The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) has fourteen smallconventional water treatment plants (WTP) located in four field divisions. Theseplants treat California State Project Water (California Aqueduct) water forindustrial use (i.e. pump seals, cooling water, and air conditioning),irrigation, and employee and public consumption. Many of the treatment facilitiesare more than thirty years old and have exceeded their design life. Combined withincreasingly stringent treatment regulations, many of the facilities haverequired significant refurbishment while operational costs have steadilyincreased. DWR headquarters and field division staff are now seeking lessexpensive treatment options. One possible alternative is replacement of thecurrent facilities with ultrafiltration (UF) membrane treatment. Membranetreatment provides better and more consistent pathogen removal than conventionalsystems and can meet anticipated future turbidity and pathogen regulations withminimal or no modifications. Also, membrane systems typically provide significantcost savings by reduced operation and maintenance costs. Ultrafiltration waschosen over other types of membrane treatment because of excellent pathogenremoval, minimal pretreatment needs, potentially low disinfection requirements,and in turn, reduced disinfection byproduct formation. To prove ultrafiltration'sviability, a pilot study was requested by the Operations and MaintenanceDivision, Environmental Assessment Branch Chief, and was developed and conductedby the Operations and Maintenance Division, Water Quality Section staff inconjunction with Delta Field Division staff. The pilot study involved renting twodifferent UF membrane systems, one from Aquasource North America and another fromKoch Membrane Systems. The pilot study was conducted at the John E. Skinner FishFacility, began on June 11, 1999 and was completed on December 8, 1999 at a totalcost of approximately $271,000. The DWR ultrafiltration pilot study objectiveswere to: ascertain the effectiveness of ultrafiltration to treat State ProjectWater under high and low turbidity conditions; determine the minimum pretreatmentrequirements for acceptable ultrafiltration treatment performance; evaluateultrafiltration's capability to remove total organic compounds (TOC) anddissolved organic compounds (DOC) for disinfection byproduct control; estimatethe operational costs of ultrafiltration to treat State Project Water; provide anoperational comparison of two different UF membrane systems; and, develop a costand performance comparison of UF treatment versus two DWR treatment facilities. Includes tables.
| Edition : | Vol. - No. |
| File Size : | 1
file
, 220 KB |
| Note : | This product is unavailable in Ukraine, Russia, Belarus |
| Number of Pages : | 17 |
| Published : | 05/01/2001 |
