GeneralEngineering Requirements nber 1998 G1-19 Requirements Element Engineering Report Facility Plan uding no acti ative and alternative technologies[that Collection system altematives saving energy and nonconventional udge management/use altematives treatment(land application, etc. ) Flow reduction Costs Public acceptability Recommended alternative ecommended Site layout Same as engineering report. Flow diagram Environmental impacts Design life Ability to expand Design parameters ancial Analysis Costs Same as engineering report User charges nancial capability Capital financing plan Water quality management plan Same as engineering report, state- List required permits Documentation that the project is identified in a sewer general plan Documentation of adequate public involvement process Gl-4.1.5 Preliminary Engineering Conference Ecology highly recommends that project proposers and their consultants meet with Ecology's regional office engineers as early as possible in the project planning process. This conference is especially critical for treatment plants Discussions should cover critical factors important to the success of the project such as finance, reliability, communication strategy, timelines, permitting (including other federal and state agencies), and project objectives
General Engineering Requirements December 1998 G1-19 Requirements Element Engineering Report Facility Plan Alternatives • List specific alternative categories, including no action • Collection system alternatives • Sludge management/use alternatives • Flow reduction • Costs • Environmental impacts • Public acceptability • Rank order • Recommended alternative Same as engineering report, plus description of innovative and alternative technologies [that is, those saving energy and nonconventional treatment (land application, etc.)]. Final Recommended Alternative • Site layout • Flow diagram • Sizing • Environmental impacts • Design life • Sludge management • Ability to expand • O&M/staffing needs • Design parameters • Feasibility of implementation Same as engineering report. Financial Analysis • Costs • User charges • Financial capability • Capital financing plan • Implementation plan Same as engineering report. Other • Water quality management plan conformance • SEPA approval • List required permits Same as engineering report, plus stateapproved SERP compliance, including: • Environmental issues analysis • Documentation that the project is identified in a sewer general plan • Capital improvement plan • Documentation of adequate public involvement process G1-4.1.5 Preliminary Engineering Conference Ecology highly recommends that project proposers and their consultants meet with Ecology’s regional office engineers as early as possible in the project planning process. This conference is especially critical for treatment plants. Discussions should cover critical factors important to the success of the project such as finance, reliability, communication strategy, timelines, permitting (including other federal and state agencies), and project objectives
December 1998 Criteria for Sewage Works Design Table G1-2. Explanation of Engineering Report Requirements Text from WAC 173-240-060 Explanation 060(1)Planning Requirements ering report for The report must comply with an up-to-date general sewer plan(WAC 173- wastewater facility shall include each 240-050)that is on file with Ecology. The community must certify that its ppropriate(as determined by Ecology) item eneral sewer plan adequately addresses the current conditions and service equired in WAC 173-240-050 for genera rea. If no adequate, up-to-date, existing general sewer plan is available, unle Ecology will identify those portions of Section 050 that are appropriate to clude in the engineering report line extensions or pump stations. See WAC 173240-020(13)and173240-03015)The a wastewater project, or the general sewer plan needs to be updated, th facility plan described in 40 CFR 35 is an nay be expanded to ewer plan, including local approval requirements in Chapters 35.63, 36.70 36.94, and 56.08 RCW. An engineering report is not normally needed for sewer line extensions or pump stations that conform with an Ecology- pproved general sewer plan where no Ecology financial assistance is 060(2)Sufficiently Complete The engineering report shall be sufficiently Sufficiently complete" as used in the regulations is defined to mean the report complete so that plans and specifications can shall contain enough design information that an engineer who was not be developed from it without substantial involved in writing the report can produce construction drawings that will result in the construction of the facility envisioned by the report writer without any need for process change or environmental impacts or an increas change will require an amendment to the approved engineering report dequate detail means that there is suitable attention given in the report to he individual elements and components that make up the whole proposed 060(3)Minimum Information Required The engineering report shall include the following information, together with any other relevant data as requested by Ecology: The name, address, and telephone number of the owner and the owners of th presentative must be included. This is the person or position empowered to and their authorized ign contracts relating to this project. The owner s representative can be the ayor, chair of the city council sewer committee, city manager, public works director, etc. A specific project contact person other than the legal epresentative may also be indicated b)A project description including a location The project description includes the where, what, and why of the report of the pr Include documentation of the need for the proposed project. There must be location map of the project area, along with a map showing the current and oposed sewer service area. The map(s)must be scaled so that at least one map shows the complete, current, and proposed service areas with the relationship of this service area to adjacent service areas. There should be a p that shows the existing collection system changes and what land applications of wastewater are proposed. A current zoning map for the service area is needed to support the population and waste load projection process
G1-20 December 1998 Criteria for Sewage Works Design Table G1-2. Explanation of Engineering Report Requirements Text from WAC 173-240-060 Explanation 060(1) Planning Requirements The engineering report for a domestic wastewater facility shall include each appropriate (as determined by Ecology) item required in WAC 173-240-050 for general sewer plans unless an up-to-date general sewer plan is on file with Ecology. Normally, an engineering report is not required for sewer line extensions or pump stations. See WAC 173-240-020(13) and 173-240-030(5). The facility plan described in 40 CFR 35 is an “engineering report.” The report must comply with an up-to-date general sewer plan (WAC 173- 240-050) that is on file with Ecology. The community must certify that its general sewer plan adequately addresses the current conditions and service area. If no adequate, up-to-date, existing general sewer plan is available, Ecology will identify those portions of Section 050 that are appropriate to include in the engineering report. Where there is no general sewer plan and an engineering report is needed for a wastewater project, or the general sewer plan needs to be updated, the engineering report may be expanded to meet the requirements for a general sewer plan, including local approval requirements in Chapters 35.63, 36.70, 36.94, and 56.08 RCW. An engineering report is not normally needed for sewer line extensions or pump stations that conform with an Ecologyapproved general sewer plan where no Ecology financial assistance is provided. 060(2) Sufficiently Complete The engineering report shall be sufficiently complete so that plans and specifications can be developed from it without substantial changes. “Sufficiently complete” as used in the regulations is defined to mean the report shall contain enough design information that an engineer who was not involved in writing the report can produce construction drawings that will result in the construction of the facility envisioned by the report writer without any need for process change or more than minor unit-sizing modifications. “Substantial change” means a change in the selected treatment process, facility size, design criteria, performance standards, or environmental impacts, or an increase in total project cost. A substantial change will require an amendment to the approved engineering report. “Adequate detail” means that there is suitable attention given in the report to the individual elements and components that make up the whole proposed project. 060(3) Minimum Information Required The engineering report shall include the following information, together with any other relevant data as requested by Ecology: (a) The name, address, and telephone number of the owner of the proposed facilities, and their authorized representative. The name, address, and telephone number of the owner and the owner's representative must be included. This is the person or position empowered to sign contracts relating to this project. The owner's representative can be the mayor, chair of the city council sewer committee, city manager, public works director, etc. A specific project contact person other than the legal representative may also be indicated. (b) A project description including a location map and a map of the present and proposed service area. The project description includes the where, what, and why of the report. Include documentation of the need for the proposed project. There must be a location map of the project area, along with a map showing the current and proposed sewer service area. The map(s) must be scaled so that at least one map shows the complete, current, and proposed service areas along with the relationship of this service area to adjacent service areas. There should be a map that shows the existing collection system changes and what land applications of wastewater are proposed. A current zoning map for the service area is needed to support the population and waste load projection process
GeneralEngineering Requirements December 1998 Text from WAc 173-240-060 Explanation ture quantity and quality of wastewater, received by the treatment plant, its sources( the percentages of domestic including any industral wastes which ommercial, and industrial dischargers), the characteristics of industrial may be present or expected in the sewer discharges/pretreatment, the current I/I flows, CSOs as defined in Chapter 173-245 WAC, diurnal flow and loading variations, and seasonal load and flow ariations.As much wastewater loading and flow data as possible is needed RCW 90.48.495 requires water conservation measures be considered in ewer plans. Include a discussion of water conservation measures considered or under way and their anticipated impact on public sewer service. aboratory data should be from an Ecology-certified laboratory, or at least ave been corroborated by a certified laboratory by way of split samples or other acceptable means Treatment plant flow meters must be checked uracy. The location of influent and effluent sampling, the type of samples ken, and the locations of treatment process return streams shall also be he future(normally 20 years from the date of the report) waste load and sources of wastewater including the above items must be estimated. The estimates are based on the present (or known future)zoning pattem, council of governments population forecasts, historical population trends, existing industrial users, and anticipated future industrial wastewater sources d)The degree of treatment required based A copy of the current discharge permit and any compliance orders must be upon applicable permits and regulations, part of the engineering report. For new discharges, a draft permit should be cluded. The evaluation results of Sections 3(e),(h), and(must be used to strength of wastewater to be treated, and estimate the degree of treatment needed in lieu of the existence of a curren other influencing factors. permit or a draft permit prepared by ecology. At a minimum, the engineering eport must contain an evaluation of the WTP discharge water quality criteria(Chapter 173-201A WAC). For municipal WTPs, this means an analysis of NH3 and Cl that may indicate the need for nitrification or dechlorination. Additionally, the report must evaluate the effects of industrial discharges to the collection system on the final effluent, including the potential for toxic materials to pass through the treatment facility to the final effluent or
General Engineering Requirements December 1998 G1-21 Text from WAC 173-240-060 Explanation (c) A statement of the present and expected future quantity and quality of wastewater, including any industrial wastes which may be present or expected in the sewer system. This includes an analysis of the current waste load (flow, BOD, TSS, etc.) received by the treatment plant, its sources (the percentages of domestic, commercial, and industrial dischargers), the characteristics of industrial discharges/pretreatment, the current I/I flows, CSOs as defined in Chapter 173-245 WAC, diurnal flow and loading variations, and seasonal load and flow variations. As much wastewater loading and flow data as possible is needed. At least one year of current data is the ideal. RCW 90.48.495 requires water conservation measures be considered in sewer plans. Include a discussion of water conservation measures considered or under way and their anticipated impact on public sewer service. Laboratory data should be from an Ecology-certified laboratory, or at least have been corroborated by a certified laboratory by way of split samples or other acceptable means. Treatment plant flow meters must be checked for accuracy. The location of influent and effluent sampling, the type of samples taken, and the locations of treatment process return streams shall also be included. The future (normally 20 years from the date of the report) waste load and sources of wastewater including the above items must be estimated. The estimates are based on the present (or known future) zoning pattern, council of governments’ population forecasts, historical population trends, existing industrial users, and anticipated future industrial wastewater sources. (d) The degree of treatment required based upon applicable permits and regulations, the receiving water, the amount and strength of wastewater to be treated, and other influencing factors. A copy of the current discharge permit and any compliance orders must be part of the engineering report. For new discharges, a draft permit should be included. The evaluation results of Sections 3(e), (h), and (l) must be used to estimate the degree of treatment needed in lieu of the existence of a current permit or a draft permit prepared by Ecology. At a minimum, the engineering report must contain an evaluation of the WWTP discharge compliance with water quality criteria (Chapter 173-201A WAC). For municipal WWTPs, this means an analysis of NH3 and Cl that may indicate the need for nitrification or dechlorination. Additionally, the report must evaluate the effects of industrial discharges to the collection system on the final effluent, including the potential for toxic materials to pass through the treatment facility to the final effluent or sludge
December 1998 Criteria for Sewage Works Design Text from WAc 173-240-060 Explanation (e) A description of the receiving water, The name, location(river mile, latitude/longitude, waterway segment number, applicable water quality standards, and wnship/range, etc ) and water quality classification of the proposed how water quality standards will be met receiving water shall be given. Any existing receiving water data(monitoring at the boundary of any applicable dilution stations reporting to STORET, CRMS, USGS reports, NOAA reports, FERC z0ne.(173201A-10WAC icense reports, data collected for this report, etc. )must be summarized Data collected for this report shall be included in an appendix to the report low flow) flow must be determined and given in the report. This is the flow For salt water and estuaries, current velocity, appropriat a mperature profile conditions must be determined and This is then used to design and evaluate the size and shape of allowable evaluation of toxic chemicals( toxic pollutant scan may be quired)that may be in the effluent. This includes an evaluation of their effects on migratory fish (i.e, barrier to fish migration). The applicable numerical Water Quality Criteria(EPA)must be evaluated along with a decision of which criteria are limiting for this discharge(see Ecology s"Permit Writer's Manual). The NPDES permit may contain requirements for whole effluent toxicity testing and limits(WET rule, Chapter 173-205 WAC) Identification of the various chemicals that may be present in the discharge and the species present in the receiving water may affect the need or frequency of biomonitoring WET testing In salt water, not onby must the effects of chemical discharges be evaluated but the impact of bacterial discharges on shellfish beds(certification or decertification ) must be evaluated. Refer to the criteria and information in the DOH documents "Special Sewage Works Design Consideration for Protection of Waters Used for Shellfish Harvest, Water Supplies or Other Areas of Special Public Health Concern, "and"Shellfish and Domestic Wastewater scharge Outfall Projects, "Oct. 1995 (interagency permit streamline) For ground water discharges, the minimum requirements of the tudy must be addressed. These requirements are listed in E3- described in the"Implementation Guidance for Ground Water Quality (f The type of treatment process proposed, At least one of each of the following wastewater treatment categories and he character of the ons should be among the preliminary altematives considered: fixed growth astewater to be handled. the method of ocesses, lagoons novative treatment processes, nonstructural alternatives(operational red. and a discussion of the hanges), and no action. The no action altemative must be considered. The alternatives evaluated and the reasons nItematives considered must be ranked (with their reasons)according to their they are unacceptable ability to meet the receiving water quality standards, costs, and other objectives of the engineering report. From this group of ranked alternatives, a top group of three to five distinct, final altematives that meet the report's objectives must be selected to be further developed and evaluated. Further evaluation includes environmental impact, applicability to available site(s), cost effectiveness(capital cost and present worth cost), ease of operation, and other criteria deemed important by the community. Costs are to be based on EPA cost curves, CAPDET analysis, or any other cost estimating method acceptable to Ecology. A final altemate recommended for implementation should rank as first in this further evaluation. the selection of the recommended alternate includes a discussion of why the other alternates were not selected
G1-22 December 1998 Criteria for Sewage Works Design Text from WAC 173-240-060 Explanation (e) A description of the receiving water, applicable water quality standards, and how water quality standards will be met at the boundary of any applicable dilution zone. (173-201A-10Q WAC) The name, location (river mile, latitude/longitude, waterway segment number, township/range, etc.), and water quality classification of the proposed receiving water shall be given. Any existing receiving water data (monitoring stations reporting to STORET, CRMS, USGS reports, NOAA reports, FERC license reports, data collected for this report, etc.) must be summarized. Data collected for this report shall be included in an appendix to the report. For fresh water streams and rivers, the 7Q10 (seven-day, ten-year recurrence low flow) flow must be determined and given in the report. This is the flow used for calculating dilution zone sizing in streams and rivers. For salt water and estuaries, current velocity, appropriate salinity, density, and temperature profile conditions must be determined and given in the report. This is then used to design and evaluate the size and shape of allowable dilution zones. There must be an evaluation of toxic chemicals (toxic pollutant scan may be required) that may be in the effluent. This includes an evaluation of their effects on migratory fish (i.e., barrier to fish migration). The applicable numerical Water Quality Criteria (EPA) must be evaluated along with a decision of which criteria are limiting for this discharge (see Ecology’s “Permit Writer’s Manual”). The NPDES permit may contain requirements for whole effluent toxicity testing and limits (WET rule, Chapter 173-205 WAC). Identification of the various chemicals that may be present in the discharge and the species present in the receiving water may affect the need or frequency of biomonitoring WET testing. In salt water, not only must the effects of chemical discharges be evaluated, but the impact of bacterial discharges on shellfish beds (certification or decertification) must be evaluated. Refer to the criteria and information in the DOH documents “Special Sewage Works Design Consideration for Protection of Waters Used for Shellfish Harvest,” “ Water Supplies or Other Areas of Special Public Health Concern,” and “Shellfish and Domestic Wastewater Discharge Outfall Projects,” Oct. 1995 (interagency permit streamline). For ground water discharges, the minimum requirements of the hydrogeologic study must be addressed. These requirements are listed in E3-4 and are fully described in the “Implementation Guidance for Ground Water Quality Standards” (Ecology, 1996). (f) The type of treatment process proposed, based upon the character of the wastewater to be handled, the method of disposal, the degree of treatment required, and a discussion of the alternatives evaluated and the reasons they are unacceptable. At least one of each of the following wastewater treatment categories and options should be among the preliminary alternatives considered: fixed growth processes, suspended growth processes, land treatment processes, lagoons, innovative treatment processes, nonstructural alternatives (operational changes), and no action. The no action alternative must be considered. The alternatives considered must be ranked (with their reasons) according to their ability to meet the receiving water quality standards, costs, and other objectives of the engineering report. From this group of ranked alternatives, a top group of three to five distinct, final alternatives that meet the report's objectives must be selected to be further developed and evaluated. Further evaluation includes environmental impact, applicability to available site(s), cost effectiveness (capital cost and present worth cost), ease of operation, and other criteria deemed important by the community. Costs are to be based on EPA cost curves, CAPDET analysis, or any other cost estimating method acceptable to Ecology. A final alternate recommended for implementation should rank as first in this further evaluation. The selection of the recommended alternate includes a discussion of why the other alternates were not selected
GeneralEngineering Requirements December 1998 G123 Text from WAc 173-240-060 Explanation g) The basic design data and sizing This must be done for all of the final alternates as part of the ranking process calculations of each unit of the treatment and to estimate construction and operation and maintenance costs for cost works.Expected efficiencies of each unit, comparisons as required in 3(p)below. The detailed sizing calculations and the entire plant, and character of effluent design criteria used for sizing the selected altemative treatment systems shall anticipated. gree with the appropriate chapters of this manual or other authoritative reference. Any deviation from the design criteria in this manual must be thoroughly justified. The basic hydraulic and pollutant loading data to be used capacities, and adequacy of all existing treatment units used in the upgraded (h)Discussion of the various sites available This is part of the alternative evaluation process(c)through(0). When multiple and the advantages and disadvantages potential treatment plant sites are evaluated, their topography, flood potential impacts to existing wetlands, soils suitability for construction, zoning, and oximity of residences or developed roximity to residential areas must be evaluated areas to any treatment works. The lationship of a 25-year and 100-year Flood analysis should not be limited to determining whether or not a site is flood to the treatment plant site and the included within a flood plain mapped on a FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map anous plant units FIRM). The flooding potential of any drainage way passing through or near the site must be evaluated for site flooding potential. The existence of wetlands on a proposed site must be shown on the site map. Mapping the extent of wetlands may require the use of a wetlands specialist. During the aning stage, there should be enough soils analyses done at the final aLtemate sites so that the ability of the soils to structurally support the proposed structures or provide the wastewater treatment required is known to reasonable level of security( that is, enough soils analyses need to be done so that duning design or construction a" changed site condition clause does not have to be invoked because the soils are unable to perfom as required) O A flow diagram showing general layout of The flow diagram for each of the final alternates considered must be both a the various units. the location of the schematic flow diagram showing all wastewater liquid and solids flow paths effluent discharge, and a hydraulic profile and a scaled site layout(showing the site topography) that shows that the of the system that is the subject of th proposed treatment units will actually fit on the land available. gineering report and any hydraulically hydraulic profile(s)must be developed in detail for the selec Itemate. The hydraulic profile must be done for at least the high plant flow and high receiving water fiow/elevation and low plant flow conditions Hydraulic profiles for other critical flow conditions should also be included There must be an evaluation of the existing treatment plant flows showing the ws and bypasses, and degree of VI in the collection system. Evaluation of the existing flows includes proposed corrections and controls viewing the age and characteristics of the existing sewerage system and flow monitoring in the system and finding sewer lines with high 1. A complete evaluation of M in a system will involve at least one year of testing to establish he baseline flows and conditions for further evaluation Sanitary sewer overflows(SSOs)and combined sewer overflows(CSOs) must be identified on a map and a discussion of their current frequency of overflow and impact to receiving water must be included. A recommendation of how to eliminate SSOs and minimize CSOs and their effect on the receiving water must be included in the engineering report. If the sewer system contains any CSOs, the municipality must submit the CSo reduction plan required in Chapter 173-245 WAC. The final project recommended for implementation must include an I/I reduction and sso elimination plan, and refer to a CSo control plan that conforms to Chapter 173-245 WAC ron or any s e are a astes that require special handling by the treating industrial wastes, including a eatment plant, the wastes and methods for handling them must be identified pretreatment requirements for significant A treatability study may be appropriate for some industrial wastewaters during industrial sources the treatment alternatives development stage. The need for pretreatment of industrial wastewater must be identified
General Engineering Requirements December 1998 G1-23 Text from WAC 173-240-060 Explanation (g) The basic design data and sizing calculations of each unit of the treatment works. Expected efficiencies of each unit, the entire plant, and character of effluent anticipated. This must be done for all of the final alternates as part of the ranking process and to estimate construction and operation and maintenance costs for cost comparisons as required in 3(p) below. The detailed sizing calculations and design criteria used for sizing the selected alternative treatment systems shall agree with the appropriate chapters of this manual or other authoritative reference. Any deviation from the design criteria in this manual must be thoroughly justified. The basic hydraulic and pollutant loading data to be used for sizing the treatment systems is included in 3(c) above. The age, capacities, and adequacy of all existing treatment units used in the upgraded facilities must be described. (h) Discussion of the various sites available and the advantages and disadvantages of the site(s) recommended. The proximity of residences or developed areas to any treatment works. The relationship of a 25-year and 100-year flood to the treatment plant site and the various plant units. This is part of the alternative evaluation process (c) through (f). When multiple potential treatment plant sites are evaluated, their topography, flood potential, impacts to existing wetlands, soils suitability for construction, zoning, and proximity to residential areas must be evaluated. Flood analysis should not be limited to determining whether or not a site is included within a flood plain mapped on a FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). The flooding potential of any drainage way passing through or near the site must be evaluated for site flooding potential. The existence of wetlands on a proposed site must be shown on the site map. Mapping the extent of wetlands may require the use of a wetlands specialist. During the planning stage, there should be enough soils analyses done at the final alternate sites so that the ability of the soils to structurally support the proposed structures or provide the wastewater treatment required is known to a reasonable level of security (that is, enough soils analyses need to be done so that during design or construction a “changed site condition” clause does not have to be invoked because the soils are unable to perform as required). (i) A flow diagram showing general layout of the various units, the location of the effluent discharge, and a hydraulic profile of the system that is the subject of the engineering report and any hydraulically related portions. The flow diagram for each of the final alternates considered must be both a schematic flow diagram showing all wastewater liquid and solids flow paths and a scaled site layout (showing the site topography) that shows that the proposed treatment units will actually fit on the land available. The needed hydraulic profile(s) must be developed in detail for the selected alternate. The hydraulic profile must be done for at least the high plant flow and high receiving water flow/elevation and low plant flow conditions. Hydraulic profiles for other critical flow conditions should also be included. (j) A discussion of infiltration and inflow problems, overflows and bypasses, and proposed corrections and controls. There must be an evaluation of the existing treatment plant flows showing the degree of I/I in the collection system. Evaluation of the existing flows includes reviewing the age and characteristics of the existing sewerage system and flow monitoring in the system and finding sewer lines with high I/I. A complete evaluation of I/I in a system will involve at least one year of testing to establish the baseline flows and conditions for further evaluation. Sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) and combined sewer overflows (CSOs) must be identified on a map and a discussion of their current frequency of overflow and impact to receiving water must be included. A recommendation of how to eliminate SSOs and minimize CSOs and their effect on the receiving water must be included in the engineering report. If the sewer system contains any CSOs, the municipality must submit the CSO reduction plan required in Chapter 173-245 WAC. The final project recommended for implementation must include an I/I reduction and SSO elimination plan, and refer to a CSO control plan that conforms to Chapter 173-245 WAC. (k) A discussion of any special provisions for treating industrial wastes, including any pretreatment requirements for significant industrial sources. If there are any industrial wastes that require special handling by the treatment plant, the wastes and methods for handling them must be identified. A treatability study may be appropriate for some industrial wastewaters during the treatment alternatives development stage. The need for pretreatment of industrial wastewater must be identified