7. GCWA1113_interview.pptx
Multiple options to supplement
supply were investigated
1. Desalination
2. Obtain additional treated water
from Houston
3. Participate in raw water supply
from east Texas
4. Participate in Allen’s Creek
Project
5. Potable Reuse
Near-term,
lowest cost option
Longer term,
higher cost option
Not Practical
9. GCWA1113_interview.pptx
WWTP discharge to A Canal is a “grey”
area of TCEQ regulations
Waters of the State
Discharges Permitted under 30
TAC §307 and §309 (TPDES)
A WTP intake can be located as
close as 500 feet away
Brazos River
Not Waters of the State
Intent to reuse requires
permitting on an individual basis
Dilution and environmental
buffer are important
GCWA Canal
10. GCWA1113_interview.pptx
This project puts GCWA on path towards
supply augmentation with potable reuse
T1&2 –
Data/gaps/monitoring
T3 - Regulatory
T4&5 – Goals &
Standards
T6 – Presentations
T7 - Reporting
Water
shortages
Water Quality Study
Negotiate
Implement
Strategies
Augment Supply
Ongoing monitoring
& verification
11. GCWA1113_interview.pptx
Increasing risk requires more
safeguards to make supply safe
IncreasingRisk
(acute&chronic)
Increasing Safeguards
(treatment & barriers)
Conventional WTP
(4 log virus, 3 log Crypto)
Higher level of treatment
& barriers needed for
higher risk
Brazos R. designated
“high” per TCEQ SWA
WWTP discharge into canal increases risk
15. GCWA1113_interview.pptx
WQ evaluations will establish
possible range of blended quality
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Oyster Cr @ A
Canal
Oyster Cr @
Hwy 90
Possible
Blend - Low
Possible
Blend - Max
E.coli(CFU/100ml)
Historic Sampling Possible Blended Canal WQ
Under some
conditions, blended
quality might be
higher than
Oyster Cr.
16. GCWA1113_interview.pptx
Potable Reuse in Texas
§290.D.42(g) - Innovative/ alternate
treatment clause:
“Any treatment process that does not
have specific design requirements in
290.42(a) – (f) of this title.”
Case-by-case approval
• Treatment requirements based on
pathogen log reduction credits
• Pilot or “full scale verification” required
17. GCWA1113_interview.pptx
Regulatory Approaches to Direct
Potable Reuse (DPR)
Severely impaired High quality
sewage
WWTP
effluent
Defined:
10-4 risk
drinking water
TCEQ Approach (8/6/5.5)
California / WRRF Approach (12/10/10)
site-
specific
quality
site-
specific
quality
28. GCWA1113_interview.pptx
TCEQ BASELINE GOALS
1. Existing Systems
2. Possible Additional Barriers
a. Enhanced disinfection
(chlorine dioxide +
chlorine)
b. Optimized filtration
(0.15 NTU 95% time)
c. UV disinfection
Barrier/Treatment Log Removals*
* Virus / Crypto / Giardia
Multiple barriers will ensure safety
of supply
8 / 6 / 5.5
4 / 3 / 2
4+ / 2+ / 2+
0 / 0.5-1.0 / 0
<1 / 3+ / 3.5
29. GCWA1113_interview.pptx
TCEQ BASELINE GOALS
1. Existing Systems
2. Possible Barriers
a. Enhanced disinfection
(chlorine dioxide +
chloramines)
b. Optimized filtration
(0.15 NTU 95% time)
c. UV disinfection
Total of All Barriers/Treatment
Barrier/Treatment Log Removals*
* Virus / Crypto / Giardia
Multiple barriers will ensure safety
of supply
8 / 6 / 5.5
4 / 3 / 2
4+ / 2+ / 2+
0 / 0.5-1.0 / 0
<1 / 3+ / 3.5
8+ / 6+ / 5.5+
30. GCWA1113_interview.pptx
UV inactivates Crypto & Giardia at
low doses and reasonable cost
0
20
40
60
80
100
2 log virus 3.5 log
Giardia/Crypto
UVDose(mJ/cm2)
$0.05/gal $0.20/gal
Budgetary Cost
Range for UV @ WTP
31. GCWA1113_interview.pptx
Conclusions
1. Potable reuse offers the quickest, least
expensive approach for augmenting the
GCWA water supply
2. This study will establish reuse water
quality to ensure safety and reliability of
supply
3. Multiple barriers are needed to make
supply safe and trustworthy
4. Supplemental treatment with UV
disinfection or another technology might
be required
32. GCWA: Ivan Langford III – General Manager
Carollo Engineers: Meera Victor – Project Manager