
280,300
373,100
1.33
2001
217
268,100
349,300
1.30
2002
265
329,100
470,300
1.43
2003
219
242,400
340,900
1.41
2004
214
252,700
324,200
1.28
2005
241
262,600
335,100
1.28
2006
236
241,600
283,400
1.17
2007
242
254,300
315,300
1.24
2008
242
208,200
256,700
1.23
2009
239
211,400
248,500
1.18
Average
236
251,100
Table 2-2 shows the CWWTP influent TSS average concentration and load. With the exception of a high
average load in 2002 (329,100 ppd) and a low loads in 2008 (208,200 ppd) and 2009 (211,400 ppd), the
TSS values have been relatively stable and increasing slightly in the last nine years. The 2002 maximum
month load appears to be an isolated incident and should not be used for planning purposes. Excluding
2002 the maximum month peaking factor was 1.41. Based on these factors and for scenarios with no
changes to the current flow split ratio, a TSS concentration of 240 mg/L and a maximum month load
peaking factor of 1.40 are recommended for planning purposes. For scenarios in which more flow is
diverted to SWWTP the concentration and maximum month load peaking factor will remain the same, but
the load will be reduced relative to the amount of flow diverted to SWWTP.
2.2.3
Influent Ammonia
The CWWTP daily average influent ammonia loading from the DWUs operations data for June 2000 to
January 2009 is presented in Figure 2-4. From the daily values, a 30-day running average was
calculated. Table 2-3 summarizes the calculated ammonia load peaking factors.
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
9 of 43
Section 2.0
Figure 2-4: CWWTP Average Influent Ammonia Loading

40
35
Ammonia-N Loading, ppd x 1000
30
2000-04 Avg = 18.9
2005-06 Avg = 18.9
25
2007-09 Avg = 15.1

20
15
10
Table 2-3: CWWTP Influent NH3-N Load Peaking Factors

Year
Average
Concentration
(mg/L)
Average Load
(ppd)
Maximum Month
Load (ppd)
Maximum Month
Peaking Factor
2000
16.5
19,300
22,200
1.15
2001
15.1
18,700
23,800
1.27
2002
16.0
19,800
23,200
1.17
2003
16.6
18,200
22,300
1.23
2004
15.7
18,400
20,500
1.12
2005
17.6
19,100
21,100
1.11
2006
18.5
18,700
20,900
1.12
2007
16.9
17,600
20,100
1.14
2008
18.4
15,700
18,800
1.20
2009
16.8
14,600
15,300
1.05
Average
16.9
18,000
Except for 2008 and 2009, the CWWTP influent ammonia load has remained near the average of 18,200
ppd. The maximum month load has trended downward since 2001, while the average concentrations
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
10 of 43
Jan-10
Jul-09
Jan-09
Jul-08
Jan-08
Jul-07
Jan-07
Jul-06
Jan-06
Jul-05
Jan-05
Jul-04
Jan-04
Jul-03
Jan-03
Jul-02
Jan-02
Jul-01
Jan-01
Jul-00
Jan-00
Section 2.0
maximum month peaking factor was 1.27. Based on these factors and for scenarios with no changes to
the current flow split ratio, a NH3-N concentration of 17 mg/L and a maximum month load peaking factor
of 1.30 are recommended for planning purposes. For scenarios in which more flow is diverted to SWWTP
the concentration and maximum month load peaking factor will remain the same, but the load will be
reduced relative to the amount of flow diverted to SWWTP.
2.2.4
Influent Total Phosphorous
Figure 2-5 presents the CWWTP daily average influent total phosphorous loading from the DWUs
operations data for June 2007 to August 2008. From the daily values, a 30-day running average was
calculated. Table 2-4 summarizes the calculated phosphorus load peaking factors.
Figure 2-5: CWWTP Average Influent Total Phosphorus Loading
14
12
Total P Loading, ppd x 1000
10
2007-09 Avg = 6.0
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
Dec-09
Oct-09
Aug-09
Jun-09
Apr-09
Feb-09
Dec-08
Oct-08
Aug-08
Jul-08
May-08
Mar-08
Jan-08
Nov-07
Sep-07
Jul-07
May-07
Mar-07
Jan-07
11 of 43
Section 2.0
Table 2-4: CWWTP Influent Total Phosphorus Load Peaking Factors

Year
Average
Concentration
(mg/L)
Average Load
(ppd)
Maximum Month
Load (ppd)
Maximum Month
Peaking Factor
2007-2009
6.4
6,000
8,500
1.34
For this time period, the CWWTP average influent total phosphorus concentration is 6.7 mg/L with a
maximum month peaking factor of 1.34. Based on these factors and for scenarios with no changes to the
current flow split ratio, a TP concentration of 7.0 mg/L is recommended for planning purposes. Due to the
limited data set, a 1.40 maximum month load peaking factor is recommended for planning purposes. For
scenarios in which more flow is diverted to SWWTP the concentration and peaking factor will remain the
same, but the load will be reduced relative to the amount of flow diverted to SWWTP.
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
12 of 43
Section 3.0
3.0
SWWTP Historical Wastewater Quality Data
SWWTP HISTORICAL WASTEWATER QUALITY DATA
The SWWTP is an activated sludge WWTP. Raw wastewater is screened and pumped to grit removal
facilities. Grit removal is followed by primary clarification, aerobic suspended growth activated sludge,
final clarification, disinfection, and monomedia filtration. Appendix F presents data figures and tables that
summarize historical data SWWTP collected.
The wastewater quality projections assume no changes to the current flow split ratio between CWWTP
and SWWTP. The impact of future changes in the flow split ratio is discussed in Section 4.0.
3.1
Sampling Locations
The raw wastewater samples are downstream of the influent screens in Influent Pump Station (IPS) C at
the grit building. Therefore, the concentration of the raw wastewater is influenced by the plant sewer
effluent. The plant sewer waste stream includes filtrate from dewatering and thickening. Figure 3-1
shows sampling locations.
Figure 3-1: SWWTP Sampling Locations
Legend: Sampling Locations

RI
RIA
REC
PRE
PREA
FE1
FE2
CC1
CC2
PE
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
Plant Raw Influent

Plant Raw Influent Alternate
Recycle Line
Primary Effluent
Primary Effluent Alternate
Final Clarifier Effluent 1
Final Clarifier Effluent 2
Chlorine Contact Effluent 1
Chlorine Contact Effluent 2
Plant Effluent
13 of 43
Section 3.0
3.2
Historical SWWTP Raw Wastewater Data and Trends
The following paragraphs detail raw loadings of CBOD5, TSS, ammonia, and total phosphorous
associated with various flow conditions. The plant sewer waste stream includes several recycle streams
as described in Section 3.1. Since changes to these recycle streams are not anticipated, this data is
representative of what the plant will be treating in the future.
DWU Historical SWWTP Data, 1999-2009, provides the data for the tables, charts, and graphs. (Ref. 29)
3.2.1
Influent CBOD5
Figure 3-2 presents the SWWTP daily average influent CBOD5 loading from the DWUs operations data
for January 2000 to June 2009. From the daily values, a 30-day running average was calculated. Table
3-1 summarizes the calculated CBOD5 load peaking factors.
Figure 3-2: SWWTP Average Influent CBOD5 Loading

200
180
160
CBOD5, Loading, ppd x 1000
140
120
2007-09 Avg = 80.1

2000-06 Avg = 79.1
100
80
60
40
20
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
Jan-10
Jul-09
Jan-09
Jul-08
Jan-08
Jul-07
Jan-07
Jul-06
Jan-06
Jul-05
Jan-05
Jul-04
Jan-04
Jul-03
Jan-03
Jul-02
Jan-02
Jul-01
Jan-01
Jul-00
Jan-00
14 of 43
Section 3.0
Table 3-1: SWWTP Influent CBOD5 Load Peaking Factors

Year
Average
Concentration
(mg/L)
Average Load
(ppd)
Maximum Month
Load (ppd)
Maximum Month
Peaking Factor
2000
137
84,400
102,700
1.22
2001
118
75,700
91,900
1.21
2002
131
75,300
95,300
1.27
2003
123
65,800
76,600
1.16
2004
131
82,900
90,800
1.10
2005
153
75,700
95,300
1.26
2006
153
91,300
107,500
1.18
2007
139
86,100
98,500
1.14
2008
162
86,700
110,100
1.27
2009
132
73,900
86,600
1.17
Average
138
79,800
As shown in Figure 3-2 and Table 3-1, increased average CBOD5 concentration and loading has occurred
since early 2005. The planning criteria should assume that concentrations will remain at these levels.
During this elevated concentration and loading period (2005-2009), the maximum month peaking factor
was 1.27. Based on these factors and for scenarios with no changes to the current flow split ratio, an
average CBOD5 concentration of 150 mg/L with a 1.30 peaking factor is recommended for planning
purposes. For scenarios in which more flow is diverted to the SWWTP to the concentration and
maximum month load peaking factor will be increased relative to the amount of flow diverted to the
SWWTP.
3.2.2
Influent TSS
Figure 3-3 presents the SWWTP daily average influent TSS loading from the DWUs operations data for
January 2000 to June 2009. From the daily values, a 30-day running average was calculated. Table 3-2
summarizes the calculated TSS load peaking factors.
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
15 of 43
Section 3.0
Figure 3-3: SWWTP Average Influent TSS Loading

400
350
300
250
TSS Loading, ppd x 1000
2007-09 Avg = 131.1

200
2000-06 Avg = 94.6
150
100
50
Table 3-2: SWWTP Influent TSS Load Peaking Factors

Year
Average
Concentration
(mg/L)
Average Load
(ppd)
Maximum Month
Load (ppd)
Maximum Month
Peaking Factor
2000
174
109,200
160,200
1.47
2001
153
98,700
116,800
1.18
2002
154
89,000
125,800
1.41
2003
148
79,500
99,600
1.25
2004
155
99,100
124,200
1.25
2005
160
80,500
115,200
1.43
2006
179
107,100
135,000
1.26
2007
213
135,600
165,200
1.22
2008
244
131,600
168,200
1.28
2009
214
125,900
152,800
1.21
Average
179
105,600
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
16 of 43
Jan-10
Jul-09
Jan-09
Jul-08
Jan-08
Jul-07
Jan-07
Jul-06
Jan-06
Jul-05
Jan-05
Jul-04
Jan-04
Jul-03
Jan-03
Jul-02
Jan-02
Jul-01
Jan-01
Jul-00
Jan-00
Section 3.0
Table 3-2 shows the SWWTP influent TSS average concentration and load. TSS values have shown an
increase in the last three years. For 2006-2009 the average concentration was 224 mg/L with a
current flow split ratio, a TSS concentration of 225 mg/L and a maximum month loading peaking factor of
1.30 are recommended for planning purposes. For scenarios in which more flow is diverted to SWWTP
the concentration and maximum month load peaking factor will be increased relative to the amount of flow
diverted to SWWTP.
3.2.3
Influent Ammonia
Figure 3-4 presents the SWWTP daily average influent ammonia loading from the DWUs operations data
for January 2000 to June 2009. From the daily values, a 30-day running average was calculated. Table
3-3 summarizes the calculated ammonia load peaking factors.
Figure 3-4: SWWTP Average Influent NH3-N Loading

25
2007-09 Avg = 10.4
NH3-N Loading, ppd x 1000
20
15
10
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
Jan-09
Jul-08
Jan-08
Jul-07
Jan-07
Jul-06
Jan-06
Jul-05
Jan-05
Jul-04
Jan-04
Jul-03
Jan-03
Jul-02
Jan-02
Jul-01
Jan-01
Jul-00
Jan-00
17 of 43
Section 3.0
Table 3-3: SWWTP Influent NH3-N Load Peaking Factors

Year
Average
Concentration
(mg/L)
Average Load
(ppd)
Maximum Month
Load (ppd)
Maximum Month
Peaking Factor
2000
19.4
12,000
14,400
1.20
2001
15.5
10,000
13,000
1.30
2002
17.0
9,700
12,400
1.28
2003
17.9
9,600
10,700
1.11
2004
15.8
9,900
11,800
1.19
2005
18.5
9,300
11,200
1.20
2006
18.0
10,700
12,800
1.20
2007
18.0
11,100
12,400
1.11
2008
20.1
10,800
12,000
1.11
2009
19.0
10,700
12,900
1.23
Average
18.0
10,400
The SWWTP influent ammonia load has been steady, with an average load of 10,400 ppd from 20002009. The maximum month load has trended downward since 2001, while the average concentrations
maximum month peaking factor is 1.30. Based on these factors, an average ammonia concentration of
19.0 mg/L with a 1.30 peaking factor is recommended for planning purposes. For scenarios in which
more flow is diverted to SWWTP the concentration and maximum month load peaking factor will remain
the same, but the load will be increased relative to the amount of flow diverted to SWWTP.
3.2.4
Influent Total Phosphorous
Figure 3-5 presents the SWWTP daily average influent total phosphorous loading from the DWUs
operations data for June 2007 to August 2008. From the daily values, a 30-day running average was
calculated. Table 3-4 summarizes the calculated phosphorus load peaking factors.
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
18 of 43
Section 3.0
Figure 3-5: SWWTP Average Influent Total Phosphorus Loading

6
2007-09 Avg = 3.4
Total P Loading, ppd x 1000
Aug-08
Jul-08
Jun-08
May-08
Apr-08
Mar-08
Feb-08
Jan-08
Dec-07
Nov-07
Oct-07
Sep-07
Aug-07
Jul-07
Jun-07
Table 3-4: SWWTP Influent Total Phosphorus Load Peaking Factors

Year
Average
Concentration
(mg/L)
Average Load
(ppd)
Maximum Month
Load (ppd)
Maximum Month
Peaking Factor
2007-08
5.6
3,400
3,900
1.15
For this time period, the SWWTP average influent total phosphorus concentration is 5.6 mg/L with a
current flow split ratio, a TP concentration of 6 mg/L and a maximum month loading peaking factor of 1.40
are recommended for planning purposes. For scenarios in which more flow is diverted to SWWTP the
raw influent concentration will likely increase due to a higher strength in the CWWTP wastewater. For
scenarios in which more flow is diverted to SWWTP the maximum month load peaking factor will remain
the same, but the concentration and load will be increased relative to the amount of flow diverted to
SWWTP.
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
19 of 43
Section 4.0
4.0
Factors That Impact Future Wastewater Quality
FACTORS THAT IMPACT FUTURE WASTEWATER QUALITY
Several factors were evaluated that may impact future wastewater quality:
Wastewater flow
Water reuse
Decentralized wastewater treatment
Land use
Pretreatment standards
Drinking water treatment
4.1
Wastewater Flow
Table 4-1 shows the projections for the future annual average flows (AAF combined). For planning
purposes, the assumption is that the annual average wastewater flows will continue to decrease for the
next several years due to water conservation efforts. Between 2010 and 2020 the annual average flows
will then begin to increase as water conversation bottoms-out and population increases.
Table 4-1: Wastewater Flow Projections Annual Average Flow
CWWTP AAF
(1)
SWWTP AAF
(1)
Combined AAF
2010
2030
(mgd)
109
99
(mgd)
65
98
174
197
(2)
(mgd)
Based on WWTFSP TM Wastewater Flow Projections (Ref. 135). Projections based

on current CWWTP/SWWTP flow split remaining the same.
When evaluating varying CWWTP/SWWTP flow splits combined projections should be

used.
The WWTFSP wastewater flow projections assume no changes in the current flow split between the
CWWTP and SWWTP. Diversion of flow from SWWTP to the CWWTP is not anticipated because the
SWWTP currently operates well below the permitted capacity. Therefore, future changes in the flow split
ratio should not significantly impact the CWWTP raw influent TSS, CBOD5, and TP concentrations.
Wastewater flow diversion from CWWTP to the SWWTP will result in increased raw influent TSS, CBOD5
and TP concentrations.
4.2
Water Reuse
DWU has developed plans to use reclaimed water for both direct reuse and indirect reuse (augmentation
of raw water supplies). These plans and the potential impacts of direct and indirect reuse on WWTP
influent flows and loads are discussed in the subsequent sections.
4.2.1
Direct Reuse
In 2005, DWU developed a Recycled Water Implementation Plan (Ref. 16) for direct reuse projects. Two
direct reuse projects were recommended: the Cedar Crest Pipeline Extension and the White Rock
Pipeline Alternative. Both of these projects would be supplied with reclaimed water from the CWWTP.
The Cedar Crest Pipeline Extension and White Rock Pipeline alternative will provide 6 mgd for domestic
use and 3 mgd for irrigation use.
The planned direct reuse projects are not projected to change the AAF. Reclaimed water does have a
different quality than potable water, causing a slight change in the load returned to the collection system.
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
20 of 43
Section 4.0
However, these loads are so small that they are negligible in the future wastewater quality projections.
Both recommended direct reuse projects are expected to be completed within the next five years.
4.2.2
Indirect Reuse
Augmenting raw water supplies with reclaimed water does not change water demand, so it has generally
no effect on wastewater flow. However, generally reclaimed water contains more chlorides, sulfates, and
total dissolved solids (TDS) than the raw water supply. Discharging reclaimed water to the raw water
supply begins a feedback loop that tends to increase the concentrations of these constituents both in the
raw water supply and in return flows, thereby increasing the loading of these constituents at the WWTPs.
Nevertheless, preliminary analysis indicates that the maximum annual average chlorides, sulfates, and
TDS concentrations in the treated effluent would still be less than the Texas Surface Water Quality
Standards (TSWQS) (Ref. 59) for the Upper Trinity River, which is the receiving water body for the
CWWTP and SWWTP. The preliminary analysis depends on the following assumptions:
Reclaimed water augmentation rates for DWUs water supply lakes are limited to meet the existing
TSWQS.
No other significant sources of TDS, chlorides, and sulfates (such as a large industrial customer) will
contribute wastewater flow to the collection system during the planning period.
Therefore, removal of chlorides, sulfates, or TDS prior to discharge of the treated effluent to the Upper
Trinity River does not appear to be necessary.
4.3
Decentralized Wastewater Treatment
The Recycled Water Implementation Plan (Ref. 16) did not recommend implementation of any
decentralized wastewater treatment plants (water factories). In addition, any water factories to be
reconsidered in the future would likely be Reclaimed Water Production Facilities (RWPFs) (Ref. 119) due
to the relative ease of permitting. For these reasons, it appears unlikely that decentralized treatment will
impact the wastewater quality for this planning period.
4.4
Land Use
In June 2006, Dallas adopted the forwardDallas! Comprehensive Plan (Ref. 123) to shape growth in the
city through 2030. The forwardDallas! plan incorporated previous planning efforts including the following:
1994 Dallas Plan
1987 City of Dallas Growth Policy Plan
2006 Trinity River Comprehensive Land Use Plan
2005 Strategic Engagement Economic Development Plan
Many other area plans
Changes in land use can impact the wastewater flow and loading at the WWTPs. According to
forwardDallas! only 42 percent of Dallas land has been developed. Of the remainder, some land is not
available for development due to such constraints as floodplains, steep slopes, wetland and riparian
areas, parks, and open spaces. According to the plan, approximately 18 percent or 44,289 acres of land
is buildable and vacant land. The majority of this land is located in the southern sector, with other small
sites scattered throughout the city. In addition, there is a significant amount of underutilized land (e.g.,
infrequently used parking lots near commercial buildings) that could be redeveloped.
The timing of the population growth projected in the forwardDallas! Comprehensive Plan (Ref. 123)
conflicts significantly with the projections in the 2006 Region C Water Plan. (Ref. 118) The forwardDallas!
2030 population projection is based on the 2000 U.W. Census ratio of 2.58 people per household. (Ref.
124) This estimate is similar to the Region C 2050 population projection and it exceeds the Region C
2030 population projection by more than 250,000 people, or 17 percent, as shown in Table 3-1. During
development of the Comprehensive Wastewater Collection System Assessment (CWWCSA) City of
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
21 of 43
Section 4.0
Dallas Wastewater Collection System Master Plan (Ref. 20), DWU directed that planning of wastewater
collection facilities be based on the Region C population projections.
The forwardDallas! Comprehensive Plan (Ref. 123) contains maps showing existing and projected 2030
land use acreage for different land use categories. However, assuming that growth occurs according to
the Region C projections, the related timing of the projected land use changes is not clear. In addition,
the projected influent flows to the WWTPs include increases in residential flow due to population growth
and increases in industrial and commercial flow due to population growth and redevelopment. Therefore,
no additional adjustments to project wastewater quality were necessary for planning purposes.
4.5
Pretreatment Standards
For many constituents, DWU has established technically-based local limits (TBLLs) that specify the
maximum concentrations that commercial and industrial customers can discharge to the wastewater
collection system. TBLLs are designed to prevent the introduction of pollutants into the collection system
that would cause the WWTPs to violate the effluent quality limits established in TPDES permits or that
would interfere with WWTP operations, including solids disposal practices.
An evaluation of DWUs technically based local limits (TBLLs) was conducted in 2003. The evaluation
recommended elimination of TBLLs for BOD and TSS and development of a surcharge program to limit
BOD and TSS and to collect revenue for the additional treatment provided. No TBLLs were proposed for
flow, ammonia, total phosphorus, alkalinity, or total Kjeldahl nitrogen. As a result of this evaluation, DWU
submitted an application to the TCEQ in October 2003 for approval of revisions to the TBLLs. The TCEQ
has not yet approved the revised TBLLs.
It is projected that industrial wastewater concentrations will be unchanged. Therefore, no additional
adjustments to projected wastewater quality were necessary for planning purposes.
4.6
Drinking Water Treatment
DWU is considering changes in solids disposal at its water treatment plants. These changes could
impact wastewater characteristics. However, information regarding these changes is unavailable at the
time of this document. If appropriate, corrections to the projected wastewater characteristics will be
addressed in future documents. The projections presented in this document do not account for changes
in solids disposal at DWU water treatment plants.
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
22 of 43
Section 5.0
5.0
Summary
SUMMARY
Table 5-1 summarizes the wastewater quality projections, for this planning period.
Table 5-1: Projections for Wastewater Quality

Parameter
CWWTP
2010
SWWTP
2030
(1)
2010
Combined
2030
(1)
2030 (1)
2010
Flows (mgd)
AAF (mgd) (2)
109
99
65
98
174
197
205
205
150
162
184
184
186,600
169,500
81,400
132,400
268,000
301,900
1.73
1.73
1.30
1.47
1.60
1.60
322,800
293,200
105,800
194,400
428,600
487,600
240
240
225
228
234
234
218,400
198,400
122,100
186,700
340,500
385,100
1.40
1.40
1.30
1.34
1.36
1.37
305,800
277,800
158,700
250,000
464,500
527,800
17.0
17.0
19.0
18.6
17.7
17.8
15,500
14,100
10,300
15,200
25,800
29,300
1.30
1.40
1.30
1.30
1.30
1.35
20,200
19,700
13,400
19,800
33,600
39,600
7.0
7.0
6.0
6.2
6.6
6.6
Average Load (ppd)
6,400
5,800
3,300
5,200
9,700
11,000
Load Peaking Factor
1.40
1.40
1.40
1.40
1.40
1.40
9,000
8,100
4,600
7,300
13,600
15,400
CBOD5
Average Load (ppd)
Load Peaking Factor
TSS
Average Load (ppd)
Load Peaking Factor
Ammonia (NH3-N)
Average Load (ppd)
Load Peaking Factor
Total Phosphorus

1
Projections based on future CWWTP/SWWTP flow split where a portion of flows from CWWTP will be
diverted to SWWTP. The loading rates reflect the combined concentration.
Based on WWTFSP TM Wastewater Flow Projections (Ref. 135). Projections based on current
CWWTP/SWWTP flow split remaining the same.
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
23 of 43
Appendix A
Glossary of Acronyms and Terms
Appendix A Glossary of Acronyms and Terms

Acronym or Term
Definition
AAF
Annual Average Flow
BOD
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
CBOD5
Five-Day Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand
CWWTP
Central Wastewater Treatment Plant
DP
Dallas Plant
DWU
gpcd
Gallons Per Capita per Day
gpm
Gallons Per Minute
IPS
Influent Pump Station
Liter
lbs
Pounds
mg/L
Milligrams per Liter
mgd
Million Gallons per Day
NH3
Ammonia
NH3-N
Ammonia-nitrogen
Phosphorous
pH
Potential of Hydrogen (measure of acidity)
ppd
Pounds per Day
RWPFs
Reclaimed Water Production Facilities
SWWTP
Southside Wastewater Treatment Plant
TBLL
Technically Based Local Limits
TCEQ
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
TDS
Total Dissolved Solids
TF
Trickling Filter
TKN
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
TN
Total Nitrogen
TP
Total Phosphorus
TS
Total Solids
TSS
Total Suspended (non-filterable) Solids
TSWQS
Texas Surface Water Quality Standards
VS
Volatile Solids
WRP
White Rock Plant
WWTP
Wastewater Treatment Plant
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
24 of 43
Appendix B
References
Appendix B References
Reference
Number
Reference Information
16
Alan Plummer & Associates. Recycled Water Implementation Plan, Volume 1. Alan
Plummer & Associates, Dallas: Alan Plummer & Associates, August, 2005.
20
MWH. Comprehensive Wastewater Collection System Assessment (CWWCSA) City

of Dallas Wastewater Collection System Master Plan. Dallas: MWH, October 2007.
28
Dallas Water Utilities. DWU Historical Central Wastewater Treatment Plant Data, 19802009. Dallas, 2009.
29
Dallas Water Utilities. DWU Historical Southside Wastewater Treatment Plant Data,
1980-2009. Dallas, 2009.
59
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. Texas Surface Water Quality

Standards, 30 TAC 307, April 1988.
118
Freese and Nichols, Inc. 2006 Region C Water Plan. Prepared for the Region C
Water Planning Group, Fort Worth: January 2006.
119
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. Reclaimed Water Production Facilities,

30 TAC 321, 2001.
123
City of Dallas Long Range Planning Division. forwardDallas! Comprehensive Plan.

Dallas. Dallas: June 2006.
124
United States Census. Census 2000. Retrieved January 2009 from

http://www.census.gov/main/www/cen2000.html.
135
Carollo Engineers, Inc. Wastewater Treatment Facilities Strategic Plan, Technical

Memorandum, Wastewater Flow Projections. Dallas: Carollo Engineers, Inc., July
2010.
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
25 of 43
Appendix C
DP Historical Influent Wastewater Characteristics
Appendix C DP Historical Influent Wastewater Characteristics

Table C-1: DP Strength and Loading Data
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Flow (mgd)
113
17
41
10
BOD5 (mg/L)
401
55
207
61
TSS (mg/L)
893
15
232
74
NH3-N (mg/L)
25
20
org-N (mg/L)
34
14
6.0
P (mg/L)
19
0.4
6.4
2.1
pH
17
6.4
7.0
0.2
Alkalinity (mg CaCO3/L)
245
99
183
29
Parameter
Raw Influent
Figure C-1: DP Influent Average Daily Flow

160
140
120
Average Daily Flow, mgd
100
80
30-Day Running
Average
60
40
20
Jul-08
Jan-08
Jul-07
Jan-07
Jul-06
Jan-06
Jul-05
Jan-05
Jul-04
Jan-04
Jul-03
Jan-03
Jul-02
Jan-02
Jul-01
Jan-01
Jul-00
Jan-00
Note: The graphic uses a gray diamond () to indicate individual data points. The black solid
line (
) indicates a running 30-day average.
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
26 of 43
Appendix C
Figure C-2: DP Influent BOD5 Concentration

600
BOD5 Concentration, mg/L
500
30-Day Running
Average
400
300
200
100
Jan-09
Jul-08
Jan-08
Jul-07
Jan-07
Jul-06
Jan-06
Jul-05
Jan-05
Jul-04
Jan-04
Jul-03
Jan-03
Jul-02
Jan-02
Jul-01
Jan-01
Jul-00
Jan-00
Figure C-3: DP Influent BOD5 Concentration Cumulative Probability Plot
BOD5 Concentration (mg/L)
1000
100
10
1
0.0001
0.001
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
0.01 0.02
0.05
0.1
0.2
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
July 2010
0.8
0.9
0.95
0.98 0.99
0.999
0.9999
27 of 43
Appendix C
Figure C-4: DP Influent TSS Concentration

500
450
400
TSS Concentration, mg/L
350
30-Day Running
Average
300
250
200
150
100
50
Jan-09
Jul-08
Jan-08
Jul-07
Jan-07
Jul-06
Jan-06
Jul-05
Jan-05
Jul-04
Jan-04
Jul-03
Jan-03
Jul-02
Jan-02
Jul-01
Jan-01
Jul-00
Jan-00
Figure C-5: DP Influent TSS Concentration Cumulative Probability Plot
TSS Concentration (mg/L)
1000
100
10
1
0.0001
0.001
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
0.01 0.02
0.05
0.1
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
July 2010
0.9
0.95
0.98 0.99
0.999
0.9999
28 of 43
Appendix C
Figure C-6: DP Influent NH3-N Concentration

30
25
NH3-N Concentration, mg/L
30-Day Running
Average
20
15
10
Jan-09
Jul-08
Jan-08
Jul-07
Jan-07
Jul-06
Jan-06
Jul-05
Jan-05
Jul-04
Jan-04
Jul-03
Jan-03
Jul-02
Jan-02
Jul-01
Jan-01
Jul-00
Jan-00
Figure C-7: DP Influent NH3-N Concentration Cumulative Probability Plot
NH3-N Concentration (mg/L)
100
10
1
0.0001
0.001
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
0.01 0.02
0.05
0.1
0.2
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
July 2010
0.8
0.9
0.95
0.98 0.99
0.999
0.9999
29 of 43
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
Jul-05
Apr-05
Jan-05
Oct-04
Jul-04
Apr-04
Jan-07
Apr-07
Jan-07
Apr-07
Oct-06
Oct-06
Jul-06
10
Jul-06
11
Apr-06
12
Jan-06
13
Apr-06
14
Jan-06
15
Oct-05
Figure C-9: DP Influent Phosphorus Concentration
Oct-05
Jul-05
Apr-05
Jan-05
Oct-04
Jul-04
Apr-04
Jan-04
Jan-04
Oct-03
Jul-03
Apr-03
Jan-03
Oct-02
Jul-02
Apr-02
Jan-02
Oct-01
Jul-01
Apr-01
Jan-01
Oct-00
Jul-00
Apr-00
Jan-00
Oct-99
TKN Concentration (mg/L)
Oct-03
Jul-03
Apr-03
Jan-03
Oct-02
Jul-02
Apr-02
Jan-02
Oct-01
Jul-01
Apr-01
Jan-01
Oct-00
Jul-00
Apr-00
Jan-00
Oct-99
Phosphorus Concentration (mg/L)

Appendix C
Figure C-8: DP Influent TKN Concentration
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
30 of 43
Appendix D
Appendix D
WRP Historical Influent Wastewater Characteristics

Table D-1: WRP Strength and Loading Data
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Flow (mgd)
10
234
88
23
BOD5 (mg/L)
21
522
197
57
TSS (mg/L)
28
890
246
80
NH3-N (mg/L)
45
16
org-N (mg/L)
72
16
P (mg/L)
0.4
27
6.9
2.3
pH
6.4
9.0
7.0
0.1
116
324
182
22
Parameter
Raw Influent
Figure D-1: WRP Influent Average Daily Flow

250
200
Average Daily Flow, MGD
30-Day Running
Average
150
100
50
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
Jan-09
Jul-08
Jan-08
Jul-07
Jan-07
Jul-06
Jan-06
Jul-05
Jan-05
Jul-04
Jan-04
Jul-03
Jan-03
Jul-02
Jan-02
Jul-01
Jan-01
Jul-00
Jan-00
31 of 43
Appendix D
Figure D-2: WRP Influent BOD5 Concentration

400
350
30-Day Running Average
300
250
200
150
100
50
Jan-09
Jul-08
Jan-08
Jul-07
Jan-07
Jul-06
Jan-06
Jul-05
Jan-05
Jul-04
Jan-04
Jul-03
Jan-03
Jul-02
Jan-02
Jul-01
Jan-01
Jul-00
Jan-00
Figure D-3: WRP Influent BOD5 Concentration Cumulative Probability Plot
BOD5 Concentration (mg/L)
1000
100
10
1
0.0001
0.001
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
0.01 0.02
0.05
0.1
0.2
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
July 2010
0.8
0.9
0.95
0.98 0.99
0.999
0.999
32 of 43
Appendix D
Figure D-4: WRP Influent TSS Concentration

800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
Jan-09
Jul-08
Jan-08
Jul-07
Jan-07
Jul-06
Jan-06
Jul-05
Jan-05
Jul-04
Jan-04
Jul-03
Jan-03
Jul-02
Jan-02
Jul-01
Jan-01
Jul-00
Jan-00
Figure D-5: WRP Influent TSS Concentration Cumulative Probability Plot
TSS Concentration (mg/L)
1000
100
10
1
0.0001
0.001
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
0.01 0.02
0.05
0.1
0.2
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
July 2010
0.8
0.9
0.95
0.98 0.99
0.999
0.9999
33 of 43
Appendix D
Figure D-6: WRP Influent NH3-N Concentration

30
25
NH3-N Concentration, mg/L
30-Day Running
Average
20
15
10
Jan-09
Jul-08
Jan-08
Jul-07
Jan-07
Jul-06
Jan-06
Jul-05
Jan-05
Jul-04
Jan-04
Jul-03
Jan-03
Jul-02
Jan-02
Jul-01
Jan-01
Jul-00
Jan-00
Figure D-7: WRP Influent NH3-N Concentration Cumulative Probability Plot
NH3 Concentration (mg/L)
100
10
1
0.0001
0.001
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
0.01 0.02
0.05
0.1
0.2
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
July 2010
0.8
0.9
0.95
0.98 0.99
0.999
0.9999
34 of 43
Oct-99
Jan-00
Apr-00
Jul-00
Oct-00
Jan-01
Apr-01
Jul-01
Oct-01
Jan-02
Apr-02
Jul-02
Oct-02
Jan-03
Apr-03
Jul-03
Oct-03
Jan-04
Apr-04
Jul-04
Oct-04
Jan-05
Apr-05
Jul-05
Oct-05
Jan-06
Apr-06
Jul-06
Oct-06
Jan-07
Apr-07
Jul-07
Oct-07
Jan-08
Apr-08
Jul-08
Phosphorus Concentration (mg/L)

Oct-99
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
Jul-01
July 2010
Oct-03
Apr-07
Jan-07
Oct-06
20
Jul-06
Apr-06
Jan-06
Oct-05
Jul-05
Apr-05
Jan-05
Oct-04
Jul-04
Apr-04
Jan-04
Jul-03
Apr-03
Jan-03
Oct-02
Jul-02
Apr-02
Jan-02
Oct-01
40
Apr-01
45
Jan-01
Oct-00
Jul-00
Apr-00
Jan-00
TKN Concentration (mg/L)

Appendix D
Figure D-8: WRP Influent TKN Concentration
60
55
50
Data not
available
4/01 to 9/01
35
30
25
Data not available

4/07 to present
15
10
Figure D-9: WRP Influent Phosphorus Concentration
15
14
13
12
11
10
35 of 43
Appendix E
Appendix E
CWWTP Historical Influent Flow Data
CWWTP Historical Influent Flow Data

Figure E-1: Influent Average Daily Flow
350
300
250
30-Day Running
Average
200
150
100
50
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
Jan-09
Jul-08
Jan-08
Jul-07
Jan-07
Jul-06
Jan-06
Jul-05
Jan-05
Jul-04
Jan-04
Jul-03
Jan-03
Jul-02
Jan-02
Jul-01
Jan-01
Jul-00
Jan-00
Jul-99
Jan-99
36 of 43
Appendix F
Appendix F
SWWTP Historical Influent Wastewater Characteristics
SWWTP Historical Influent Wastewater

Characteristics
Table F-1: SWWTP Plant Strength and Loading Data
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Raw Flow (mgd)
15
167
71
17
BOD5 (mg/L)
26
397
139
38
TSS (mg/L)
38
1,110
179
62
NH3-N (mg/L)
2.5
66
18
4.3
org-N (mg/L)
NA
NA
NA
NA
P (mg/L)
2.2
8.5
5.7
1.3
pH
6.1
7.7
7.1
0.2
114
316
183
23
Parameter
Influent
Figure F-1: SWWTP Influent Average Daily Flow

200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
Jan-09
Jul-08
Jan-08
Jul-07
Jan-07
Jul-06
Jan-06
Jul-05
Jan-05
Jul-04
Jan-04
Jul-03
Jan-03
Jul-02
Jan-02
Jul-01
Jan-01
Jul-00
Jan-00
Jul-99
Jan-99
37 of 43
Appendix F
Figure F-2: SWWTP Influent BOD5 Concentration

300
250
30-Day Running
Average
200
150
100
50
Jan-09
Jul-08
Jan-08
Jul-07
Jan-07
Jul-06
Jan-06
Jul-05
Jan-05
Jul-04
Jan-04
Jul-03
Jan-03
Jul-02
Jan-02
Jul-01
Jan-01
Jul-00
Jan-00
Figure F-3: SWWTP Influent BOD5 Concentration Cumulative Probability Plot
1000
100
10
1
0.0001
0.001
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
0.010.02 0.05 0.1
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
July 2010
0.9 0.95 0.980.99
0.999
0.9999
38 of 43
Appendix F
Figure F-4: SWWTP Influent TSS Concentration

500
450
400
350
300
30-Day Running
Average
250
200
150
100
50
Jan-09
Jul-08
Jan-08
Jul-07
Jan-07
Jul-06
Jan-06
Jul-05
Jan-05
Jul-04
Jan-04
Jul-03
Jan-03
Jul-02
Jan-02
Jul-01
Jan-01
Jul-00
Jan-00
Figure F-5: SWWTP Influent TSS Concentration Cumulative Probability Plot
1000
100
10
1
0.0001
0.001
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
0.010.02 0.05 0.1
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
July 2010
0.9 0.95 0.980.99
0.999
0.9999
39 of 43
Appendix F
Figure F-6: SWWTP Influent NH3-N Concentration

35
30
NH3-N, mg/L
25
20
15
10
Jan-09
Jul-08
Jan-08
Jul-07
Jan-07
Jul-06
Jan-06
Jul-05
Jan-05
Jul-04
Jan-04
Jul-03
Jan-03
Jul-02
Jan-02
Jul-01
Jan-01
Jul-00
Jan-00
Figure F-7: SWWTP Influent NH3-N Concentration Cumulative Probability Plot
100
10
1
0.0001
0.001
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
0.010.02
0.05 0.1
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
July 2010
0.9 0.95
0.980.99
0.999
0.9999
40 of 43
Appendix F
200
190
180
170
160
150
140
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
TKN data not recorded

prior to 7/2002
Aug-04
Jul-04
Jun-04
May-04
Apr-04
Mar-04
Feb-04
Jan-04
Dec-03
Nov-03
Oct-03
Sep-03
Aug-03
Jul-03
Jun-03
Apr-03
May-03
Mar-03
Feb-03
Jan-03
Dec-02
Nov-02
Oct-02
Sep-02
Aug-02
TKN data not

recorded after 6/2004
Jul-02
TKN Concentration (mg/l)
Figure F-8: SWWTP Influent TKN Concentration
Date
Figure F-9: SWWTP Influent Phosphorus Concentration

8
Total P Concentration (mg/L)
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
Jul-08
Jun-08
May-08
Apr-08
Mar-08
Feb-08
Jan-08
Dec-07
Nov-07
Oct-07
Sep-07
Aug-07
Jul-07
Jun-07
41 of 43
Appendix F
Figure F-10: SWWTP Influent Temperature

86
84
82
Temperature (oF)
80
78
76
74
72
70
68
66
64
62
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
May-08
Jan-08
Sep-07
Jan-07
May-07
Sep-06
Jan-06
May-06
Sep-05
Jan-05
May-05
Sep-04
May-04
Jan-04
Sep-03
Jan-03
May-03
Sep-02
May-02
Jan-02
Sep-01
May-01
Jan-01
Sep-00
May-00
Jan-00
Sep-99
May-99
Jan-99
60
42 of 43

Record of Change
Record of Change
Version 1.0
Date: 09/2009
Location in Document
Description of Change
First Release
Version 2.0
Location in Document
Date: 07/2010
Description of Change
Global Changes
Acronym SSWWTP changed to SWWTP
Global Changes
Updated text, tables, and figures to reflect the most current data.
WWTFSP_App.F2-2.0
July 2010
Page 43 of 43

WWTFSP App.F2 Wastewater Quality Projections

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

WWTFSP App.F2 Wastewater Quality Projections

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Appendix F2: Basis of Planning - Wastewater Quality

Dallas Water Utilities

Wastewater Quality Projections

Executive Summary .................................................................................................3

CWWTP Historical Wastewater Quality Data .........................................................5

Factors That Impact Future Wastewater Quality.................................................20

SWWTP Historical Wastewater Quality Data .......................................................13

Wastewater Quality Historical Trends ........................................................................... 3

Glossary of Acronyms and Terms............................................................24

DP Historical Influent Wastewater Characteristics.................................26

WRP Historical Influent Wastewater Characteristics .............................31

CWWTP Historical Influent Flow Data ......................................................36

SWWTP Historical Influent Wastewater Characteristics ........................37

Dallas Water Utilities

Wastewater Quality Projections

Wastewater Quality Historical Trends

Influent Five-Day Carbonaceous Biological Oxygen Demand

Influent Total Suspended Solids

Influent Total Phosphorus

Dallas Water Utilities

Wastewater Quality Projections

Factors that Impact Future Wastewater Quality

Wastewater Quality Projections

Table 1-1: Summary of Projected Wastewater Quality

Average Load (ppd)

Load Peaking Factor

Max. Month Load (ppd)

Dallas Water Utilities

Wastewater Quality Projections

CWWTP Historical Wastewater Quality Data

CWWTP HISTORICAL WASTEWATER QUALITY DATA

Historical Raw Wastewater Data and Trends

Dallas Water Utilities

Wastewater Quality Projections

CWWTP Historical Wastewater Quality Data

Figure 2-1: CWWTP Sampling Locations

Legend: Sampling Locations

Dallas Plant Raw Influent (2000-2008)

Dallas Water Utilities

Wastewater Quality Projections

CWWTP Historical Wastewater Quality Data

Figure 2-2: CWWTP Average Influent CBOD5 Loading

CBOD5 Loading, ppd x 1000

2007-09 Avg = 159

Table 2-1: CWWTP Influent CBOD5 Load Peaking Factors

Dallas Water Utilities

Wastewater Quality Projections

CWWTP Historical Wastewater Quality Data

Influent Total Suspended Solids

Figure 2-3: CWWTP Average Influent TSS Loading

TSS Loading, ppd x 1000

2000-04 Avg = 275

2005-06 Avg = 252

2007-09 Avg = 210

Dallas Water Utilities

Wastewater Quality Projections

CWWTP Historical Wastewater Quality Data

Table 2-2: CWWTP Influent TSS Load Peaking Factors

Dallas Water Utilities

Wastewater Quality Projections

CWWTP Historical Wastewater Quality Data

Figure 2-4: CWWTP Average Influent Ammonia Loading

Ammonia-N Loading, ppd x 1000