Table Of Content

U C.!, I CAZO$ COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW CONThOL COSTS AT ONTARIO RAP SITES SUMMARY REPORT 4 CH2M H/Li ENGINEERiNG LTD. Waterloo, Ontario July 1992 Copyright Provisions and Restrictions on Copying: This Ontario Ministry of the Environment work is protected by Crown copyright (unless otherwise indicated), which is held by the Queen's Printer for Ontario. It may be reproduced for non-commercial purposes if credit is given and Crown copyright is acknowledged. It may not be reproduced, in all or in part, for any commercial purpose except under a licence from the Queen's Printer for Ontario. For information on reproducing Government of Ontario works, please contact ServiceOntario Publications at COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOW CONTROL COSTS AT ONTARIO RAP SITES SUMMARY REPORT Report Prepared For: The Ontario Ministry of Environment and Energy Water Resources Branch and Environment Canada Wastewater Technology Centre Report Prepared By: CH2M Hill Engineering Limited Waterloo, Ontario JULY 1992 - - & DISCLAIMER This report has been reviewed by representatives from the Ontario Ministry of Environment and Energy, and the Wastewater Technology Centre on behalf of Environment Canada and approved for release to the public. The views expressed in the report are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the Ontario Ministry of Environment and Energy or Environment Canada. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study was funded by the Ontario Ministry of Environment and Energy and Environment Canada through the Federal Great Lakes Action Plan Cleanup Fund. Mr. D. Weatherbe on behalf of Environment Canada and Mr. M. D'Andrea of the Ontario Ministry of Environment and Energy, Water Resources Branch served as Project Scientific Liaisons. The technical involvement and report reviews by Mr. J. P'ng and Mr. W. Liang of the Ontario Ministry of Environment and Energy and report review comments by Mr. T. Coape-Arnold of the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Energy are gratefully acknowledged. TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES-i i-i INTRODUCTION 1. 2. STUDY APPROACH 2-1 2.1 Combined Sewer Overflows and Their Effects 2-i 2.2 CSO System Analysis 2-2 2.2.1 Overview 2-2 2.2.2 CSO System Description 2-2 2.2.3 Control Technologies 2-6 2.2.4 CSO Control Criteria 2-7 2.2.5 Performance Analysis 2-8 2,2.6 Cost Optimization 2-9 2.2.7 Kingston and St. Catharines Case Studies 2-13 3. COST AND PERFORMANCE OF CSO CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES AT ONTARIO RAP SITES 3-I 3.1 Background 3-1 3.2 Existing Levels of Control 3-5 3.3 Central Treatment and Storage 3-7 3.4 Satellite Treatment and Storage 3-16 4. SUMMARY 4-1 4.1 Summary of Results - 4-1 4.2 Recommendations for Further Model Development 4-2 APPENDIX A - References TOR/C50587199L51 LIST OF TABLES Table Page ES.1 Ontario RAP Municipalities Characteristics ES.2 Derived Input Data Summary Ontario RAP Municipalities ES-li ES.3 Ontario RAP Municipalities Modelling Assumptions ES-12 ES.4 Ontario RAP Municipalities Pollution Control Performance Data ES13 ES.5 Ontario RAP Municipalities Estimates of Existing Levels of CSO Control ES-l4 ES.6 Ontario RAP Municipalities Expansion Paths for Central Treatment and Storage ES-16 ES.7 Ontario RAP Municipalities Expansion Paths for Central Treatment and Storage (% Suspended Solids Removal) ES-l7 ES.8 Ontario RAP Municipalities Capital Summary for Central Treatment and Storage ES48 ES.9 Ontario RAP Municipalities Capital Cost Summary Per Unit Effective Combined Area Central Treatment and Storage ES-21 ES.1O Ontario RAP Municipalities Expansion Paths for Satellite Treatment and Storage ES-24 ES. 11. Ontario RAP Municipalities Expansion Paths for Satellite Treatment and Storage (% Suspended Solids Removal) ES-25 ES.l2 Ontario RAP Municipalities Capital Cost Summary for Satellite Treatment and Storage ES-26 ES.l3 Ontario RAP Municipalities Capital Cost Summary Per Unit Effective Combined Area Satellite Treatment and Storage ES-29 2.1 Ontario RAP Municipalities Pollution Control Cost Equations 2-12 1 I ii I LIST OF TABLES (CONT'D) Table Page 3.1 Ontario RAP Municipalities Characteristics 3.2 Derived Input Data Summary Ontario RAP Municipalities 3-3 3.3 Ontario RAP Municipalities Modelling Assumptions 3-4 3.4 Ontario RAP Municipalities Pollution Control Performance Data 3-6 3.5 Ontario RAP Municipalities Estimates of Existing Levels of CSO Control 3-7 3.6 Ontario RAP Municipalities Expansion Paths for Central Treatment and Storage 3-8 3.7 Ontario RAP Municipalities Expansion Paths for Central Treatment and Storage (% Suspended Solids Removal) 3-9 3.8 Ontario RAP Municipalities Capital Summary for Central Treatment and Storage 3-11 3.9 Ontario RAP Municipalities Capital Cost Summary Per Unit Effective Combined Area Central Treatment and Storage 3-14 3.10 Ontario RAP Municipalities Expansion Paths for Satellite Treatment and Storage 3-17 3.11 Ontario RAP Municipalities Expansion Paths for Satellite Treatment and Storage (% Suspended Solids Removal) 3-18 3.12 Ontario RAP Municipalities Capital Cost Summary for Satellite Treatment and Storage 3-19 3.13 Ontario RAP Municipalities Capital Cost Summary Per Unit Effective Combined Area Satellite Treatment and Storage 3-22 'II (099131 OR LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page ES.i Schematic of Simple Combined Sewer Catchment ES-5 ES.2 Analysis Methodology Description and Development ES-S ES.3 Ontario RAY Site Aggregate Cost Effectiveness Curves Central Treatment and Storage ES-20 ES.4 Ontario RAP Site Aggregate Cost Effectiveness Curves Satellite Treatment and Storage ES-28 2.1 Analysis Methodology Description and Development 2-3 2.2 Schematic of Simple Combined Sewer Catchment 2-4 2.3 Storage and Treatment Performance Isoquants (% Volumetric Control) 2-10 2.4 Performance Isoquant and isocost Curves 2-11 3.1 Ontario RAP Site Aggregate Cost Effectiveness Curves Central Treatment and Storage• 3-13 3.2 Ontario RAP Site Aggregate Cost. Effectiveness Curves Satellite Treatment and Storage - 3-21 I, i I 1 iv TOR/C505871991 .51 I EXECUTWE SUMMARY BACKGROUND Remedial Action Plans (RAPs) are currently being developed for a number of sites in the Great Lakes Basin in accordance with recommendations made by the International Joint Commission, Great Lakes Water Quality Board. These sites, known as Areas of Concern (AOCs), have experienced water quality impairment due to several different causes, and RAPs are being prepared to restore beneficial uses of the water resource. In order to provide information to assist RAP studies, the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Environment Canada's Great Lakes Cleanup Fund commissioned a study to estimate costs for control of combined sewer overflows. The study resulted in two reports. 1. Analysis of Combined Sewer Overflow Control Technologies - Kingston and St. Cat/zarines Case Studies. CH2M HILL ENGINEERING LTD., June 1992. 2. Combined Sewer Overflow Control Costs at Ontario RAP Sites - Summaiy Report. CH2M HILL ENGINEERING LTD., June 1992. These reports will be published by the Ontario Ministry of the Environment in late 1992. Draft copies are available for review at the Water Resources Branch, Ontario Ministry of the Environment, and at the Great Lakes Environment Office, Environment Canada, Toronto. The following presents an overview of the summary report. For a description of the terminology used in this discussion, see the Glossary at the end of this document. In several AOCs, a phenomenon referred to as Combined Sewer Overflow (CSO) has resulted in water quality impairment due to the direct discharge of untreated combined wastewater to the receiving waterbody. Only those AOCs with significant areas of combined sewers have been affected. Sections of many Ontario municipalities built prior to 1956 are still serviced by combined sewers. Combined sewers convey both storm and sanitary wastewater flows but are configured in such a way that flows in excess of the downstream pipe flow capacity or the treatment capacity at the Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP) are discharged directly to receiving waters without treatment. Consequently, CSOs occur during periods of wet weather. The major reason for providing this "relief valve" in the sewer system is to minimize basement flooding and impairment of WPCP treatment capabilities during wet weather. Since 1956, new developments have been serviceji with separate storm and sanitary sewers. There are 17 Canadian Areas of Concern identified by the International Joint Commission, Great Lakes Water Quality Board. These include those areas with RAPs being developed jointly with the United States, at international boundary river locations. Of these, a previous study identified 10 locations with combined sewer overflows. ES-i 06125/92 ONTSIflVrTOR99OS L