4.4. SR 03-20-2017 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Table ESA - Theoretical Performance of the Existing Ultraviolet Disinfection System at Reduced UV Transmittance due to Leachate Blending Influent Flow UV Performance without Leachate Blending UV Performance with 0.035 MGD Leachate Blending (MGD) UVT Dose # lamps Energy UVT Dose # lamps Energy (%) (uWs/cm2) operating (kW) (%) (uWs/cm2) operating (kW) 1.0 61 30,000 36 5.40 16.0 3,500 72 18.00 1.5 61 30,000 36 6.12 21.4 5,700 72 18.00 2.0 61 30,000 36 7.56 26.8 8,490 72 18.00 3.0 61 30,000 72 10.80 37.6 15,668 72 18.00 5.0 61 30,000 72 14.40 59.2 28,700 72 18.00 7.0 61 30,000 72 18.00 61 30,000 72 18.00 Review of Comparable Applications Operation of comparable treatment facilities that blend leachate from Waste Management landfills with municipal wastewater were reviewed to provide assurance regarding the treatability and anticipated impact on performance and color removal expectations. The following is a summary of available data from four of the most similar co -treatment applications. Waste Management operates over 150 landfills with either direct connections or leachate receiving at publically owned treatment works (POTWs). Activated sludge with chemical or biological phosphorus removal is the most common method of treatment. Comparison of the Elk River WWTF and four other facilities currently receiving leachate from other Waste Management landfill are summarized below in Table ES.2. As indicated, only two of the facilities were identified with a similar UV disinfection process and no facility reported operation with leachate contributions to the percent contribution proposed at the Elk River facility. City of Elk River, Minnesota —121.109643 Page 3 Elk River/Waste Management Leachate Study Prepared by Bolton & Menk, Inc.