HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 Site ApplicationWaste Engineering, lnc.
2430 Alcott Street
Denver, Colorado 80211
(303) 433-2788
March 6, 1-989
Mark Bean
Garfield CountY Planner
l-09 8th Street
Glenwood SPrings, CO 81-601
Dear l{ark:
As per our telephone c,onver.sation, enclosed are two complete -copies of the
Ski Sunlight Site Application .u.td euti" of Desigrn neport, a1,ong with ten
extra copies ot-tf,"-"ite appficaiion for inclusion ih ttre commissioner's
packets.
It is our understanding that the application will be included on the April
agenda.
If you have any questions please do not hesitate to call'
VerY truly Yours,
WASTE E{GINEERING, INC.
\q
TAZ/frn
87l--034.050cc: Tom JankovskY
LarrY Green
Hazardous Waste o Hydrocarbon Contamination o Water QualitY Control o Waste Treatment Design
c.
D.
lfthefacllltydllbelocatedonoradJacenttoaaltethatleownedoroanagedbya
Fcderal or State lgencyt eend the a8'etrcy 8 copy of thlg appllcatlon'
:::f:::il ::Tffi":'il:TT: recoooeadatroo declaloo' Are the proposed
facllltt'eecooslsteotrlththecooprchcnalveplanaadaoyotherplaoaforthearea'
laclutllngthe20lFacllltyPlaaor20sllaterQgsutyHaaageocntPl.ao,asthcyaffectwater
gualtty?IfyouhevcaoyfulthercoDDentsorquc8t1oo8,plcaeecall320-8333,Dttenslon
5272.
3.
4.
5.
1.
2.
Rccoocnd Racooend No
DeIl- Aplllygf- EtE"4!ryel* g9!@9EL- slcnailre of ReDre
slte 18 il'"'i"-i""0'1'^::-"i:l:n three
;ii:,i iii-i'"rt'tr on %stxtct''
(ro!uftatatioos,tbcsl.gaatureoftheStateGeologlst16llotrequlred.Appllcatlonsfor
treatDeDt plants requlre all 6lgnature6')
IcertlfythatlaofanlllarrrlththerequlleEeotSofthe-RegulatlonsforSlteAppllcatlons
ForDoDe6ttctl"st",.t"rTreatDeBtl{orke,-audhavepostedthe6ltelnaccordancewlththe
regulatlone.Aaeus,lneeringreport,asdescrlbedbytheregulatlons,hasbeenpreparedandil
enclosed.
wl/i.?t-LL
-3-
l,lQCD-3 (Revlsed 8-83)
sl6ffirfiilFet
Waste Engineetinq ln'
2430 Alcott Street
D"nu"t, Colorado 80211
(303) 480-1 700
June 29, 1988
Mr. Tom JankouskY
?bL8lt's.lliv'H;uo ',,bie;;"od Sfltingt, Co 8l60l
Re: Improvements to Wastewater Management System
Dear Mr. JankouskY:
Attached are the Basis 9.[-.P:'isn Report t{^1.'-1}:'.n1no f.?Hi!:LT"tHi -[!
'sBLx,rT"?n'i? i$.,i*'I;fi, y::Uul'"t"; :l+ir " iiuii,'Ji' iii",i gn
.
Report
atso -includes a 'SiG Apnroy,{ Aipfi."ii"n- Fo*'' "- ti=*uy or Jnav not be
necessary to ,uurit triti site xd;iffiil - rin.t tt't improvementi are to
upsrade an exrsring system ,o '"#"Li"iuutti quafiiy standards without any
ailditional caPacrtY'
E8,f-ff.f, o,llEop,l,,i"
ru?l'E{,..}!'.""p3}hl:ili, l?t 'i3;':iX'til"',#"'i"X"i'l
office and rur1.
y
lJn,n ilfu1-;i".1i. 6;;*i. iln.tiJn i,iiici. to facilitate their
;iiliy tir[*-oi tni ptoposed improvements'
H,#[il.f*,#slf *1",0*i'i;;f"r1""i""-"4!lt'd'JtJ#"-':',,$*"ffi i
[l txi
"
l[i:, l?}ilti;,"iill',,t1, ;xi .
o, iituT,io
p,"nT i'c
o r o,uo6 D.p u.t*-"'11
" "o r "
n e at tfi
on this Project'
We look forward to your comments on our recommendations'
Very trulY Yours'
WASTE ENGINEERING, INC'
I
t
I
I
t
t
I
I
I
I
FRM:ard
o.2\
ffiz-oy.ozocc: GinnY Tonez
John-Blair
Hazardous Waste o Hydrocarbon Contamination . Water Quality Control o Waste Treatment Design
ilfo5e-frTaGre go r t I Y' u' t
's;;i;tli;urao.,i w uste En gi neer
I
I
l
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
tr
I
T
I
I
I
I
t
T
I
T
T
PrePared for:
SKI SUNLIGHT, INC.
WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
GARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO
BASIS OF DESIGN REPORT
PrePared bY:
WASTE ENGINEERING, INC'
24gO ALCOTT STREET
DENVER, CO 8021 1
(303)480-1700
JUNE 1988
872-034.o20
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
T
I
t
t
t
I
T
I
t
t
I
I
T
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
a
I
I
It
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Descrtption
TNTNOPUCTION AND PURPOSE
EXISTING SMUATION
Facilities
Discharge Permit Standards
WASTEWATER FLOWS AND QUALITY
PROPOSED IMPROYEMENTS
General SYstem DescriPtion
Bar Screen and Flow Measurement
Pond l-aYout, Volumes and Aeration
Chlorination
Snowmakin g/ I rri gation
Page
I
3
3
4
9
9
ll
t2
l4
15
t
I
I
T
t
I
t
il
T
T
I
I
I
!
I
I
T
I
T
t
I
t
I
I
I
T
T
t
I
I
Appendix
A
C
LIST OF APPENDICES
DescriPtion
DESIGN CALCULATIONS
Wastewater DailY Flows QualitY
Inflow Measuring Flume
I-agoon Volumes
Aeration SYstem
Chlorination SYstem
Snowmaking & Irrigation SYstems
SNOWMAKING AND MEADOW IRRIGATION
TECHNICAL REPORTS
Wright-Mclaughlin Engineers' December I 974
Wright-Mcl-aughlin Engineers' December 1975
Forest I-and Treatment in New England' June 25-28' 1985
Nova Tec Consultants, Inc" June l6' 1988
SITE APPROVAL APPLICATION
I
I
lr
lr
B
T
LNT OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Table Name
Table No.
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
Figure I
Pond Volumes and
Effluent Discharge Standards
Estimated Wastewater Flows
L.rur" Raw Wastewater QualitY
Summary of New Treatment Cell Configuration;
30,000 gal/daY Influent
Srrnrnury-of Major ComPonents of the
Snowmaking/lnigation SYstem
-
Fate of Nitrogen via Various Pathways
Page
4
5
7
8
13
17
18
10
Process Diagram
t
t
I
I
t
T
I
T
I
t
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
T
I
INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
SkiSunlight,Inc.operatesaskiareainGarfieldCountynearGlenwood
Springs,Colorado.Partoftheoperationincludesawastewatertreatment
facility for the ski area lodge' condominiums and a resmurant'
Thepermanentpopulationattheareaisapproximatelyl00people.During
peakskiseasonthereisamaximumofabout3,500daytimeusersofthe
arca.Currently,therearenoplansforamajorexpansionofthearea,but
somemoderateincreasesinusagecanbeexpectedaSaresultofgeneral
growth in the region and growth in the ski industry'
Adischargepermitwasissuedtothefacility(NumberCo-0038598)onDecem.
ber 2r, rgg' by the water Quality contror Division of the colorado Depart-
ment of Health. This permit ulio*' for direct discharge from the facility
to Four Mite Creek with limits on flow' PH' biochemical oxygen demand
(BoDs),totalsuspendedsolids(TSS),fecalcoliformbacteria(FC),total
residual chlorine (TRC), total ammonia and oil and grease'
Thetreatmentfacilitywasoriginallyconstructedinl966toincludea
series of three ponds without aeration and without any surface discharges
to Four Mile Creek' At a later date' aeration equipment was added to the
first lagoon to improve on the wastewater treatment for direct discharge to
Four Mile Creek' Additional aeration equipment has also been purchased in
recent Years for the second Pond'
operatingdifficultiesandthemorestringentstandardsintherecentdis-
chargepermit(particularlyammonia)havemadeitimpracticaltomeetwater
qualitystandardswiththeexistingsystem.Waterqualitymeasurements
taken by the Colorado Department of Health in January and February, 1988
have confirmed this fact and a Notice of violation and Cease and Desist
Order was mailed to Ski Sunlight' Inc' on May I l' 1988'
-2-
The Cease and Desist order required, among other things, that Ski Sunlight'
Inc.complywithascheduleforconstructionandmodificationsas.necessary
to bring the plant into compliance with effluent limits by october 30, 1988
or the beginning of the 1988 ski season' whichever comes first'
Thepurposeofthisreportistoprovidethebasisofadesignforimprove.
mentstotheexistingfacility.Submittedwiththisreportinseparate
volumesareengineeringplansandspecificationsforreviewbySkiSun-
light, Inc. and the Colorado Department of Health'
The information contained in these documents can provide the basis for a
mutuallyacceptableapproachformeetingtherequirementsofthecuffent
discharge Permit'
I
I
t
t
I
I
I
I
t
T
I
-3-
EXISTING SITUATION
t
t
I
t
t
I
l
t
I
I
T
I
Facilities
TheculTentwastewatertreatmentfacilityconsistsofthreepondsin
series.Thefirstpondisoperatedasanaeratedlagoonwithasurfiace
aerator.ThesecondandthirdpondswereintendedtooperateaSfaculta.
tivelagoonswithoutaeration.Twoadditionalsurfaceaerators(one2
horsepowerandonelhorsepower)havebeenpurchasedbuthavenotbeen
installed.
Disinfection is achieved by injecting gas chlorine into the effluent as it
passes from the second to the third ponds'
Somefillinginofthefirstandsecondpondsoccurredaboutfiveyearsago
asaresultofsomesloughingofembankments.Thiswasaresultofsatura-
tion of the embankments by uncontrolled drainage from ^ nearby road' This
hasbeencorrectedandadditionalsloughinghasnotoccurred.Afieldsur-
veyofthesitewasconductedinthefirstweekofJunelgsstomeasurethe
actualwatervolumeforeachpond.TheresultsofthisSurveyandvolume
calculationsareincludedintheAppendixofthisreport.Asummaryof
these vorumes, available aeration capacity and liquid detention times at
thepermittedcapacityof30'000gallonsperdayareshowninTablel'
Somesludgedepositionhasoccurredin.thesecondpond,Thisistypicalof
aeratedpondswheresludgeremovalisrequiredonlyonceeveryseveral
years. It does not appear that sludge deposition is interfering substan-
iiAty wittr the process at this time'
Thedetentiontimesandaerationcapacityoftheexistingsystem,however
are not considered under typical engineerint . :i*T^..::^,-Ot
adequate to
meetthelimitsofthedischargepermitinahighmountainclimate.This
is particularly true for the ",i*oniu standards which have historically been
difficult to achieve in cold climates without substantially more aeration
and detention time'
-4-
TABLE I
POND VOLUMES AND AERATION CAPACITY
Pond
I
2
3
Available Aql4llon Operating
volume (gal)
192,000
65,000
62,000
3 19.000
Detention
a
Time (daYs)
6.4
2.2
2.1
10.7
TYPe
Surface
Surface
N/A
Horsepower
5
3
x4
8Total
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
t
I
T
I
.Detention times based on permitted peak flows of 30'000 gallons per day'
The operability of the existing system is further complicated by a lack of
influentandeffIuentmeasuringdevicesanddechlorinationequipment.
ffin.vicinityofthewastewatertreatmentfacilityis
classified for the following .,,",.- recreation' Class 2; Aquatic Life, Class
I (cold); water supply and agriculture' To protect these uses' the Colo-
radoDepaftmentofHealthhasdeterminedasetofstandardstoapplytothe
SkiSunlightfacility.ThesestandardsaresummarizedinTable2andarea
part of the disciarge permit for the facility' The permit expires on
November30,lgg2anditcanbeexpectedthatthesestandardswillapply
through the permit expiration date'
ThewaterqualityviolationsnotedintheNoticeofViolationandtheCease
and Desist order included BoD, fecal coliform, total residual chlorine, oil
and grease. water samples collected during this same period also indicated
ammonialevelsintheoisctrargeinexcessofthepermitlimits.Theam-
monialevels,however,werenotspecificallyreferencedintheNoticeof
Violation.
-5-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
t
EFFLUENT
TABLE 2
DISCHARGE STANDARDS
Discharge Limitations Maximum Concentrations
(Maximum Mass)
EffIuent Parameter
i;*I,,B' ?Bl6tsl il.fJ/'',i[' o ",'
Total susPended solids,
mg/l (lb/daY)
Fecal coliforn bactria,
Number/l'00 ml
Total residual chlorine, mg/l
Flow, MGD
Total ammonia as N, mg/l
(lb/day)
Nov.-Feb.
Mar.-June
July-Oct.
pH - standard units shall remain between 6'5 and 9'0'
Oil and grease shall not exceed l0 mg/l in any
be a visible sheen.
Percentage removal requirements (BOD' limitation)'
In additon to the concentrati?l, li3l{3lion 3,1".i313|"i"?;In additon .to tne corlutrrltratr,tt "il',t;'"'- ioncentration fdr;il" -ilih;tii mean. or tq" 1,991, ',?R' "^"'g:,',1l;e days i
[lir"#Ji " "i,i'" u"' f".ioa .or ., !hinl-, J10],
consecutive daYs
uu,EUtELr 'r Sani-- or the lrithmeticfifteen ( 15) PeI ^---^-imorar
nsecutive days
mean of the
Xrt"r"J^, !'"l,lo,*"'::i["q! ul""upfro*i;;i;iy the same times
ffi;A (85 peicent removal)'
30-daY Avg.
30 (7.5)
7s (18.7)
6,000
N/A
0.03
24.0 (6.0)
14.1 (3.s)
1.2 (0.3)
7-dav Avg.
4s (l 1.2)
tr} Q7.s)
[2,000
N/A
N/A
Dailv Max.
N/A
N/A
N/A
0.009
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
nor shall there
N/A
N/A
N/A
grab samPle
indicated above,
effluent samPles
shall not exce-ed
concentration for
during the same
WASTEWATER FLOWS AND QUALITY
SkiSunlightisprimarilyadayskiareawithovemightaccommodations
limitedtoapproximatelyl00bedsplusarestaurant.Useoftheareais
dominated by the daytime skiers. Thus, the flows to the wastewater manage-
ment facility vary substantially from day to day and season to season'
Estimating design wastewater flows are complicated by the fact that there
are no measuring devices installed on the current system' Monthly water
usagerecordsforlgSl-82areavailableandwereusedtoestimatethe
monthly wastewater flow patterns. The results of this analysis are summa-
ized in Table 3. For projection purposes' it was assumed that daily in-
flows will increase by 33 percent above the water use measured in l98l-82'
Theaveragedailyflowswerethenincreasedby50percenttoestimatethe
design peak daily flows. An average wastewater inflow of 4'000 gal/day was
also added based on field observations made in early June 1988 when use of
the area was at very row levels. The resurting peak day projection of
30,ooo gallons per day matches the current discharge permit limitation of
30,000gallonsperday.ThispeakdailyflowaswellaSanannualflowof
6,1000,000gallons(l8.8acre-feetperyear)wasselectedforthedesignof
the ProPosed imProvements'
Raw wastewater quality data is also unavailable for the facility' Thus'
standard domestic wastewater quality parameters (Metcalf and Eddy' p' 231)
wereusedfordesignpurposes.ThesevaluesaresummarizedinTable4.
I -6-
-7-I
TABLE 3
ESTIMATED WASTEWATER FLOWS
October
November
December
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
Average
Total
(AF/Year)
Average DailY
Water Use
rsal/day)
8,000
6,000
12,000
12,000
1 1,000
12,000
6,000
6,000
5,000
7,000
8,000
8,000
8,500
9.5
Average DailY
Wastewater
(sal/day)
16,000
13,000
22,000
22,000
21,000
22,000
13,000
13,000
13,000
14,000
16,000
16,000
16,750
18.8
Peak DailY
Wastewater
f eal/day)
20,000
16,000
28,000o
28,000'
27,000'
28,000'
15,000
16,000
16,000
19,000
20,000
20,000
" Round 24 hout peak flows to 30'000 gal/day'
200
200
40
2s
l5
0
0
-8-1
TABLE 4
AVERAGE RAW WASTEWATER QUALITY
Biological oxygen demand, mg/l
Total susPended solids, mg/l
Nitrogen
Total as N, mg/l
Ammonia as N, mg/l
Organic as N, mg/l
Nitrate as N, mg/l
Nitrite as N, mg/l
I -9-
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
This report identifies a series of potential
facility to bring the effluent within permit standards'
General System Description
Figure I is u G"ruti. of the system after the improvements have been
made. These include several items:
l.Barscreentoremovelargesolidsandotherobjectswhichcould
interfere with the process equipment'
2. lnfluent measuring flume'
S.Anewpond(celll)toincreasethedetentiontimeofthetreat.
ment system to increase its reliability'
4.Aerationequipmentforcellltoincreasethecapacityofthe
system to remove BOD and ammonia'
5.Yardpipingtoallowabypassofcellsland2toprovideopera-
ting flexibilitY'
6. Chlorine contact tank for disinfection'
T.Expandedsettlingpondforbettertotalsuspendedsolidscontrol,
dechlorinationandanoperatingSumpfortheeffluentsnowmaking
weirtomeasureeffluentdischargeddirectlyto
g. PumP with totalizing
making/irrigation areas'
flow meter to deliver effluent to the snow-
10. Monitoring wells to measure
stream of the treatment facilities'
groundwater quality upstream and down-
Theproposedsystemisdesignedforapeakdailywastewaterflowof30'000
gallonsperday(gpd).Thisisequaltothepresentpermitlimitsand
allows for some growth beyond current flows'
improvements to the existing
and irrigation system'
8. Discharge V-notch
Four Mile Creek'
@
@
9
t._
lJ9
F=a --)
a
OIz-
C'
=&t.lt!
=(,ztJ
UJt-
U)
=
Fz
trJ.=
O I'tlz(9>
=-<:Er{S(9F>k<I (.)
-(9 E>,-\ - l-rl <ruOJT\az-<irJ a= =6E b)A LtJfC)t-H
0(-, o- a6E,Y <:L- o_.@= H
))
LJ
=
tu(9PZ
,t60
ozdoC,>
U)t!ENO
Lrl l"-&
t!Lo>ZG
= lrlE(o
trJ Joo<GLFcz:roat l)
GU(,iz
}E602F)-JozJtsOLJor-
\
J
ElrlF
-)
zI
F
o
&
9
i
I
I
=> I(,o- I(9I
-loo Izo Io-
I
z-9
t-o-
lrJL(JLGIorrjoZP?
E-O
lrjJ-
=YdLJ3 trJO& utl() J6
FGoG
JZ<oo-Fo<OEO lrJ
ooo-z
o
=FO lrloxJ<u<lr
-OEO)Goo(,)oOFjqtE
uO LJc)(oN<
e
Gxg
(,2;2x
lrJ
6
z_
l-O lrJ
-Jox<<U(,L &.oo)tNo/)oOFJ TL<JOTElrj (lt 14o-ur<
U'E!}Joo26iZ
OFIrJ-o(a<oidtH
C)r)r)F
(9uzo-
-o>JE-lrj =.h6
(,
z_
N,-JL<
=r->oLF
lrJz0-uz&o-o
-oJ> J-E-olrJ>\ttlo,
,o)
t!^ELt^l >>t-
o^is-<=
&
UJF:
Jl!a- ulot
g
&
lrJd)
=I(J
Fo
Fzo()
-o:o
I
oo
trJ<E
-c)
I
oF
I
tt
JJ
lrJo
GI
(9lY,
ILJZ io- I
-o i>J IE-- |trl :) !06 i\ l.
.-\--t___3-_-__,i l5 iI ffi qs
i'ltJrI i Nt- Iig+ iiu, I i'-------t---------'
.l_z_ .tu
I TrLa=
a
a
l.JF
E
trJo-
:
ItalsohastheflexibilitytooperateaSanon-dischargingfacilitywith
excellent controls on BoD, suspended solids, ammonia, oil and grease and
chlorine through the snowmaking and irrigation systems' During those
periods of time when permit standards can be met with the expanded aeration
pondsandmodifiedchlorinationsystem,theeffluentcanbemeasuredand
dischargeddirectlytoFourMileCreek.Directdischargeismostlikelyto
be feasible under the warm weather and low wastewater flow conditions in
the spring' summer and fall months'
Design calculations for various system elements are included in Appendix A'
Appendix B COntains four technical reports on meadow irrigation' forest
irrigation and snowmaking as a wastewater management tool' These concepts
in cold climates were originally pioneered in lg'74 by wright-Mcl-aughlin
Engineers in conjunction with th; Upper Yampa water Conservancy District in
steamboat springs, colorado. Since that time' the approach has been re-
fined and reported by various New England ski areas and by Nova Tec Con-
sultants, lnc. in conjunction with Environment canada and the British
columbia Ministry of Environment. The technical documents in Appendix B
provide helpful information concerning the effectiveness of this approach
to wastewatef management'
AdraftsiteapplicationformisattachedasAppendixB.Itisnotclear
at this time whether or not it will be necessary to submit the application
for a full review since the improvements are designed to retrofit an exist-
ing facility to bring it into compliance with discharge permit requirements
without any increases in approved design capacity'
-11-I
Bar Screen and Flow Measurement
The new baruo""n and flow measuring flume will
interceptor line teading to the treatment works'
inch and will accommodate manual cleaning' The
provide effective flow measurements throughottt
be installed in the main
The bar sPacing is one
2-inch Parshall flume will
a wide range of flows
I
-12-
(12,900to303'000gallonsperduy).Itwillbeequippedwithastaffgage
to determine flow rates. The upper limit of 303,000 gallons pel day for
accurate measurements is ten times tr,e peak Z4-hour flow. This will pro-
vide adequate capacity for flooding conditions without plant flooding or
bypassing to a watercourse'
The bar screen and Parshall flume are housed in an enclosed shelter to pro-
videgoodoperatoraccessandtopreventexcessaccumulationsofice.
Measurements at the parshall flume will provide valuable information on the
operating conditions at the facility' They can provide data for evaluating
the performance of the facility and for changing mechanical equipment set-
tings(i.e.,operatingblowerhorsepower).Itwillalsoprovideanaidfor
forecasting the need for additional treatment capacity'
Pond I-avout' volumes and Aerationr :-.--^-.^r r.,, +he .nnsrnrction of an addi-
The existing pond system will be improved by the construction
tional treatment cell, additional aeration and expansion of the final pond
to provide operating flexibility for the snowmaking/irrigation components
of the system.
A summary Of the new treatment cell configuration' aeration capacity and
expected BOD removals is presented in Table 5'
In a multi-cell aeration lagoon, the critical factor for detention time is
the cold water temperature during the winter months' The biological reac-
tions are significantly slowed when the water temperatures approach freez-
ing. For this reason, the new cell 1 will be constructed relatively deep
(10 feet) and static tube subsurface aerators witl be used to conserve
thermalenergy.Usingawatertemperatureof5degreescentigrade,the
detentiontimerequiredtoachieveaneffluentlimitof30mg/lisslightly
more than 18 daYs.
824l
- 13-
c"U
I
2
3
I
Aeration System
TABLE 5
SUMMARY OF NEW TREATMENT CELL
CONFIGURATION; 30'000 GAL/DAY INFLUENT
Volume
lsd)
300,000
192,000
60,000
552,000
Time
(days)
10.0
6.4
2.0
18.4
TyPe
Static tube
Surface
Surface
Operating
Horsepower
3
5
?
t0
BOD Removal
lbs/dav Vo
29 58
l0 20
Z4
Total
The amount of air required to maintain aerobic conditions in the treatment
cellsiscontrolledbysummerconditions.Thisisduetothefollowing:
l.Higherwetertemperaturesincreasebiologicalreactionsandthere-
fore requirements for oxYgen'
2.sludgesSettlingtothebottomsofthecellswillplacedemandon
the amount of oxygen in the wastewater'
j. Some nitrification of ammonia will occur, placing further demands
on the available oxygen'
TheproposedsystemofthreeaeratedcellswillprovideadequateBoDand.TSsremovalstomeetdischargerequirementsonayeararoundbasis.The
ammonialimitations,however,arequitestringentanditwillnotbepos-
sibletorelyontheaerationsystemtomeetrequirementsonaconsistent
basis in the summer months in spite of the warrner temperatures and lower
wastewater flows' For the winter months' even though the ammonia limits
are less stringent, the higher flows and cold water temperatures preclude
heavyrelianceontheaerationsystemmeetingallofthewaterquality
standards.Therefore,thedesignincludesprovisionstodischargedirectly
I -14-
to Four Mile creek when conditions are such that water quality standards
can be met. For those periods when it is not possible to meet standards'
the effluent will be pumped to a non-discharging system of snowmaking and
meadow irrigation.
For more information on the snowmaking and meadow irrigation system' please
refer to those sections of this report'
Chlorination
The existing facility includes equipment for disinfecting the effluent with
chlorine gas. The existing system, however, does not have adequate con-
trols over chlorine contact time and short circuiting of effluent' This
results in the necessity to dose with high levels of chlorine which' in
turn, makes it more difficult to dechlorinate the effluent prior to dis-
chargetoFourMileCreek.Thesituationisfurthercompoundedbythefact
that some components of the chlorination system are in disrepair'
The proposed system should enhance the effectiveness of the disinfection
and simplify its operations. A new contact chamber will be buried below
ground after the third aeration cell. The chamber will be fitted with a
series of baffIes to direct the flow in a manner which will eliminate any
short circuiting. The detention time at peak design flow rates will be
approximately64minutes.Thecapacityofthetankshouldalsobemore
than adequate to meet short terrn peak flows' The length to width ratio of
the flow path exceeds the generally accepted value of 40ll'
The chlorine will be dosed into the tank using the existing pump/eductor
system connected to chlorine gas cylinders. This will require some repairs
and rebuilding of the existing equipment. The design includes the use of
7o tb. chlorine cylinders. At a dosage rate of 15 mg/I, a 70 lb' cylinder
will last for lg days at maximum effluent flows before it requires re-
placement.
I
-15-
Snowmakin g/I rri gation
The purpose or ttre snowmaking/inigation system is to provide a method for
meeting the ammonia limits in the discharge permit' It is anticipated that
the four cell aeration and settling pond system will be capable of meeting
these limits during certain periods of the year' During these times' the
wastewater will be discharged directly to Four Mile Creek' During the re-
mainingpartsoftheyear,theeffluentwillbepumpedtothesnowmaking/
irrigation system. For detailed documentation of this approach' please
refer to the technical reports and calculations in the Appendices.
The primary mechanism for controlling the ammonia levels will be the soil
underlying the snowmaking and irrigation areas. During the snowmaking
season, the effluent will be pumped to a portable snow gun located in ap-
plication areas tA or lB. The snowgun will be attached to one of several
hydrantsviaafirehose.Thisallowsflexibilityforpositioningand
movingthesnowgunasnecessarythroughoutthesnowmakingseason.
During the manufacturing of the snow' approximately l0 percent of ammonia
nitrogen is lost through volatilization (Nova Tec, p'5)' After the snow
has been made, it naturally goes through several freezelthaw cycles before
it finally melts during the spring runoff, Each of the intermediate forma-
tions and melting of the ice crystals in the snowpack tends to "purify" the
ice crystals and reject contaminants such as ammonia in the meltwater'
Approximately 90 percent of the ammonia is removed from the snow in this
fashion in the first 25 percent of the meltwater (Nova Tec' p' 7)' This is
consistentwiththeresultsoftheWright-lr4cl'.aughlinstudyatSteamboat
SpringsinlgT5(Wright-Mclaughlin,|g75,p.3)andskiareasinNewEngland
(Reed & crites, p. 19). This concentration of the ammonia in the initial
meltwater is relatively independent of snow depth (6 to l3 feet) and only
moderately depended on moisture content (30 to 38 percent)'
The ammonia in the meltwater percolates slowly into the soil and is stored
until it is subsequently decomposed by aeration and bacterial action into
I - l5-
nitrates. The natural storage capacity of the soil for ammonia is substan-
tial. It can range from 2,000 to 15,000 lbs' per acre (L-and Application of
Water, Vol. II, p. 6). The fate of the ammonia can follow one of several
pathways once it has decomposed into nitrate'
l. Further bacterial action can denitrify the nitrate into nitrogen
gas and release it to the atmosphere'
2.Nitratescanbetakenupbytherootsystemofthemeadowgrasses
and subsequently removed by harvesting of the grasses'
3. Nitrates can percolate into the groundwater and move away from the
site via groundwater flows to Four Mile Creek'
similar phenomena occur with the irrigation of the effluent during the
non-snowrnaking season. In this case' the ammonia is applied directly to
the soil in the irrigation water. This will be achieved by a portable
sprinklersystemconnectedtothesnowmakinghydrantsinareaslAandlB
and flood irrigation in area 2'
A summary of the major system components for snowmaking/irrigation system
is provided in Table 6. This system follows generally accepted guidelines
for systems of this type and should provide a practical technique for con-
trolling ammonia levels for those periods of time when direct discharge to
Four Mile creek is inappropriate. The fate of the nitrogen in the waste-
water via the various pathways under the assumption that no effluent is
discharged directly to Four Mile Creek from the aeration cells is shown in
Table 7.
Each of the application areas will be controlled to maximize infiltration
of the meltwater and irrigation water into the soil' This will be accom-
plished by a series of control berms along the lower edges of the applica-
tion areas. These berms will be adequate to control any initial meltwater
and all of the irrigation water applied. lt is anticipated that during
peaksnowmeltrunoffconditions,therewillbeSomedirectrunoffofthe
purified snow directly into Four Mile Creek'
t
-17-
TABLE 6
SUMMARY OF MAJOR COMPONENTS
OF THE SNOWMAKING/IRRIGATION SYSTEM
Settling/Control Pond
Volume
Detention time @ 30,000 gPd
Pump capacitY
Snowmakinq SYstem
Application areas lA and 1B
Liquid volume
Annual snow dePth @ 35Vo water
Equivalent water dePth
Total nitrogen aPPlied
Total nitrogen aPPlied
Average daily snowmaking time @ peak
wastewataer flow 30'000 galldaY
Irrigation System
Application areas lA and lB,2
Uquid volume
Annual water dePth
Peak daY water dePth
Total nitrogen aPPlied
Total nitrogen aPPlied
Average daily irrigation time @ peak
wastewater flow of 30,000 galldaY
100,000 gal.
3.3 days
100 gPm
2.8 ac.
2,829,000 gallYr
8.9 ft.
37 inches
524lbslYr
187 lbs/aclYr
5 hours
3.5 acres
3,105,000 gal.
33 inches
0.3 inches
484 lbs/Yr
138 lbs/aclYr
5 hours
and
be
of
via
- l8-
I
Monitoring wells drilled to bedrock will be placed
downstream of the snowmaking and irrigation areas.
sampled to determine background water quality levels
ammonia nitrogen, if &nY, reaching the surface
groundwater flows.
both upstteam
These wells can
and the amount
stream system
Total N
(lbs/yr)
I,551
388
155
I,008
630- I,260
0-378
76-100%
TABLE 7
FATE OF NITROGEN VIA VARIOUS PATHWAYS
Raw wastewater
I-ess losses in aeration cells (25%)
lrss losses in snowmaking/irrigation
application (10%)
Net available for application to soils
I-ess crop uptake (180-360 lbs/aclyr)
Balance for return to groundwater/surface
water system as nitrates
Overall N removal efficiencY
I
APPENDIX A
DESIGN CALCULATIONS
Date t.fzo lb7 Sheet / of
-
Proi. No'. t F1z- 07+ ' o rc
Prol. Name SKt SoPuAtfr- htw-P
Dei. ly l\cr- = . -ckd. BY-
I
lsuulect
I+
l,bJrrrr-lfb' lrl?Lc€-r@w1; fi.N)
( erul
--
-{lhe
2l,ii
I1-*.ooo _
-
1,'
---):-----llrooo
13 oo
I-l
1r:
Itereo
1b,750
lg. g
_"i
/4r4 e,
.FCA I<
\rt
cDo
@o
'ottt-S .
l, o?gcRle?TeJS
sheet z- of z'
hoj. No. -Proj. Name
Des. BY.Ckd. BY
I
J..__t -
:lll
I
,T
lr
*- tt-'Aagd (F
- TtrftPI
!
7g:rftt '- --'. :
Ala*ol rA l
p)*etz
!=]- '
,ba I
,lL{ ;'17a
'
liil
I
-$ lo,w o
312o
JP,bn
I _l-j ;
4o
25
.tf
o
]teqs ._;ah
Sheet / of I
w"i'iilf iz:
o"1,. gv ruc ckd' BY
>w = )r3OrC
lPartu 7en r
I
,ut 4 ir
'l
3q o@ c*u *' PAt
il-Utr, JJ.Kfix' @-tu^)
l--
-) -- --I
--l : -- --__t--
1
l;1po
i4s 7 ._i
.!----L-':/
,l
--i -i -:
'i
l'
It^r/^4- t - O,*1l_
'ee* - )
I
lr
t
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
E - (l rsleu-
I
I
I
I
T
t
I
T
.l
i .-1---i -rll
,ir,.1.
?o,8 t
LB
_1
?.-.r1.,. ::>.:a.#'i --,.Yt44t'*'ir....:
,.ii..I
t
II
'i
{rf,
!Gollrargaaei.t.claon
,lo.
t
F,
Ii
C,F3tz
3
2C
SECTIOX L.L
Ficurc 19.4orholt f,unc dimcnrionr. (Shca I ol t') f O3-D{70'
iiorncrv U.S. Soil Con*trstioa Scwicc')
fi-
!
F,
T
t
a
c]i
]aa.atla al llratl .rS X raraXal r.a drad
a/, tt.. Col..aa. &.la lBrlrl, litl'tr' t'
"'
1.
,,ao. Cab.-a alala l.diit ItGt'r.J
'rlldf,
i"l
,r, 4...r lO tr t. ld D lou , '-a alr ' at'u t tt'ttt flff f 'rt'
f ifprc rg.-Fonholl f,unc dlrncnrimr' (Slrd t o' t') tO3{..86'l '
a{
..trtrI Anglc
ll A l^'IE c 0 E T G t{x x x P R I t rrrur lrrrtrur
l, ri T ri rl rlt a1
0 n
I
I
ti'l
lrr
o Ool
.@
.03
ot9
.tl7
r rl
o,lr
lz,r!l
0 eii
ol
I
I
I
2
4
6
0
'l?
o6x
ics
lmf
''e3tl
,t to
0 !
rl
6
0
I
t
r0
o
o
I
,l
0lt I
ol'i
i rll
lz+
I
0,5
1e
r lo
' l.
zlo
rlo
1io
rl0
610
'lotln
2
2
a
1
5
5
6
6
1
I
c
6
9
o
6
o
6
o
6
.t
' !,1ti0
!i2
l4
ll
40
1a
at
3.0
5'.
I 2
?
a
a
a
t
5
6
6
1
7
ol
rO
.lt
Da.l
Dl
1l
Pl
L.l
I
I
2
2
3
a
5
5
I
t
a
,t
I
0
6
0
0
0
0
o
o
()
I
I
2
I
I
5
6
I
t
t
il
,l
ol
ci.l
4l
9
20
215
rlorlo
rlo
slo
rlo
,io
!0
t0
!r0
2
?
2
2
2
2
2
?,
I
I
0
o
0
0
o
o
o
o
o
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
o
o
o
0
0
0 3
!
!
r
I
!
I
l
!
!
!
to,lo
ri!,lr
,1,rll
rls
,1.
r16
,1.
r16
0 i4l
ht
lg
It
lrr9
le
lel9
I'la
2'll{
3,.t
r lrol
5,6
5ll
7,!l
c iottol ti
,rlr1
r2r5
tsi!l
,i.,i'
rC,lc,i!
t,l
zlo,lo
?io
210
alo
o ?
2
?
z
2
2
2
2
2
2
0lllr
ls
l:lr
l,l!l!l!lr
.05
.09
.il
.t5
a?
.51
t.!
r.6
2.6
l.o
3.5
t9
E,9
16 l
?a.6
l!. I
501
679
t56
r0! 5
r?t a
l!9 5
a
10,0
,zlo
,rlo
rol o
zllo
rolo
l.olo
lrclo
a:0
6ltrlotrr
rr'o
12l t
rel o
ni r
t4
r6
?5
a5
?1
27
0
0
o
0
o
o
0
o
t?
ta
ra
21
6v
a!
L*
0
a
a
o
a
t
a
ttr?l
rct4l
,5'orl o
rrl o
rol rl
rol rt
lmlet
.10
rlo
6io
?lo,lo
7iO
rlo
7ro
r
a
6
5
6
6
6
0
o
0
o
o
0
o
o
0
0
0
o
o
o
o
o
o
I
I
I
I
I
6
6
9
0
0
o
0
0
I iri
I lrirls
zls2il2lr
alrzlr
I 0
0
o
0
o
0 19.
lrl9
ls
lc
li
6
t
c
r0
r!
r5
20
a7
?o0
!30
600
r0o0
r200
r50o
eo
DOO
affih l.l ! l/g ,r.i; ld.'.ra.di, ariFaa Cilctl.r la
' --,- ':::--
fl-a :i
I i,l1l
'lo
,t
I
fc a3.
roll
PLAil
.1
'l I
fl;r1s..s, ,fz Sheet / ot--
Proj. No.
PfO'. Name €<-t 3u, tr rt 6 r{T-
De;. ByPEA ckd. By-
I
lt
Date d/a r /ae Sheet a of-
PrOi. NO. C77 t- a3+.o1o
Proj. Name 5rc r 5'.rt-rl .l6H-?-
Des. BY>: - Ckd' B
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
g2;11s b/t/n Sheet 3 of-
PrOi. NO. ,nt-03,|, ato
Prd. NamQ 3r<r S uxr rJF':HT '
O"i. Oy :=^ Ckd. BY
-
Date ult /a*' Sheet 4 of-
PrOi. NO. ,R.-t - c'-1. ot O
--'-.t a -- ?. -rr ra-Plfft"l Nall" <r<-r €"-'stl-'t.e'Hr
ii*. sy:= Ckd' BY
rl
rl
I
I
I
II
lr
lr
lr
oare ofzq/aa Sheet / of {
Proi.No. r t8t^-o34 ozD
Prd'. Nam e S Zt 5 ,t^sut a"- u)wtP
Oel. ey il-b Ckd. By-
i?tgi)vaMlsublect <ton, 9691r-
EoP f*Wco,
lr
I
t.-
7@- 64,0 = ///, v3p
ut
-l l
.o o ,b4,o ta
-,v
sa-
I
= Ze mrlZok<c'
nurJS l
b)t pteR
t-i-.?
tt= O,7-7b
K = O, t3R
I
I
Date
Proj. No. -Proj. Name
Des. By.
Shet 7- of 5
Ckd. By
I
_170
84- 44'7
lir
, Kat
'1
3q,3
lii,L i ----:lll
i
'-t--;;
-?_ _ LI,
I.l I zQz.J t-J-.}-,'..-
I
Il
1
+ g*ltAuDir11ao
i--
lfr=
f,lp,6 .Su
,lN ?uo i 3eo frrN
I Date Sheet 3 of €
Prof. No.
Proj. Name
Ckd. ByDes. BY.
ll
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
T
I
T
)._------
vE|AAN
-; --1--++-
BoP
11
l
_7+
I
t{I
I
I'l
I
-l
.--'
il
LJ)-' r-
!
'9o C
l
sheet 4 oi S
I
II
ftoj. No.
Proj. Name
Ckd. ByDes. By.
I
I
I
T
T
I
I
**18;
I
I
T
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
.t-b,oto eF i i Iffi*"=-Ezz-*il :
i
-)-- ,-1=.ffn e
1:-r-i1
-
-- - J -e ?42'g'iLt, - - l l. I*-*;. --t,bs
r< 'tttbo t -r? * dEIf :,c 17* p,y?'*., Bu?tlEs
aR, _
AEv --- 1lt
't + ?741= Lbq t\
--ll,ll
Sheet 5 of 5
Prof. No.
Proj. Name
Des. By- Ckd. By
Trtcta*.zt rtT 8,@ trT eTnctA*.zt fr 8,@trTe i_
--i-....--li.ii
t
rl
lr
lr
l:
l
ii:'
_, , I _-r_
,l
i-r
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
t
tl
lr
lr
lr
lr
gals b 1z= /a* Sheet I oI I
Prof. No.
Proj. Name
Ckd. ByDes. By.
*.*= 1* --,r^,
I
7
----{o5.a== --f
i;i;'+ t_ttlI F
:ffi:.t1
Fu3;ts fut _
frt5
i
-.tla
Ii l-l
I>:-l L.lolV
i
:i.-iii:i:
1:1:::;:mll
.: !l:::: : ]::i]:: :,.: ]
gc,!t,,Y
,
{
1
..,. :-:ildIl,r?
:l:;'.,l.:::i1l1:1,1::,.:.,.:l
Zv,*,o4, .+rttrlS *tqaC
I
ANCO COIYCRETE, INC.
5880 Sheridan Btvrt. - (303) 428'5021
Aruada, Colorado 80003
.:.:,i..i'.il
.':',,V,l
I ::r:::::i:i:lii:::::::::::::::r:::::i::
V..,,..,.,,,,,:,,,.-,...i.,.,.',.,.
1 ..":.:...:......' :::':''i'''::;'I ,..
:r ,:::,:1::]
g'
TRAP/ INTERCEPTOR
I NT E RC EPTORARCO TRAP /
iiii. . - Sheet-of-aI l)',lfi q te '" -
I Proi' No' a? t -a 31 'o t o
Proi' Name 6K'r =ar t-r l- '/- H'r
I pei. gyp -^*=-aerckd. BY-I Des' sY'
')uD,ect l ' i
-\
lr
I
O* ,t* tX Sheet ,J of +
w"i.NJ ' nr- o=a' uo
Prdi Ni,ne srt soPt'tt"xr u;orv
Des. By.
i
r:E
llH
llE
l:E lrfuEv
LlgsS
iIrl_H
I-T-
i-j--
__,-;--- -.
- .- _---:. ..-
l,lrrli
- t-t-j -+I
sa?- --)tu'rll
,r.loV (1,
---lzD I - 4L I
-74'--.".t24-) 4! i ibt';-
--- 6; - of,;-.-1,14 . I ,cilr lt-.l I
lrlr-ffi-t-r--i-
tr
rl
I----------'ilr
,l--r-r_f_--
I
,l
il r,- f-
iill-i--1 -f lllr
lr,: r-i I -t^tu'.lA
lr:ll
-il'l--,
--i :-T l
r--i-l -i-l-l-l
I
iilr,llt
lu
aS
.b5
tzt
lLt
I
I
Date sheet 2-. of 4
Proj. No.
Proj. Name
CKd. BDes. By
ht"r* 'y
II
lr
lr
l:
lr
A&d-,-t
Aa 5 otgt
Il-l-lso - l,rzto
,, -l -- I
frffu'se Ni
p4t)Yets =
, _ nip y1,. t c.tt ztg! --bt:;nH.aE .-io, g, r "), ?' msueg.-d NoT 1t*xeu
{i' 'g;o-;
r s nrrbn 1-( o dsilr)u^r'R€p to
^).
;,it",Df ,ry-f itt- . -- I -:_ :.4;. . ->--it^fi,"i -h?FL,"o
Ltt- oin6w a*il trr t5.' - -l lr,ltla1tt-G +ttp ulst uxtz.f ut* F€4A'U.-
fio.t r. ,, o)a t t- -:I,&rf-.L'A . , -y! f :, , .- ^ ,!* 'ro!|?,^u
1,-.- )t) tbg,t" no ltnt- *tottE' T,tRooGt lorv -6*EPo'otto
I -pAER.- Ap V' -ffisla G 'iot- rtKED uP t3V -i-
: A!r-P-r--DaES {eFr vlotaE,.--Sfian-sfrvr9hR9'
t I l
l, oo 6 U/T.
,
l- -:- , -J
I
I
ztg lL il rR wA 't-E
-:EB il. is p- nc*E-JeP -rcnR-I l- I I
II -.----
I
Sheet 3 o( *
Ckd. By
Proj. No. -Proj. Name
Des. By.
l
,--i,.,- -.-r-
I,irl''- -, ',-'
i
I
I
lr
lr
lr
l:
lr
@,, fr7,soo,z\ooo ! b1z,oe6 -z\ooo i thlOo6
'l^5?n gS"a. ,.2,erfl MO rtfibi 6',7', Ar--.----#; A,7 lF =_ 24,fl-Ar
/o_e_GtY-__3@
YJG. S
z1O
'--- 3
)41oo
t-
z, g A-t,
aleLTt4*7€<
Date Sheet 4 ot *
Proj. No.
Proj. Name
Ckd. ByDes. By.
, 4o3,Po
I
i
i--i-- --
i
-T- -f-rirl
I
I
I
I
-t4@Jam
- -l1o,looO.
4Al- _
I
-f lF,
/4^_
0
I
dr*
)0t_
t-
-+-
I
I
I
I
Ii --r
1-1 --riL_+
rfilN RsPoe-7 lltLl&te 4/-tN KgfoET
ftlfuc*niaO Donni-g 7D
ilattoo*s ftRtfl j
I
APPENDIX B
SNOWMAKING
AND
MEADOW IRRIGATION
TECHNICAL REPORTS
IJPPEH YAMPA I^,ATEFI EGINBEET'O'"' GIIBTFIIET
BTEAMEGIAT BPFIINOBT cCtLoFlAE'C,
sEw:GiE EFFLLTENT FIENtrIVATIGIN
IN MGIUNTAIN MEAtrltrlWS
.I.7'] ET'IAECH /INEI G'IMG,|U'?;IA?IC!N FFC'JII:T
IY
MCLAUGIHLIN ENGIINEEFIS
EIENVEFIT coLclFlAE,cl
EtEctUltEA' 'L74
732 - 63 WFltGl{T -
i
K,-t'
tO?aALD C. i'GLIUOHLI"
XINNG'H I, WiIOHT
HALFOIo:. ttlcxlox
g0uGLAt l. aovEiL
,OHL l. LcLANE
f Hotaaa w. r,C,tilt
,rxtal: D. rHlttlELo
WRIGHT'Mc LAUGHLIN ENGINEERS
rNolxGSi lNo coNtuLtANt'
l"o aLgo.lt 3?ll3t
Dtxvti' goLotaDo 'ottlttot) "'''tol
.rEr o?..Gt -T:::3I:iIo't'
t. o' 'ol El' f?3aaagar vrLLao3, coEaas x"t
afr3t. GOLOIA@tlo! !
28 JanuarY 1975
GOLtL:?E GXOI! EEI lt'G tElvlcls
I't YHE 3'EGI LTY 7iELO3 OF
WATET 'U??LY
AND OI3'RIIUTIOI{
watEl aiaD aEwaoE rrEatMENT
IEWAGE COLLEGIIOIT A'{O IEUSE
lxou6?llaL waarE3
a?oira oRAlr{aoE
?LooD col{TioL AXO
olH:l waiEi<'FlExrEd PtoJEcr3
llr. Loy Ardrey, Pres i dent
Board of Di rectors
Upper YamPa tlater
Box 5220
Steamboat SPrIngs'
ConservancY District
Golorado 80499
Gent I emen:
The report on the 1974 sunmer research and demonstratl:n Ptogram on land
application of tl.ii"a i"*"g" "fiir"it is attached' The report is entitled
'rsewage Ef f luent R"no'"tion in l{ountain Headows '"
Field work for the surmer program cornmenced in t{ay and continued through
the f i rst week oi=no'*iltl iiZ'*, 'i tn trt"-]?tt. sewage ef f I uent appl i cat i on
being made by sprinkler on O.toUl,"iitt' This.lol Ulrdget research and demon-
stration program,sponsored by ;;; Diiirict and additional ly supported by
other agencies and'private ri.rr]i", "ia.a,i,npo.i"nt
knowledge to the field
of wastewater renovation under gli"."ily adverse climate, croP' and soil con-
ai .i""i i n a hi th al ti tude setti n9'
ThereportbeginswithConclusions,RecorrmendationsandReportSurrmary.
Following that ir" r".ious sectioni of the repori a""ling with specific
aspects of the Project'
}JestronglyrecorrmendthatyourProgramcontinueforatleastonemoreirri.
gation season.
-ii; mechani""r "[a-llectrical equipment, t!9 piping' the
irrigation system, and the test;1.;t-;;" ivlitaute for 1975' lt is our
opinion that signif icant r"rt"."i, and denron"'"lion data would be generated
by continuing this progt"*' P."'haPS using-personnel from Colorado State
University for management. W" *"[ia-i" pf""t"a'io assist the University in
any way Possible'
Yours verY trulY,
tIR I GHT-ilcLAUGHL l N ENG I NEERS
KRW: ms
Attachmen t
732-63
Il
tI
T
T
T
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
Ir
lr
lr
t
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
t
T
I
I
II
I
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
UPPER YA},IPA }JATER CONSERVAIICY DISTRICT
STEAHBOAT SPRINGS, COLORADO
Appreciationisgrateful.|.y.acknowledgedtotheOfficersandBoardof
Directors of the Upper Yampa w"a.i-Coi,tti"n"y oitttict for their generosity
in sponsoring and ?in"n.iaity ,rppoiting this research and dernonstration
P rog ram.
REPORT ON
SE}'AGE EFFLUENT RENOYATION
IN HOUNTAIN HEADOWS
Charles GregorY
Sumner Hackett
Elvis StarbuckLoy ArdreY
Wes Signs
John Fetcher
Kel Iy Klumker
Thegenerosityofthefollowingorganizationsforfinancialassistance
is grateful lY acknowledged'
Colorado River l'later Conservation District
|,1t. tJerner Water and Sanitation District
Northwest Counci I of Governments
Ski CountrY EnterPrises
Aspen Ski CorPoration
URIGHT-HCLAUGHLI N ENG INEERS
ENGINEERI NG CONSULTANTS
DENVER, c0L0RADo
DECEI.IBER, I974
Page
I
6
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
t
I
Letter of Transmittal
coNcLUSloNS, RECOHHENDATIoNS AND
Conclusions ' '
Reconmendations '
Sunmary . . "
:
TABLE OF CONTENTS
REPORT SU}.IHARY
sEcTloN l, INTRoDUCTI0N
Land APP|ication of Effluent' '
Research and Denronstration Program
7
t-l
t-2
t-,{
I l-l
I l-l
il-5
Acknourl edgments
SECTION II - PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Loca t i on
Si te DescriPtion
Cl imate
sEcTloN I I t, PHYSICAL FACILITIES
General .
Drainage SYstem . .
I rrigation SYstem
Honitoring SYstem.
Livestock Control
SECTION IV, OPERATION OF IRRIGATION SYSTEH
SECTION V, SAHPLING AND TESTING
Soil SamPling
Hay Samples
Water SamPl ing
Ground Water Levels
SECTION VI, COHHUNITY ACCEPTANCE
SECTION VII, TECHNICAL REVIEW
l,Jastewater Renovat i on
Creek Water I rrigation
Soil Constituents
Crpe Res.Ronse . .'^: _:_:_:
e iound \,later and Dra inage
Aeroso I
LITERATURE CITED
GLOSSARY OF TERHS
r-lt-l
t-2
t-3
t-4
v-l
v-4
v-4
v-9
vil -l
vlr-4
vil-5
vil-6
vil-6
vil-7
L-l
G-l
rl
rl TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
FIGURE I I.I' -iRitGATtoN AND DRAINAcE LAYour
'O'L",II^},, PHYSICAL AND CHEHICAL PROPERTIES' ROUTT SOIL (ZVO)
TABLE II-2
AVERAGE I{ONTHLY PRECIPITATION AT STEAMBOAT SPRINGS
TABLE I I.3
AVEMGE HONTHLY TE}'IPEMTURES AT STEAHBOAT SPRINGS
TABLE IV.I
SUHHARY OF IRRIGATION APPLICATION IN INCHES
FIGURE IV.I
H I STOGRA},I OF SEWAGE EFFLUENT I RR IGAT ION AND T'IATER LEVELS
CENTER TEST HOLE
TABLE V-I
SUI.IMARY OF SOIL TESTS FOR THE HAY 17' 197\ SAHPLES
TABLE V.2
SUHHARY OF SOILS TESTS FOR THE AUGUST 29, I97I{ SAHPLES
STEAI4BOAT SPRINGS, SUHI'IARY OF
Page
r t-2
il-4
I r-5
n-7
I V-2
IN
tv-3
u-2
v-3
totfirlils
ExpER r HENTAL pLors NEAR srEMBoAr spR rNGs , .HEH I cAL
AND NUTR|TIoNAL ANALYSIS oF xni iniprEs' JULY 9' 197\ v-5
TABLE v-4 -., ^.r-?,r,^ rrrr v o tqztr v-5
SUHI.IARY OF YIELDS FRO}'I FIRST HAY CUTTING' JULY 9"I9T\
'o'firliis ExpERrflENrAL pLors NEAR srEAMBoAr spRrNGS, .HEHIcAL
AND NUTRITrouni-nnALysts or nni inxples, sEPTEI{BER 5, 197\ v-7
'O'IiNX'f,S EXPERIHENTAL PLOTS, SUI{HARY OF YIELDS FROH SEPTEHBER
6,1974 HAy iuiiinC-e*o wniEn-'exo HurnlENr APPL.cArloNs v-8
TABLE V-7
TII{BERS EXPERIHENTAL PLOTS NEAR
WATER QUALITY I{ONITORING DATA
.ri
FIGURE V.I' '-iiir PLor 5, IJATER LEvEL HoNlroRlNG
'O'!E,XII-I,,,U'*, POLLUTANT REMOVAL EFFICIEIICIES' TEST PLOT
No. 5 FoR .luni, Juli' AND AUGUsT' 197\
*,!E,XII-I,,L,,*,
POLLUTANT REHOVAL EFF IC I ENC I ES ' TEST PLOT
No. 5 FoR seiiiHsiR-AND ocroBER' 197\
'o'firll,'r3*roLorrD wArER FoR JUNE ' JULY ' AND AUGUST CoHPARED
wrir nEHovATED sEwAGE EFFLUENT
TABLE VI I.4
SOIL ANALYSIS CHANGES IN TOP 6 INCHES
TABLE VI I-5
CROP YIELD COHPARISONS
v- l0
v-14
vll-2
vil-3
vll-l{
vil-5
vil-5
coNcLUS I ONS , RECOII{ENDAT I ONS ANo REPORT St'l',tt4ARY
.CONCLASIONS
.ThefollowingconclusionsarebaseduPonafieldresearchanddemon-
strationprogramoflandapplicationofsewageeffluentinlgT4inamoun-
tain hay meadow at 7050 feet elevation in the Yampa valley' colorado'
The program was sponsored by the Upper Yampa River Conservancy District'
1. I'he appli,eati.on of treated eettaTe effluent to high mountai'n hay meadou
ie a ptaetieal meana of fwmi.shi.ng irrLgati.on uatet otd maero an'd mLero
ttutrientrt.eedeofthegrags.TheYampaRiverValleyisagriculturally
oriented and a need for irrigation water exists' Artificial fertiliza-
tionofmeadowswasmoreextensivelyPracticedpriortothelgT4fer-
ti I izer price increase. The nutrient value of sewage effluent is I
recognized bY ranchers'
2. Cateful moni.torLng of effluent Lartd. treatrnent eites i's a neeessara
aspeet of farrn and uasteulater management' The measuring of water
tablelevels,samplingforPollutantsbeforeapplicationoftheefflu-
ent,comPUtingofcroPevaPotransPiration'measuringforpollutantsin
thedrainwater,andcroPresPonsemonitoringareessentialasPectsto
good system oPeration so that potential problems can be identified
and corrected in a timelY manner'
g.. Raneherst aeeeptartee of Eanage effluent use for irri'gation u)as found
tobegood..Generally,sitevisitationsbyranchersintheareaindi-
vcatedtheysawnothingwrongwiththeuseofsecondaryeffluentfor
irrigationwater.PersonalobservationandcormentSbytheranchers
revealedthattheyPerceivedthecropreceivingthreeinchesperweek
ofsewageeffluentwasdeeperanddarkerincolor'moreluxuriant,and
exPeriencedfewerweedsthanthecontrolplotsirrigatedwithcreekwater.
4. The u.rbat atea dteller reaeti,on to irrLgation of tny ui'th sa'tage effluent
uas faootable. operation of the demonstration project has indicated that
land treatment can be socially acceptable. During the course of the first
season, several si te vi si tations were made by various representatives of
tl
I
I
t
I
t
I
I
t
t
t
I
I
T
I
iI
I
I
I
J
I
l
T
I
I
T
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
iI
I
groups such as the UPPer
Conuni ss i oners, C i ti zens
study), League of Uomen
Yampa }Jater Conservancy District' Routt County
Advi sory Conmi ttee (Steamboat faci I i ties planni ng
Voters,andtheCityofSteamboatSprings.
Generallythevisitorsreportedthattheywereimpressedwiththesite
oPeration.TheydidnotexPressanyrePugnanceduetothefagtthat''sewaget|
wasbeingapplied.Also,theygenerallyfeltthataslongasthesystemwas
nothurtingthegrassorthesoil,orcontaminatingtheair,thentherewas
noreasonnottoPursuelandapplicationoftreatedsewageeffluent.
S.Appli,eati,onofEanageeffluenttohaymeadoudi.d,noteauseanymeasured
o" Pereei.tsed adtteree isrpaete '
6.EperationofLannappli.eati.onfacilitieseanbeaeeompli,shedui,thout
ereating a rui.aru7ce or dotngrdnng ile oliaeent enoirorunent,. Site selec-
tion will normally play an important role in this regard'
7. \'he oi.sual i,mpaet of the Land applieati,on eystern artd' grass areaa uag
faoorable.Thetrigr,sewageeffluentapplicationratePlotwasmore
luxuriant appearing, thicker' and greener than the four other plots'
g. The fi,eld erperLment did not tetseal any health hazatde art'd' it di'selosed
oery Li.ttle pereeitted threat or eoneerm to the health of on-site uorkers'
Visitorstendedtowalkfreelythroughtheirrigatedplotsduringirriga.
tionandimmediatelyfollowingirrigation.Thisdemonstratedtheneedfor
landmanagementwhichwouldrestrictmovementofvisitorsduringirriga-
tion oPeration Periods'
g.Thei.rui.gationoperati.onLyLthseb)ageeffluentuasfreeofobnoriousodors
duri-rtg the entire fi''tte-month operati'on peri'od'
10. The eqerinental plots iwigated. uith seaage effluent eryeri'eneed good
cropresponae.Theeffluent-irrigatedcropyietdfromthesecondsample
cutting shovred excel lent regrowth for fal I pasture'
'
t
iI
I
I
T
I
T
T
t
I
I
T
I
T
I
I
(
I
T
4
process in the fall, increasing armonia and kjeldahl nitrogen removal
rates above that of the surmer.
15. Iotal phoeplorouo ?emoual vtith the Latd application portion of the treat-
ment eystqt ave?aged about 86 peneent for the June tlwough Augast period.
Pbosphorous removal in September and October dropped to 47 percent. The
5-month averlge phosphorous removal for the entire period averaged 15 percent.
16. Suepertd,ed eolill rernooal uith the Lann applieation portion of the treat-
ment system al)eraged Ze p,e"eent fot June through Auguet. Overal I suspended
solids removal through the entire system was estimated at 93 percent for this
period. The subsurface drainage iystem, however, did not have a gravel envelope
and apparently picked up colloidal soil material which was measured aS suspended
sol i ds.
1.7, High applieati.on ratee require afii.fieial eubeutfaee drainage to maintain
aerobie eoil eonlitions utd treabnent efficacg. Plot 2 receiving three inches
per week of creek water tended to be soggy. Plot 5 receiving three inches per
week of sewage effluent experienced reduced treatment efficiency in September
and 0ctober probably due to reduced drainage effectiveness. tt is an impor-
tant conclusion of this study that sound management of subsurface water with
artificial drainage is a must at these high appl ication rates.
18. Nahtral soil constituents, including coLloids ard organie material,are
pollutants i.f they migrate to the drain tile effluent anl. the streon A por-
tion of the subsurface sampled water pollutants which were measured in the
laboratory were derived frorn the soil as a result of inflow to the drain tile
and observation holes. This was due to the lack of a gravel drain envelopevand the fact that such instability can be expected during the first year of
operation prior to the establishment of a balanced regime.
19. Soils uhich are ehallou, elouly perrneable, arld und.erlain by intpemsious elay
eubeoil can be used for Lattd applieation of eeuage effluent. The test area
soils are slovrly to very slowly permeable. The 28 inches of soil is under-
lain by a tight subsurface layer whlch prevents much downward percolation.
Tight soils are effective renovators of wastewater under proper management.
I
t
T
T
T
I
T
I
T
I
I
I
I
T
T
I
t
I
T
20. Surface runoff attd. eroeion uaa
inch per week application rates, a
tight soils, surface runoff was not
of erosion.
ttot eaperLenced. Even with three-
fifteen percent slope, and relatively
observed and there was no indication
21. Selection of Lmd treabnent eitee ehould be based upon careful eoi.L
etu"diee and enoirontnental aseAeethent to optimtze operation, intprooe effi-
ei,ency, and, redtee ooerall eoata. The area used for the Upper Yampa pro-
gram was selected on the basis of low initial installation cost and ready
availability of the demonstration site by a cooperative and willing land-
*,ner. Topographic conditions were about as severe as would be found in
the Yampa Valley for this purpose.
22. The natttral ettean qtalifu appeated to deterLorate notieeably doumstreon
of the aerated Lagoon seeondany effluent direet etre@t diseharge in August
tlwough 1ctober. The deterioration perception was based on algae growth
in the stream. This was apparent to casual visitors.
23. Reuee of effluent for irui,gation purposes ean free eleot etreatt uater for
other uael. With increasing recreational demand on the Yampa River, local
citizens are becoming keenly aware of the impact of water quality and low
flow on these recreational opportunities. For example, recycling of
effluent to the land for irrigation purposes could improve low flov,, water
quality to support a fish population.
24. Poorly plarmed and poorly engineened Land. treahnent systems maA eause
problems. The layout and design of a land treatment system requires strong
inputty many discipl ines, particularly members of the agricul tural sciences
and i rri gation engi neeri ng.
L
I
I
tI
I
T
T
T
I
I
I
I
T
T
I
T
T
I
(
T
T
RECO.IMENDAT I ONS
l. The Upper Yampa River Conservancy District land application field re-
search and demonstration program should be continued through 1975, The
program operation should be taken over by an agency such as Colorado State
Uni versi ty.
Z. The operational procedures should be modified based on oPerating experi-
ence of the program duri ng 1974, 'i ncl uding:
A. Continue applications of creek water on Plot 3 at about one inch per
week.
B. Continue application of sewage effluent of about one inch per week
on Plot 4.
C. Continue application of sewage effluent of about two inches per week
in June, July and August on Plot 5 with reduced apPlication of one'half
to one inch per week in l'lay, September and 0ctober.
D. lnstall a new plot with drains similar to Plot 5 but with a gravel
envelope. Apply identical amounts of sewage effluent as aPPlied on
Plot 5 in 1974.
E. lncl ude testi ng for addi tional parameters such a's soi I temperature,
aerosol effect, and potential virus.
F. Honitor ground water downhill and away from the test Plots.
3. tn the future testing program for BoD, provide a more thorough breakdown
vof thg;organics (solid and dissolved) such as crude fiber, lipids, proteins,
starches, sugars and volatile acids to provide a better trace of the organics
from the sewage effluent to the drainage water. A breakdown of the composi-
tion of the organic material in the plot receiving creek water would also
provide a basis of comparison to determine what organics have their source
in the organic matter in the soil and which have their origin in the sewage
effl uent.
(
T
The land application of treated sewage effluent to mountain hay land
was undertaken as a research and demonstration program by the Upper yampa
l{ater Conservancy District. The site was at 7050 feet elevation.in the yampa
Val ley.
Site, initial crop conditions, and climatological conditions provided
severe physical constraints. Three of the five test plots were used to pro-
vide control conditions. One of these plots was not irrigated, and two plots
were irrigated with creek water. A fourth plot was laid out for one inch per
week of sewage effluent, and a fifth for three inches per week.
Sampling and analyses were performed on the effluent, on the groundwater,
and on the soi I character. The program extended from June through October;
however, field management and testing were reduced in scope for September
and October due to financial limitations and in accordance with original
schedul i ng.
The June, July and August sample analyses indicated surprisingly good
wastewater renovation considering the field conditions and the fact that it
was the first year of application for the plots.
The September and October analyses of the drain tile flow showed less
renovation for BOD, c0D, and suspended solids, but as much or more for
nitrogen. Good management of the land application irrigation system was
demonstrated to be important, particularly as to appl ication rates and
guarding against potential short circuiting via rodent holes and first year
ti le backfi I I settl i ng.
The one season irrigation program demonstrated that crop response was
excel lent, that conrmunity acceptance was no; a problem, that nitrogen f low
to the ground water was minimal, and that system operation is relatively
simpleland straight forward. Overall results provide good data for planning,
design, and oPerational criteria, though it is evident that a single season
of operation of the program does not provide for final conclusions.
Submi tted by
t{RIGHT-I.IcLAUGHLIN
I
t
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
T
T
ENG I NEERS
Kenne th
I
t
i
ll
iI
lt
tl
tl
il
il
il
il
iT
il
il
il
il
q
il
il
TJPPEFI YAMPA IA'ATEET CGINAEHVANCY EIIBTFIICT
BTEAMBEIAT BPFIINGIST CClLCtFIAtrtcl
STORAGE and RENOVATION
of
SEWAGE EFFLUENT
tn
ARTIFICIALLY CREATED SNOWPACK
Wright-Mc[ou ghlin Enginccrs
Dcnvcr, Colorodo
Dcccmbcr,l975
73?-63
il
t
IT
il
T
I
T
I
T
I
l
I
I
I
i
I
T
STORAGE AND RENOVATION OF SEWAGE EFFLUENT
IN ARTIFICIALLY CREATED SNOWPACK
SECOND PRINTING
September 1978
The innovative experiment of converting sewage effluent to artificial
sno^, as reported in the first printing of this report continues to
attract the attention of those rndro are interested in wastewater storage
and renovation at high altitudes. The number of inquiries have far
exceeded the available copies frorn the first printing.
This second printing also allows us the opportunity to acknowledge the
assistance of the firm of P. B. Alford 6 Associates, lnc. of London,
0ntario, consultants in artificial snowmaking equipment and systems.
L
t
I
I
I
!
I
T
I
t
I
T
I
T
I
I
T
I
I
I
T
IO}.ALD C. I,ICLAUGHLIX
XENNETH i. WIIGHT
HALFOND C. EtICXSOt'
DOU6 LAS ?. 30V:ir{
,OHN I, I.C LA NE
WRIGHT-Mc LA UGHLIN ENG I NEERS
ENOINEETINO CONTULTANTI
lalo al-coTt atiEtt
DCravSr. coLoraDo aotr r
laot) aaa.3lol
COM'LETE E'{GI'.IEERING SERVICES
IN 'HE SPECIALTY TIELDS OF
WATEi SUPPLY AND DISYRIBU?ION
WA'ER AND 3EWAGE ?REATMENA
tEWA6E COLIEC'ION ANO iEUSE
INDUSTRIAL W STES
.toiM DPAINAGE
FLOOD COXTFOL AND
OTHEI WATEI.OR IEN'EO PROJEC?S
rAl W.l{Oll13
rlE D. wHl?FIELD aSttx olTtcf
t. o. tor aoraaltti. coLoraooalarl
lltaraoat 0r7rcEt o. aot lrto
ItS^rtoat vtlLAGt, c0l0taDa aoatt
l0 Decenrber 1975
l.lr. Loy Ardrey, Pres i dent
Board of Directors
Upper Yampa Water Conservancy District
Box 5220
Steamboat Springs, Colorado 80499
Gent I emen:
The report on the 1974 winter research and demonstration project
of treated sewage ef f luent entitled, TTSTOMGE AND REN0VATI0N 0F SEI.JAGE
EFFLUENT lN ARTIFICIALLY CREATED SNOWPACK,TT is attached.
Field work for the winter program began in January of 1974, with
the first snov.r being made on February 4, 1974, and the last snow being
made on April 18, 1974. Sampling and laboratory testing was concen-
trated in April. This research and demonstration program, sponsored
by your District and additionally supported by other agencies andprivate firms, provided substantial knowledge to the art of wastewater
storage and renovation by snournaking in a high altitude setting. Your
Board of Directors is to be congratulated for your dedication to research
work in water quality control.
The report begins with conclusions, recorrnendations, and a surrTlary,
which are followed by various sections of the report dealing with specific
aspects of the project. lle stand ready to discuss with you aspects of
this report and program which may be of special interest or with which
you may have questions.
Very truly yours,
WR I GHT-l'4cLAUGHL I N ENG I NEERS
,, lM*ft
Kenneth R. l.lr i gn tKRl.//lm
Attachment
732-63
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
ti
t
I
i
I
t
t
l
L
:T
:l
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
UPPER YAI4PA WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT
sTEAr.lB0AT SPR tNGS, C0L0RAD0
STORAGE AND RENOVATI ON
OF
SEI.,AGE EFFLUENT IN ARTIFlCIALLY CREATED SNOWPACK
Appreciation is gratefu'l ly acknowledged to the 0f f icers and Board of
Directors of the Upper Yampa Water Conservancy District for their vision
in sponsoring and financial ly supporting this research and demonstration.
:T
rl
:l
Loy Ard rey
Wes S i gns
The generosity of the
is grateful ly acknowledged
Charles Gregory
Sumner Hackett
Elvis Starbuck
John Fe tche r
Kelly Klumpker
fol lowing organizations for finjncial assistance
by the Upper Yampa Di strict, project sPonsors.
il
Colorado River Water Conservation District
Ht. l./erner l./ater and Sanitation District
Northwest Council of Governments
Ski Country Enterprises
Aspen Ski Corporation
Cooperation and assistance of the Colorado Water Qual ity Control Di vi -
sion is appreciated by the 0fficers and Board of Directors of the District.
URI GHT-McLAUGHL I N ENG I NEERS
ENGI NEERI NG CONSULTANTS
DENVER, C0LoRAD0
DECEMBER, 1975
rI
il
ll
{
;l
iI
I
IT
I
il
il
I
il
iT
IT
II
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
coNcLUstoNS, RECo|THENDAT|oNS AND REPoRT SUMMARY
Conclusions..
Reconmendat ions.
Sunmary.
SECTION I - INTRODUCTTON
Participation.
Background I nformat ion .
Snournaki ng Project Locat ion.
Snournaking Equipnent . .
Cl imate.
SECTION II - SOME ASPECTS OF SNOW PHYS!CS
SECTION I I I - PREVIOUS TESTS IN VERHONT AND PENNSYLVANIA.
SECTION IV - ROUTT COUNTY PROJECT DESCRlPTION
Sampl ing Procedure
Daily Record .
SECTIONV-BASICDATA.
SECTION VI - DISCUSSION OF
SECTION VI ! . PLANNING OF
REFERENCES
RESULTS.
SYSTEMS
Pa qe
I
4
5
t-l
t-2
t_3
t-4
t-4
il-t
I I t-l
lv-l
au-2
v-l
vr -l
vr l-l
I
I
I
T
T
1
t
T
I
iT
il
(
iT
il
ll
2.:T
il
;T
coNcLUsloNs, RECoMHENDATtoNS AND REPoRT SUMMARY
CONCLUS I ON
The following conclusions arc based upon a field experimental program of
making snow from sewage effluent adjacent to the Yampa River in Steamboat
Springs, Colorado, in the February through April , 1974, period.
l. Sewage effluent can be stored as snow using conventional snowmaking
equipment normally available at many major ski areas. Pressurized
effluent is mixed with high pressure air and then ejected into the
atmosphere. Expansion of the air provides a natural cooling mecha-
nism which causes ice crystals to form, which is artificial snow.
Another process uses pressurized effluent without high pressure air;
this process being termed rrairless.rr
The physical appearance characteristics of the municipal wastewater
snow are similar to natural snow except for a slightly off-white
color and usually higher density of 25 to 35 percent. Natural new
snow generally has a density of less than l0 percent. A casual
observer would not normally notice the difference between wastewater
snow and natural snow, and during the melt period there bras no accumu-
lation of solids on the surface as had been expected. Experimental
work in Vermont indicated that sewage snow could not be visibly dis-
tinguished frqn normal clear-water arti ficial snow.
There is no noticeable odor from the wastewater s thou
il
il
,l
;l 3.
il excavatinq within the snowpack indicates a slightrrs rr t
smell There also was
period.
no noticeable odor during the Apri I mel t
4. Specific pollutants in the snowpack in April showed marked decreases
frorn those in the wastewater used by the snow gun. Those pollutants
included BOD, enmonia N, phosphorus, total dissolved solids, and
suspended solids. The laboratory analyses showed that the pollutant
rcduction process occurrcd primarily in the snowpack; i.c., not in
it
ll
it
II
it
,T
I
I
I
t
I
the proccss of snoumaking when the effluent was pressurized, mixed
brith high pressure air, and then converted to crystals as it was
ejected into the etmosphere. lt is possible, however, that the coli-
form count was reduced by the conversion of the effluent frorn liquid
to ice.
5. Fecal Coliform bacteria concentrations within the snowpack in April were
general ly wel I wi thin the I imits for an A classif ied stream, i.e. less
than 200 per I00 ml. The exceptions were in the February 21, 1974,
snow production as measured on April 12, when the coliform count was
measured at 420 per 100 ml.
dissolved solids (TDS) in both the wastewater and snowpack on the
first day, but by April (after I to 2* months) the TDS concentrations
had lowered by an average of 85 percent. The TDS measurements were
well within the limits for drinking water standards in the effluent
as well as the snowpack at all times. lt is believed that the dis-
solved solids, viE processes of snow physics, migrated downward and
slowly infi I trated into the underlying soi l.
The BOD. measurements in the wastewater and in the snowpack on the
first day showed good correlation, but by April the B0D5 tests indi-
cated a ql percent BOD, removal within the snowpack. This consis-
tentlylneasured significant BODU reduction within the snowpack deserves
research so that the process and mechanism can be better described.
i.e.,
f rom'?.9 to 7.0 over a period of about two months.
Snohrnelt runoff frorn the wastewater snowpack was measured for selected
pol lutants on l,lay l, 1975. Analyses indicated characteristics similar
to the snowpack, and with significant improvement from the quality of
the wastebrater used to make the snow. The following table sunmarizes
the measurements.
jl
6.
7.
8.
9.
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
t
t
T
t
I
2
I
I
I
i
I
t
t
i
I
t
I
.L
:1
t
t
I
il
i,l
i
T
,;
Iil
l1
I
rI
i
IiI
IrI
Consti tuent
BOD
Suspended Sol ids
Ni trate Ni trogen
Total Phosphorus
Total Dissolved Sol ids
Fecal Col i form
Ammoni a Ni trogen
l,lean Concentrat ion
i n l,la s tewa te rin Februarv
(mgll )
Concentration
in Snor.nrelt
Runoffl;ef
3.5
32
0.4
0.7
34
45ltoo mt
3.5
5l
67
1.0
t8.3
258
N/A
t2!
10. Innovative water qualitv research by the State of Colorado should be
undertaken whi ch would have speci fi c appl i cabi I i ty to Colorado and
unique Colorado problems. The large amount of money spent in Colorado
each year for treatment works tends to be for conventional and tradi-
tional solutions. There is a need for imaginative solutions which could
be related to recycling of wastewater and pollutants. The Denver l.Jater
Board pilot plant is a good step in the right direction but it is only
an initial step when compared with the -opportuni.ties available.
I
rI
it
l
il
il
T
I
I
I
RECOHHENDATI ONS
iI l. Econornic fcasibi I i ty rnalyses and the question of the practical i ty
of storing sewage effluent as rrtificial snow should be investigated
for applicability to special uses such as mountain-top ski area
faci I ities. Potential other appl icabi I i ty such as for interim period
use at municipal itics tributary to phosphate and nitrogen-sensitive
mountain area lakes also deserves feasibility review. This latter
potential use would be in lieu of reservoir construction to store
winter effluent when lend treatment operations were shut down due to
cold weather.
I 2, The interrelated chemical, physical, and biological mechanisms within
a snowpack which create the pollutant reductions measured in this
experiment are not wel I understood. Snowpack research has primari ly
been aimed at the physics of the snowpack because of avalanche con-
trol work. Snowpack research should be expanded to cover questions
raised in the Upper Yampa experimental work of 197\.
I 3, Desal inization of water using artificial snowmaking techniques is
I
I
I
I
I
T
an area in which research could have beneficial results.
t
iI
t
T
4
I
I
il
T
,L
it
;l
i!
:l
il
I
I
I
stl,lt4ARY
The conversion of sewage effluent to artificial snow utilizing conven-
tional snow making equipment of the type used at many Colorado ski areas
has a potential for use in an overall wastewater management strategy.
t{hile the applicability is limited, it could be considered for short-
term use by smaller mountain area municipalities with land treatment
systcms prior to the construction of a winter storage reservoir. Addi
tionally there would be direct applicability for mountain top restau
rants or ski terminals such as at Lions Head at Vail, the Aspen Sun
Deck, etc.
There is a marked improvement in the level of pollutants within tlre
snow pack with time. The mechanisms involved with the treatment Dro-
cess which occurs within the snow pack are not well understood, though
it is expected that it relates to air movement, temperature gradient,
and snow pack and snow crystal physics. During the snow melt period,
the snow pack melts over an extended period of time. A properly selec-
ted artificial snow pack site could be selected to insure that the snow
melt water would percolate through the soil zone or would have a reason-
ably long travel path overland through appropriate vegetation. I t i s
believed that appropriate plans and assurances could be provided for
the Water Quality Control Commission so that approval for wastewater
snow making sites could be utilized, though the burden of proof would,
of course, be on the applicant.
This research effort by the Upper Yampa Water Conservancy District has.J
been i nnovat i ve. The research demonstrates the i nterest and imagi nat i ve
approaches which can be generated by ranchers, the farming community,
and citizens when given the opportunity.
it
il
lI
iI
i
il
il
5
il
iT
i
IT
IT
I
tl
II
It
iT
il
it
il
iT
I
IT
IT
I
(
it
I
The Yampa effort has pointed up the need for more research in the water
quality control field in Colorado for Colorado problems. Further,
the Yampa work has described areas where additional suitable research,
both applied and basic, woutd be fruitful, such research being reldted
to snow pack physics.
Submi tted by;
I./R I GHT-McLAUGHL I N ENG I NEERS
DJL:RLT:KRW:CJ
732-63
_,.'J,,Bv ?.^ - ".- +Tz/- ,-
Amr e retcher,
Research Associ ate
,1,,
Davi d J.
Hydraul i c
Lt ,/- l, fr?*'+L,
Ralph L. Toren,
I rri gat i on Engi neer
Kenneth R. Wrirgl.t,
l./ater Enginee
6
,
Engineer
3084
T
I
I
I
t
T
T
T
T
I
T
I
T
T
T
t
I
II
I
Nnf llg,y.qTf.f,.gflJt:H [f,ltH I nc
June 15, 1988
Wright l{ater Engineers
2490 West 26th AvenueSulte 100-A
Denver Co.
80211
USA
Jtjli 2 0 BEtt
Attn.: Mr. Bob McGregor, P.E.
Re: Effluent Snowmaking
Dear Bob,
Thank you for inguiring about our snownaking project. As promised
pLease find enclosed the following documents:
1. A copy of our paper scheduled to be presented at the ASCE-CSCENational Conference on Environmental Engineering to held inVancouver this JuIy. The information presented should beconsidered to be rrresearch in progressrr as it represents onlythe preliminary findings of the winter of L9B6/87.
2. A copy of one of the typical nutrient release profiles basedon the L987/88 data. This was for a 4.5 metre (15 ft) snowpackdepth and a density of 46 percent. This prot is very similarto the results obtained from 1.0 metre pack depths withsirnilar densities, and indicates that the efficienty can bemaintained throughout a depth range of 1.0 to 4.5 neties (3 toIs fr).
3. Resumes of key NovaTec environmental engineering personnel anda brief company brochure outlining services offered.
The snowmaking research project was funded by three revers ofgovernment, including Environment Canada.and the British ColumbiaMinistry of Environrnent. We are currently involved in assistingengineeritrg firrns and contractors in applying the developedtechnology for small conmunities and ski resorts in Canada. Thefinal report will be released sometime this farl, after it hasbeen reviewed by the various government agencies involved. Inaddition to nutrient removar data, the report wirl containinformation on metal and bacteriological removil efficiencies, inaddition to design and application information.
NovaTeers prirnary areas of activity are in'environmentarresearch, and in consulting to other engineering firns andgovernment agencies. we are currently involved in research and
Suite 300, 40 Powell Street
Vancouver, B.C. V6A 1E7
(604) 682-8777
I
t
Wright Water Engineering Ltd.
June L6, 1988
Page 2
design activities involving biological nutrient removal systems
nii=5g"t and phosphonrs) and have just completed the design for a
plant located in Denmark.
I hope that the above infor^mation will be of use to y9u in
obtaining permission to undertake the ski resort effluent
disposal -p.6:ect this winter. If we can be of help in setting uP
thl; progiam-or if you requlre further infonnation, please do not
hesitite-to give eiLher myself or Dr. Barry Rabinowitz, P. Eng.,
a call at anY tiue.
Yours tru1Y,
ruT"-ruEHsPrincipal
L
t
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
sECONDARY EFFLUENT DISPOSII, TEROUGII ENOr}iAXING
B. Rabinowitz*r T.D. Vassos*, W.F. Hyslop*,
R. Zapf-GllJe*rt and D.S. ttavinis***
lbstract
This paper describes xresearch ln progresst' into the use of
snownakl.ng as a neans of secondary effluent disposal. Theprincipal variables investlgated eere the effect of snowpackheight and Bnow denslty on the degree of concentration ofirnpurities (nutrients and netals) lnto the early portion of the
cnownelt. Prelininary data shows that the degree of nitrogenconcentratlon exceeded that of phosphorus, with the percentlurpurity release j.n the f irst 20* of the meltwater being
approxiroately 80t and 35t, respectively. Similar1y, sodiun,
potassium and boron ions showed a high degree of concentration
whereas iron and manganese showed little or no concentration.
Increased pack height had a srnall positive effect on the degreeof P concentration but little effect on N concentration.
Conversely, increased snow density had a small negative effect onthe degree of N concentration but none on P concentration.
Passage of meltwater through a 1 m soil column resulted in
conplete nitrification and P adsorbtion by the soil. The soil
colunn also buffered the effects of the concentration phenornenon,resulting in a relatively steady inpurity release rate.
f,ey lYords
snowmaking; secondary effluent disposal; impurity concentra-tion; soil infiltration; nutrient removal; effluent irrigation;effluent ground disposal.
Introductlon
The concept of using snowmaking and other forms of freezecryst,alization as a neans of wastewater treatment arose out of
research.rconducted in Scandinavia in the 1970ts into what becarne
known as fiacj.d shock syndronerr. fn this phenonenon, the surfacenaters of areas subject to acid precipitation experience dranatic
increases in acid concentrations during spring melt, which canresult in najor fl.sh kills (Leivestad and Muniz, 1976). Researchby Johannessen and Hendriksen (1978). showed that the
c6ncentration of constituents (including H+ ions) in the firstfraction of snowmelt exceeded that in the snours water of
formation by a factor of 5, or nore.
r NovaTec Consultants Inc., 300-40 Powell St., Vancouver, B.C.rr Sigfma Engineerlng Ltd., 800-1175 West Georgla, Vancouver, B.C.**r pgp6rtnent of Civil Engineering, U.B.c., vancouver, B.c.
I
I
{
I
3
T
t
I
I
I
l
I
T
T
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
t
I
T
I
There are documented explanations for why this concentration
phenomenon occurs in both natural and nan-made snow meltwaters.-Briefly, snowflakes are formed by - a process of nucleation and-rystif growth, and dissolved lurpuri-ties are not readily
lniorporaied into the crystalline lattice. Iurpurities - Ln the
attaciring vapour droplets are progresslvely I.jected !? tt-,. outer
surface 6f tne crystlI, leaving the inner volume relatively pure.
ftri= phenomenon continues soon after deposition-dur.i.ng tt-t.
proces-s of grain coarsenlng and any freeze-thaw cycles that the
iacf undergoes (Colbeck, fgef). Thus a urajor fraction of the
iurpurities -present in the snowpack are- concentrated onto the
ouler surfale of the snow crystals and into the lnterstitial
nater, froru where they are readity renoved by a nwetting frontr
noving through the Pack.
It uas reasoned that by taking advantage of this concentration
phenomenon, the conversion of secondary effluent to snow could
irovide a vLable alternative method of effluent disposal to
Lornrnunities facing effluent disposal problems during the winter
nonths (Zapf-Gilj6 et 41., 1986). Cornmunities which experience
seasonal eiflueni discharge problerns include those practising
effluent spray irrigation from spring to.the early fa}I, those
with inadeiua€e surfice water dilution during the winter, and ski
resorts, wiict generate naximum flows during, the wi.nter rnonths
when creeks are lenerally too low to allow effluent discharge and
often have insuificient- suitable land for conventional ground
disposal.
In addition to senring as a nethod of effluent disposal, there
are a number of beneficial attributes to the use of snowmaking.
For example, if secondary effluent were sprayed as .snow onto
agricultrirat land during Ltre rinter months, the uajority of the
niirient present in the- snowpack would_ be concentrated into the
eirfy portiot of the snowmeLl. The soil would be saturated with
this nirtrient-rich concentrate, leaving the remaining relatively
pure ueltwater as surfaee runoff. An additional benefit of
inownaking to agriculture is that it P?ovides a considerable
Eeasure oi crop protection against frost-kilI.
The principal objective of this research' project was to
establish design cri€eria for the use of snowmaking as a nethod
of effluent disposal. This would be done by investigating thg
effect o{ snowpack height and snow density on th9 degree of
concentration oi the constituent nutrients and metals and their
fate ln the soil. This objective r.ras to be met by monitoring the
neltwater and groundwater generated from a series of snowpacks
artificially ireated from a secondary lagoon effluent using
conventional snowuraking equiprnent.
The naJority of the funding for this. project -was p_rovided by
Supply aria se-rvices Canada under their Unsolicited Propos_al
priiri". Additlonal funding was provided by Envir-onment- Canada,-g.C. lfinistry of Environnent, B.d. Science Council and the City
of Kamloops.
I
I
(
T
{
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
T
I
t
t
t
x
T
I
ExpGrlDsntal l{etbodologY
The original experinental design uas based on a 2 x 2
factoriaf fn which the principal variables to be investigated
uere enowpack depth (2.0 and 4.0 ur) and sno$, density (wet and
dry). Tno-replications hrere planned for each combination of depth
an[-densityr-naking a total of eight snowpacks. Each snowpack was
to have thr'ee nelt-water and three soil column sanplers, set out
ln pairs. The neltwater sanplers uere designed to collect all
nel€sater passing through a 2OO Dm I.D. vertical Pipe _ located
approxigatLf y f-OO nm Lbove the ground, while in the soil
siiplers, a sinilar sample was passed through a l.m column of in-
eitir soii to test the soilrs adsorption characteristics.
Snow Uas nade using a Snow Warrior rrairlessrr snowgun
nanufactured by TurboCristal Inc. of Quebec City. Saurples of the
effluent feed -to the grun and the freshly nade snow were taken
during the course of the snowrnaking operation and analysed for
nutri6nt, metal and coliform concentrations. The snow density was
nonitored at all times by placinq plastic tubs of known volune in
the vicinity of the samplers and weighing them when fu}}. After
each pack wis cornpleted a profile was taken to determine the pack
height above each pair of samplers.
Dtrring the snowmaking operation it became clear that certain
rnodifications to the experinental design were required. For
example, it proved to be impossible to nake snowpacks of
horooleneous quafity as it was only practical to make snow with
the inowgun flcing-in a downwind direction (in Karoloops, the wind
is predoiinantly easterly during the winter nonths). Snow falling
cloler to the gun was generally wetter and, therefore, more dense
than that falling further away. In addition, sno$, accumulated at
a higher rate nLarer the 9ui, presumably as a result of its
increased density. Therefore, the snow was generally both deeper
and denser at the eastern end of the snowpack, and the
experiurental design was urodified to incorporate these variations
wiltrin the snowpaiks. It was decided to closely monitor the snovl
height and quality in the vicinity of- each pair of sarnplers with
the view to-applylng analysis of variance (ANOVA) technigues_ to
selarate out- -the -effects of the two principal variables
investigated. Pack height above the sampl-ers varied between 1.O ur
and {.5 E, and density varied between 34t and 58t of water.
.J
The sahplers were drained at regular intenrals dur.ing the melt
period. Sahples were sub-sampled, preserved, anq shipped to the
iaboratoriei for analysis. Parameters neasured in aII neltwater
samplers uere fotal-P, POo, TKN, NH4r NO3- and rnetals. Sarnples fof8Pr'NH4 and POC analys_is- w.ere pre-sente?.by acidification with
iriO. t'o a pH <*2. Saiples for Nb.. analysis were Preserved using
a Dercurlc acetate/aietone soltition and sanples for metals
analysis uere preserved by acidification ulth HNO3 to a PH < 2.
I
II
I
Bcsultg
the snowmaklng operation itself appeared to have only a suall'
effect on the Ctrenical and biologiCal characteristlcs of the
effluent. A small reduction ln aunonia concentration (appfox.
l0t) sas obsenred, presunably due to air strlpplng. Th-e collfotm
destruction was only about sOt but it should be noted that the
lnltlal total and fLcal coliform concentrations in the effluent
uere extrenely low (35-90 TCrl1OO nI and 2-15 FC/100 DI,
respectively).
The data for the meltwater saroples collected is being
lnterpreted on the basis of cumulative percent irnpurity _releaseversul cunulatlve percent neltwater fractlon. Thls uethod aIlows
a conparison to ba made of the concentration potential of the
various impurities. Plots of the nutrient and metal release rates
for one of the ureltwater sanplers are presented in Figs. 1 and 2,
respectlvely.
Fron rig. 1 it can be seen that a large fraction of the
nutrient plesent in the snowpack was released in the early
portion of tfre snowmelt. It is also evident that the degree of
nitrogen concentration was substantially greater than the degree
of ptiosphorus concentration ln this early ueltwater. In this
saniterl approximately 8Ot of the nitrogen and 35t of the
phoiphonrs ias released in the first 20* of the ueltwater.
Frorn Fig. 2 it can be seen that there hras a wide variation in
the degree of concentration between the various metals analyzed.
For exinple, approximately 80* of the potassium and sodium were
released in the first 20* of the meltnater, but there was no
evidence of iron and manganese concentration.
The data for the soil columns is being interpreted in a
similar fashion to that of the neltwater samplers. The nutrient
and netal plots are presented in Figs. 3 and 4, respectively. Ttis clear fiorn these figures that the passage through the 1 m soil
column had a urajor effect on the chemical characteristics of the
neltwater. For Lxample, it can be seen that both the nutrients
and the metals that passed through the soil columns were released
at a relatively constant rate. There rras very little evidence of
the concentration phenonenon observed in the meltwater samples.
FigurE 3 shows that aII of the phosphorus entering the soil
column sas adsorbed. An investigation of the raw data (not
presented here) shorrs evidence of a substantial lncrease in-nitrate concentration and a corresponding decrease in the ammonia
concentration, indlcating that viitualLy complete nitrification
,ccurred ln the soll colunn. The slight lag in the nitrate
release rate in the initlal groundwater sarnples conf iras the
occurrence of nltrification in the soil column.
I{lth regard to the Uetals analyzed, the raw data ahows that
Lron, boron and Danganese uere adsorbed by the soil column.
Figure 4 shows that {ne renaining netals analyzed were re}eased
I
t
T
I
t
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
b
I
T
I
!
t
II I
',
ao
o
A
e
o(l
o
IDIrl
lrl
o
&
LolL
a
a/
a!ao
ofr
a,r,oI
gt
I
EI
. I.,
6l"t
s fir'l"d
6
E
Ilig d.
E
E2
Eeog E"
3*Idat
o+
E
Eo
\
I \
\\
L
8
t
I
Igl6'l.
E.I lr3.
I
o
,!
8+R +r
I
I
I
I
!
?
OIa
E88B8838Reo
(S tsrtgr'trlj!|t r^rlynnt'rtc
tttE838te9.
0 rv,!r rrair. ultarrrrtx,
Et8P8888Reo
(, la/to .tl,n l^l^vt'Yt^nc
!8388t8t8e.
(r, ,tYrEr rrolrru l{ryrt||!nc
c1A
8I EI
A.J
ole.ole.
'{Ie 3l'E. HIIJEp q
e l" flI.lo? !lIolAR.E JcqEEofl"J d
J
EI{ra
It
2gJo ltl
EF
=,I
T \
+)\I
!
I \a I (
a
T
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
(
t
I 1
\
\
\
\
\
\
\\
\
\
L
\
\
I
\
N
t
\\
\\I
\\\
\\\
\\
\
\
\
\
\\-\N \\N\
=A
I
B
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
T
t
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
at uniforn concentrations, indicating that, as in the case of the
nutrients, the soil acted as a buffer to the concentration
phenonenon observed in the neltwater samples.
DLceussloa
Although the rigorous statistical analysis of the data has not
been carried out because the database ls still lnconplete, there
are two prelirninary lndications regarding the effect of the two
principal varLables investigated:
1) Pack height appears to have sone effect on the degree of P
concentration; P concentration lncreases with increased pack
depth (see Fig. 5). Conversely, pack height aPPears to have
no effect on the degree of N concentration (see Fig. 6). At
the tirne of writing, the authors were awaiting the additional
data from the deep packs (up to 4.5 n) to confirm this
obserrration.
2l Snow density appears to have some effect on the degree of N
concentration; N eoncentration decreases with increased snow
density (see Fig. 71. However, snow density apPears to have
no effect on the degree of P concentration (see Fig. 8).
An inportant obserrration made during this research is the
widely differing degree of concentration observed between various
inpurities during snowmelt. At the time of writing, the fol.lowing
tr.ro theories were being investigated to explain the obsenred
differences in the degree of concentration bettreen the various
iupurities:
1) The degree of concentration is correlated and, hence, possibly
related to the atomic weight of the element investigated, rtith
the snaller atoms exhibiting a greater degree of concentration
(see Fig. 9). Potassium and strontiun are two exceptions in
this hypothesis. A raajor weakness of this hypothesis is that
it does not take into account the predominant molecular formof the various elements in this particular wastewater.
2') The degree of concentration is also correlated to the initialirnpurity concentration present in the snow I s water of
formation. The initial concentrations (in nilli-equivalents/L)of ea'Ctr of the impurities exarnined are shown in brackets on
Fig. 9. fn general, lt appears as if the impurities uith
higher initial concentrations exhibited a greater degree of
concentration, with boron and nitrate-nitrogen being obvious
except,ions. However, this hypothesis is biased by the chemical
characteristics of the effluent used in this particular study.
x.Iddcdtdcd
J!r{TIarlddd
1al
EId
ra
arl.J
1
1
EIJil
:
3
.E,t
,tr
!
rlA
EI4dEJTI-D.
JaaHatld
Hsd
:.ltdraatl
1
1
EI+l}J
.Tdot
dEJu.l
EJ
J4
GIIJ
OIHJd,olaola
J
f,d
Edd
1d
J{L
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
T
I
I
t
I
I
T
I
I
I
{I
I
I
I
E
3E
Tsl
g88R8888Reo
(r)'r^orBr rou Jro:r8d
983R88388eo
(r) TilO,€r &1v.lorJr@ttrd
988R88388eo
(:) taolgr rou ltGt:rEd
988F883t8eo
(D .tyr\oiir a-.tvrol lrcrroJ
ot
I
x
;rE
T.iaa <!
+
+
c
a
+ca
.,1
.l
:
E
a;,f
.T,I
!
ad
qo
aoa
Eu
3
E:I
lLo
xo6t
hEL
z_
Iot
dE
x
t
I
tt
t
I
I
T
T
I
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
t
I
KAMLOOPS EFFLUENT SNOWMAKING PROJECT
ATOMIC X'EGHT
plo. 9. Deoree of Concentratlon Versus Iupurl.tv AtouLc llelqht
ConclugLous
This study has confirned that a Dajor fraction of theinpurities present in a snowpack are released in the earlyportion of the nelt. However, there was a substantial differencein the degree of concentration between various inpurities presentin the lagoon effluent.
Prelitinary observations regarding the effect of the two
lndependent variables indicate that increased pack height has anLncreasing effect on the degree of phosphorus concentration,while increased Bnow density has a decreasing effect on the
degree of nitrogen concentation.
Passage of the neltwater through a 1 n soil column tends tobuffer out the effects of the concentration phenomenon descrlbedabove. fn addition, virtually cornplete nitrification ot thecfflucnt anuonia and adsorption of the phoephorus, lron and
Eanganese vas obse:rred
t0
T
CONCENIR^TION FA TOR 1/s. ATOYIC SEGHT
(1.72 )(1.62)
(0.1r)Etl.FeedIn r11lltro (2.1) l; (0.27)
I r.e (0.41)
r !r (o.39)
(0.11) r
P(0.10) r cc (0.59)
r xn (0.004)
ISr(0.002)
I
I Bclcrguccg
(
I Colbeck, S.C. (1981) . A Slnulation of the Enrl.chrnent of
t *::::H:tir,'"rt""r:11tr?. t" snow cover Runorr' r{ater Resources
I Johannessen, Il. and A. Hendrlksen (1978). Chernistry of Snow
I t{eltuater: Changes ln Concentration During Meltlng. l{ater
Resources Research, 14, 615-619.
I Le!.vestad, H. and I.P. l,luniz (1976). Flsh KtlI at I,ow pH ln aa Nomeglan Rlver. Nature, 259, 391-392.
I Zapf-GiIJe, R., S.O. Russe1 and D.S. l{avinlc (1986).
I Concentration of Irnpurlties During lilelting of Snow Made frou
Secondary sewage Eff1uent. Water Sclence Technology, 18, 151-156.
t
t
I
T
I
I
T
I
I
{
T
I
I
tl
ooT
I
I
lb
lrJrn
o-I .,ffiZEr
=Er4ir;1r 5;
I hE
ula
TH
JT=V
t
t
I
I
*o(L
x
No-\., F
UJ
a
=o@5
E,
H
Ea'Jz
lrJ
=sO+3
=
31z
+
zYF
u
o
oooooooooooOOrON(ototl{l(rl'r'
(g) =s.r3r3u .r.N3!urnN 3lt-L\nnnnc
I
I
T
i\
\rl
\
\
\
\
\
\
-\-\
=
\
\
\
\
\
--
\
\\
IL
I T0: Mr. Bob McGregor
I FROM: Sherwood C. Reed, UsA CBREL
-( SuBJECT: snowmaking with Wastewater.
I Bob:
f Here is the eopy of the article I promised to send to you. I hope you
I were able to get hold of BilI Hyslop to d:,scuss therr work.
I 70 ,s ,':;,:'l;'.li:::13:';(::;",T"il:'""?;ll'ii",i."i:,:':?'i"[;,'fi:f ";n "'r En$ineers, with of f ices in Glenwood Sprlngs. I useC t,o have a f rrerrc ',her.e,
named Dick Johnson (303) 915 ?755. Noi sure that number rs ari)' Eolrd ai,J- :lirr.e
I s:.nce I have not tajked to Dick in many years.
T
Best regards,
UJo.,)-
Sherwooci Clr-need, PE
USA CRREI(-\
72 Lyme Road
Hanover, Nii 03755- I 290
(603) 616 4113
I'11 be very interested iri fo).iowing the progress oi:r'our effor'", ite;;,ee
I :il: i:.
touch as things develop and senc me copies of any repor-es you are
T
I
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
I
t
I
i 998,iu:',e
I
I
T
(
t
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
T
:l
:,
T
;
.T
i
It
il
I
l
rl
FOREST LAI.ID TREATITIENT IN NEW EI{GLAI{)
, .,,
Sherwood C. Reed
USA CRREL
Hanover, N.H.
Ronald W. Crites
George S. Nolte & Associates
Sacramento, Ca.
Presented At
FOREST LAIID APPLICATIOilIS SYI,IPOS llf,l
An International Symposium on Forest Utilization of
Municipal and Industr ial Wastewater and Sludge
June 25-28, 1985
., University of Washingtonr Seattle, Wa.
L
I,
3
),
l,
T
I
T
T
T
T
T
T
I
T
I
T
t
T
I
T
I
I
I
FOR.EST LATID TREATT,ENT IN NEY EI€LAI{D
Sherwood"C. Ried
USA CRREL
Hanover, N.H.
Ronald W. Crites
George S. Nolte & Associates
Sacramento, Ca.
INTRODIrcT IOI.I
The potent ial for effect ive wastewater renovat ion via land
treatment in forests has been wel I recognized for at least 20
years (Sepp, 1965; Sopper ,197 l; Reed, et a l, 1972; Pound &
C.it.., 1977). ffrese experiences have long since been reduced
to engineering criteria for successful planning, design'
construction and operation of forest;d systems. Such criteria
have been presented in the US EPA Process Design Manuals for
Land Treatment corrrnencing in 1977 and in numerous reports and
text books (McKim, et al, 1982; Reed & Crites, 1984). However,
the design procedure itself is anything but routine since the
concept, especial ty in forests, i s strontly dependent on
specific site conditions (soi ls, tree species, slopes, etc) so
the design detai ls which were appropr iate for one location wi I I
not autometically be acceptable elsewhere.
The rural character, the topography, the vegetat i on, the
climate, and. ahe hydroloty of northern New England, al I favor
the use of forests for land treatment of wastewater. The
concePt i s the most common (and of ten the only) f orm of land
treatment found in Maine, New Hampshi re, and Vermont. A I i st ing
of municipal and private systems.in. these states can be found
in Table l. It is the purpose of this paper to evaluate. on a
case-study basis, several of the systems listed in Table Ir to
identify the strentths as well as the concerns so that the next
teneration of system designs may benefi t.
Table l. Forested land treatment systems in New England
Loca t lon Operat i nt Season
dlyr
Average Hydrau I ic
Load i ng, mly r
0.5
t.3
t
T
T
I
I
I
T
T
t
T
I
t
T
T
I
l''.
t
(
t
l. ,,
t82
140
56
?27
3)2
2t0-330
0.9
t.t2
design 5.5
aitua I 1.7
2-2.5
lvlaine
Greenv i I le9
Sugar Loaf Mt.
New Hampshire
sunapeeb
Wolfeboroa
Ve rmon t
Vest Dovera
Resor t Areas
'l
Stratton
Sherburne
Hays tack
Br oml ey
a. Municipal systems.b. State owned and operated.
+
+
T
!
{
I
I
I
i
l:
, '.2- :.i
.lrC
I
l
I
t
{
I
t
T
T
T
T
I
I
I
T
T
I
T
'j'l
t
tI
t
CASE STTJDI ES
Extensive data and observations are avai lable for Sunapee,
NH, Wolfeboro, NH, and West Dover, VT. Comparative data are
also available for some of the resort oPerations in Vermont'
Results observed are evaluated in relation to Prevailing design
procedures.
Sunapee NH
One of the ear I iest land treatment systems in this area in
mode.rn.'times was instal led by the State of New Hampshire at
SunapeE State Park in 1971. It is located in a mature forest
consisting of mixed hardwoods and conifers. The soils are an
acidic loamy glacial t i I I material comrnon to the uplands of New
England. Wastewater is collected in facultative lagoons f rom
the park faci lities. These lagoons are drawn down during late
spring and summer and the undisinfected ef f luent PumPed through
above ground aluminum pipe to the sprinkler nozzles (laterals
are 8 cm atuminum PiPe, with impact nozzles about l5 m aPart on
risers about I m above the ground surface). A visit was made to
the-site in May 1984 to observe conditions af ter 12 years ot
oPeration.
't
Both the site and the equiPment seem to be in excellent
condition. fhu original aluminum PiPe i s sti I I in service
al.though some of the sprinklers have been replaced. There was
no intention at this site to institute a harYest Protram so the
original tree stand is still in place. The'arearreceiving
b
l
I
T
I
I
t
t
T
T
I
T
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
I
T
'{I
l,
r:ai
wastewater since 197 I aPPearS esS'entialty the same as the
nearby undisturbed areas. The forest floor within the impact
zone of the sprinklers seems to be essentially the same as
adiacent undi sturbed areas. Some of the larger trees i n very
close proximity to the nozzles have a I ighter color(eg.,
slightly bleached) zone on the trunk where the wastewater
impacts but there did not appear to be any damage to the bark
itself . Hydraulic loading on the site is about 0.5 m of
wastewaier per application season.
ttris hydraulic loading is quite low and does not impose
any significant stress on the site. Very conservative criteria
were used for design of this "first Eeneration" system. It has
an operatint season of 56 days Per year to aPPly the annual
volume of wastewater at 5 Cm per week. It was recognized in
197 I that a longer oPerating season is feasible. It is
recognized today that something smal Ier than the 2 ha treatment
area would be suf f icient. Disinfection of the applied
wastewater was discontinued some years a8o. Public access is
not restricted but is somewhat limited since most of the park
viSitorS are not aware the syStem even exi sts. Groundwater
a,
sampling has neyer indicated any problem. The waStewater
applications have not stimulated tree growth. This is not
surprisint since it was already a mature stand and the
.wastewater loading is too low to have a significant
impact (Ear ley , I 982 ) .
I
1
lt
,i;
i
I
T
{
I
I
T
T
T
I
I
t
T
I
I
I
t
.T
:l
i
T
:l
Vol feboro NH
This resort conrnunity, wiiir "Uort lr0O0 permanent residents
is on the eastern shore of Lake Winnipesaukee. Land treatment
in a forested area was selected, after a thorough study, as the
most cost effective alternative for municipal wastewater
treatment. Secondary treatment (activated sludge) i s provided
for the lllt0 ^)la design f low. Disinfection is not required by
the State but the operator elects to chlorinate the effluent
prior to transmission to the 138 day storage lagoon. Water
withdr.lwn f rom the lagoon can be pumped to one of f ive spray
areas. The total area, including the 90 m buf fer zone, is about
tt0 ha. About 32 ha of this is actually considered to be the
treatment area, receivint water f rom the sprinkler nozzles.
Sprinkling starts about mid May and has continued until early
November. The average design loading is 5.6 cm of wastewater,
applied over a l4-19 hr period, every seventh day. The system
has been operated on this program since 1978.
The distribution network is similar to that at Sunapee,
consisting of above ground mains, aluminum'laterals hung on
metal posts, and impact type spr inklers on abou t l5 m centers.
.J
This network can be drained, but.freezing is not an operational
concern. Wide lanes were not cleared dur ing construct i on of the
pipe network. Public access is not restricted in any way, and
in the winter a series of snow trails for cross country skiing
are maintained on the site.
I
T
t
T
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
t
t
t
t, I
i
;l
II
;Til
il
The treatment area is on a hillside with the historic
local name "Poor Farm Hi l l" and, the t i t le i s an aPt descr ipt ion
of the atronomic potential f or the site. The soi ls are ,hi.n and
irregular with bedrock at 0.3-l m, numerous outcroPsr slopis at
B-15%, and shal Iow, seasonal ly high "perchedI water in the low
spots. The rnajor surf icial soils are well drained sandy loams.
Vegetat ion i s pr imar i ly mixed hardwoods of the
beech/maple/bi rch type wi th some areas of second Erowth whi te
pine. Earley, €t al, studied the tree resPoni"s, during l98O'82
after the site had been oPerational for two years. Their
results are summarized in Table 2.
Table 2. Tree responses Wolfeboro, NH (EarleY,l982l
I 980- 82Species1982 Dens i ty
% Basal Area
% Mortality
Spray Area Control
Sugar Maple
Beech
Red Maple
White Pine
Red Oak
Pape r Bi rch
whi te Ash,
Wh i te Oak
Other
4
l4
20
3
38
lt
2
2
4
20
20
ll
8
3
5
5
t6
34
l4
' Tree mortality
plots as compared
was about 3.5 t
to the control s.
imes treater
In both cases
on the sPraY
the af fected
t
9
Heml ock 2
I
I
T
T
T
T
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
lr
Ir
llr
Er
FII
trees were mostly smal I diameter (<: cm). No pervasive insect
or rodent damage was noted. The. p-robable cause seemed to be the
higher moisture in the soils on the spray plots. The g.rowth
rate of the remaining trees on the spray plots was
significantly treater than on the control areas. This is
explained by the fewer number of trees, more I ight, and
increased nutrients on the spray areas. Observations during a
site visit in Apri I l9t5 indicated that the site seemed to be
typical of an upland New England forest, with normal density
and _no.r.ridence of persistent mortality in the spray areas.
A special effort was made to monitor water quality during
the period l97t-82. Flanders (1983) has reported on the 1978-El
period, the 1982 data is on fi le with the State of New
Hampshire (Allen, 1985). Pan lysimeters were installed at l5
and 60 cm to monitor shallow percolate, wells were installed to
or in bedrock t.o monitor groundwater and samples were obtained
from brooks draining the treatment area.
Ni trogen and phosphorus were the parameters of treatest
concern due to the potential for eutrophication in nearby
brooks and ultimately in the Lake. Table 3 compares nitrogen
and phosphorus results f rom the pan lysimeters for the 1982
operational season. Applied nitroten in the wastewater was
about 7.1 m.g/L (60% ammonia, 39% organic) and the total
phosphorus was 3.3 mglL. The nitroten content is lower than
usual for secondary effluent but there are probably signi ficant
losses in the storate lagoon (Reed, 1984). ,
1'
7
Table ,. Lysimeter data, 1982 season Wolfeboro' NH'
15 cmr 60 cm t5 cm 60 cm
t
T
I
T
I
T
T
t
I
T
T
T
T
T
T
rl ,
?1 '
il' '
_l ,
;
il;,
lvlay
June
July
Augus t
Sep t embe r
October
.!- Ave r a8,e
ysimeter dept
The mean phosphorus concentration for all of the lysimeters for
the entire 1979- l98l period was less than 0.05 mg/L' Table 4
compares the ,rbackground" phosphorus in l97t to the 1982 values
for the adiacent brooks and Eroundwater. It is clear that the
operation has not had an impact on the phosphorus content of
these receiving waters.
Table 4. Phosphorus comparisons Wolfeboro, NH
Loca t i on otal Phosp
Background, 1978 t982
1.4
t.7
l.l
t.2
2.4
2.3-Tr
1.4
t.3
1.2
2.0
1.6
2.1
G
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.04
0.02
0.01
@z
0.03
0.01
0.04
0.02
0.02
0. 0l
ffi
cm
site
s i te
'tApplied Ef f luent
Percolate, at 60
Brook tA"r above
Brook 'B', below
Groundwater
0.03
0.08
0.02
3.3
0 .02
0.02
0.05
0.01
II
!
t0.
I
t
T
t
T
I
T
I
I
I
T
t
t
I
t
,I
-j
The irregular soits and non uniform slopes on this site
result in local runof f as wel l.,as te.mporary saturation in the
lgw spots during urastewater appt ication. Any such runoff does
not leave the site but infi ltrates down slope. These local
conditions are beinB gradual ly corrected by the oPerator. The
above tround aluminum pipe has exper ienced local damage from
large limbs. or tree falls during high winds. A routine tree
harvest i nt program i s be i ng cons i dered for the operat i on.
West Dover VT
-Thr.
design of the West Dover systerir is based on "second
generat ion, cr i ter ia after i t was understood that very low
application rates and short seasons were unduly conservative
for a forested system. The non operational peri.od Oi d) at
West Dover is not due to winter conditions but rather to a
State requirement that wastewater would not be applied during
the spring snow melt and runof f period.
The West Dover land treatment site is on a wooded hillside
immediately ad iacent to the sewaBe treatment plant. The
elevation dif ference to the top of the hill is abo.ut 30 m.
Secondary treatment is provided in an oxidation ditch system.
Three 1.3 -3/-in centri f ugal PumPs di scharge to a mani f old
ta
system which in turn connects to the twelve laterals on the
hillsides. The main lines f rom the PUmP are buried plastic
'pipe, The laterals are above ground and are either 5 or 8 cm
,', diameter galvanized steel pipe inside a PVC plastic iacket. The
,, .. .:;: laterals are spaced about 23 m aPart and are Parallel to the
),
I
r1
I
t;
T
I
I
t
T
I
I
I
T
I
t
I
I
t
T
,t
it
it.il,
t
'it
teneral contours of the hi llside. A lane not more than 6 m wide
was cleared for installation qf ,eaqh lateral. No gradinB was
perlormed so the lateralsr suspended f rom posts' f ollow the
transverse undulations on the hilt side and the PiPe vaiies
l?
from 1.5 to 4.5 m above the ground sur face. These steel
laterals have not suffered any damage from limb or tree falls.
The eastern hi t lside has slopes ranging from 8-15% and the
western side exceeds 25%. The dominant soi ls are wel I drained
Ioamy glacial tills. About 40% of the area is covered with a
mixture/-of maples, beeches and birches with a dense understory
of balSam, spruce and hemlock. The remainder of the site is
domi nated by wh i te spruce, spruce and f i r. The mean annua I
temperature at the site is about 6oCr averatq annual
precipitation i s 1.4 m with snowf al I in excess of 2.5 m (as
snow). On averate the site is snow covered about 120 days Per
year and frost free for about 90 days (June-September ).
Special measures were required to allow oPeration
throughout the winter. Tr ial and error exper imentat ion resulted
in a special ly modi fied, downward spraying nozzle. These were
placed at all low spots in each lateral so that all remaining
tiguid would rapidly drain at the end of the oPerational cycle.
. .?
The water in the main lines drains back to the holding pond.
Winter time wastewater appl ications have been successf ul with
ambient air temperatures as low as -18" C.
.-' Another winter problem involved the accumulat ion of ice
beneath the upward sprayint nozzles. Thi s accumulation can
aentulf both the pipe and the nozzle, imposing excess loads on
,:
(L
1,
I
t
I
T
lr
lr
lr
lr
lr
lr
lr
lr
lr
lr
lr
l=,
[i.l.
li 'l.t
l,r
the pipe and blocking flow from the nozzle. This was solved by
adding a lm long riser, at,the f.ormer nozzle Gonnection,
inclined at about 20o from the vertical so that most of the
spray would fatl to one side rather than directly on the pipe.
Problems still occur and the operator is sti ll experimenting
ur.i th other approaches and nozzle tyPes.
The energy use at this system was evaluated in 1980
(Martet, et al). The total operation and maintenance cost for
l9t0 was S54r 467 with a total flow of 91,000 m3. Most of this
,,.llow o.t.urt in the winter months due to the near by ski
resorts. These O & M costs include the complete oxidation
ditch-aerobic sludge digestion secondary treatment plant as
well as the land treatment portion of the system. About 25% of'
the annual costs are retated to enerty. Electrical costs
account for about 80% and the remainder was for heating oi l-
The calculated energy consumPtion is shown in Table 5. The l4%
assigned in the Table, to the tand treatment comPonent
represents about 88,000 kwh to Pump effluent to the hillside
for the year. The remaining enerty was used to provide
secondary treatment.
'a
The Vest Dover design was based on the assumPtion that a
"{ragipan" layer (glacial induced hardpan) existed more or less
'".''uniformly on the treatment sloPes at a depth of I m or less'
':. -i- -k 1,. -
:,. Thi s barr ier was expected to Prevent deep Percolat ion to the
: .' ,I.;-- :.+- j -!}r'i "sToundwater and to channel the percolate f low laterally away
--. !-..: :1:'-- .. a-r t. ';
i ..-
..1't't3
Table 5. Energy consumPtion at West Dover, VT
Funct ion :.
Equ i pmen t % of Total
Ene r gy
46
t
!
i
l,
I
t
i
I
I
T
T
I
I
T
T
t
I
I
t
,l
.!i - !.iIt
i-. ., r
:? .
f,*'
*t-
Secondary Treatment
Aeration
Other Treatment
Component s
Hea t
Lighting, misc.
Land Treatment
a)
Ditch rotors, blowers
Conmi nu t or , pumps ,
s ludge manaternent.
Oi I f urnace
Pump s
t2
?7
I
14.
T0'o-
from the site. Fragipan is a common feature in the glaciated
uplands of northern New England and aPParently it's presence
was taken for granted during design. A Post construction
evaluation (Bouzounret alrl982l determined that fragipan is
essential ly absent on the eastern slope so deep percolation is
only limited by the relatively shallow bedrock (l-3m)
The secondary treatment plant and the holding pond were
constructed in the narrow flood ptain of Eltis Brook. This
required construction of the holding pond relat ively close to
the toe of the. eastern treatment hillside. It was noted during
'construction that natural runof f and subflow from the hillside
::. were entering the holding pond in signif icant quantities. A
-, <i't. ;:. i,. l'cut-of f ditch was constructed at the toe of the slope to
,. ':ir: ' +*: aorrect this problem. This ditch drains to an evaPorat.ion pond
:.!
.. , constructed i n sandy soi I at the southern end of the, s i te. The
l+
ditch does not collect all of the subsurface flow from the
hillside (Bouzoun' et al, tgta).-Thg western treatment slope
drains directly to the Deerfield River.
The treatment areas contain numerous outcroPs, i rragrt",
slopes, and low wet spots. at random locations on the hillside.
These conditions are not desirable f or therrideal" system and
where possible are being corrected by the oPerator.
The special downward sprayinB nozzles are:ssential for
winter operation but they do induce signi ficant local runoff.
They d,o not open iust for the drainate cycle but oPerate
contin'uously during the entire aPplication Period. The large
orilice needed to prevent freezing results in a flow rate of
about 0., L/s on an impact area less t.han 4 m in diameter'
Saturation and runoff from thi s zone occurS rapidly. However,
the runoff then infi ltrates quickly downslope. This is not a
problem dur ing the surrner. As soon as temperatures permi t the
nozzle is rotated l8Oo and sprays upward in the warm months.
' The per formance of this system wi th resPect to water
quality requirements has been consistently excellent. Water
samples are obtained f rom s ix shal low wel I s on the treatment
site (about lm deep) and from the cut-off ditch at the toe of
'lthe eastern slope. Special studies have also measured the
c.haracteristics in the adjacent Ellis Brook and the Deerf ield
River as well as the snow and ice adiacent to the sprinkler
nozzles.
t5
t
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
T
I
T
I
t
+
I
Table 6 compares the onsite water quality data from
1984. Bouzounr €t al reported the- ea.rlier results in
t9t4 data were collected by the State of
(Willard,l9t5). Table 7 is a similar comParison
ad jacent brook.
Table 6. West Dover, Vermont, on site water quality
l97t-79 to
1982, the
Vermont
.'
for the
Locat i on Total N (mg/L)Total P (mg/L)
t
t,t,
I
t
I
{t
I
I
T
t
:l
I
1t
I
I
I
T
.:
*T1" :-
11 ,
iT"
1l .,,}'l.:-.
.if ,,"
Appl ied Ef f luent
t97E-79
1984
Cut-Of f Ditch
t978-79
I 984
On-Site Wells, 1978-79
East Side
Wes t Si de
t5
t7
4.0
4.4
0.2
0.1
0.7
o.l
6.3
4.3
7.2
,.0
The removal of ni trogen and phosphorus has been excel lent
and there was no significant difference between winter and
summer performance as indicated by the 1978-79 datar EDd no
"lsignif icant dif ferences after lO years of oPeration. Table 8
surmarizes water quality data in the adiacent surface waters at
Yest Dover and other sites in Vermont.,-.
1''-
I 1,3
t
Table 7. water quality in Ellis Brook, west Dover VT, l97E-79
Parameter
:,
Upstream Downstream
t
(
t
T
I
t
T
I
t
I
t
t
t
t
i 1..
I i.';li :
i :.:-:,
if''
ilr,'
IIi,.
Tota I N,
Total P,
Cl , mg/L
Fecal Col
mglL
mg lL
0.3
0 .07
1.0
It
0.3
0.07
2.4
t2i , /l/toO mt
Since operations continue througtrout the winter at West
Dove-r there was some concern regarding the impact of the
applied wastewater on the adjacent snow, and then again on the
receiving streams during the snow melt and runof f period. Table
9 corr.rpares data collected during the 1978-79 winter on the
treatrnent site and at a remote offsite location.
The ice mound immediately beneath the sprinkler still
contained about 9O% of the applied nitrogen, the snow pack
wi thin the impact zone contained 7.5 mg/L total ni troten. The
ice mounds were about 3 m in diameter at the base and about 1.5
m tall; the impacted snow zone was about t m in diameter and
0.7 m deep. Using these dimensions and the f low and water
quality data reported it is possible to show that about 95% of
'l
the applied nitrogen moved through the porous snow pack with
the sti I I unfrozen water droplets and then probably infi ltrated
f:iirrito the still unfrozen soil. The ice mound is essentially
t:'+JE'ii/t- -: ?t-'1A,-'!5i
*
-,.:.: ':i
t1
composed of frozen was tewater. The 7.5 mg/L i n the ad jacent
snow pack is for the mosl par.t due to entrapment of
particulate matter.
Table t. Surface water quality at Vermont sites
Locat i on Total N (mg/L)Total P (mg/L)cl (mg /L )
ll
h
lr
It
ir
ir
h
h
l,
lr
lr
It
lr
h
l,
Ir
it
LTt,
ii
:-
Hay s ta,ck
Applied Effluent
Br ook
Upstream
Downstream
West Dover
Applied Effluent
Brook
Upstream
Downstream
I.'
0.6
I.l
L.0
0.)
0.3
0.7
0 .03
0.2
4.0
0.07
0.07
8.7
2.8
4.9
1.0
2.4
57
The nitroten and phosphorus which are contained in this
ice ana '!now would have a negl igible impact on receiving waters
durint snow melt and runoff. The 600 sprinklers at West Dover
impact on on I y 3 ha out of the ent i re
' .-.'
snow cover ing the other 17 ha would
same t ime
20 ha site. The pristine
melt and run of f at the
tI
,
(b
Table 9. Vest Dover, VT quality of snow and ice
Loca t i on Total N
mg/L
Total P
mg/L
BOD
mgl L
'l
T
!
I
I
I
T
I
I
T
I
I
I
I
T
I
iI
'l{"r-:
if'f,
Background Snow
Snow Vithin
Sprinkler Impact
Ice At Sprinkler
Applied Effluent
(Annua I._ Average )
Base 13.)
t4.9
t.7
4.0
0 .97
7.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.7
5.6
10.0
The calculated quality for the runof f would be:
BOD = 0.0? mglL
Total N = l.t mg/L
Totalp=O.02mglL
It seems clear that'ryinter oPerations with large droplet
sprinklers poses no environmental concern since most of the
applied water will still infiltrate within the site. The
situation is slightly different with snow making oPerations
where the intent is to f reeze essentially all of the applied
water. In thi s case, the impacted zone qr.lay contain most of the
applied nvtrients. However, in the typical case the impact zone
will still be a small portion of the total watershed area so
,the ultimate runof f impact should still be negligible. The
concern with using wastewater for recreational snow making is
''not the contained nutrients but rathef elimination of
tq
1t,,;
i
'l*u
, i:' if _r:f
t
T
t
(
I
I
t
I
T
I
.T
I
I
I
I
,l
Pathotens; appropriate levels of treatment, including
f i ltration and disinfection .sh.oul.d be ef f ective f or that
PurPose.
DESIGN LIMITS
The approach recommended by the US EPA and other texts
(Reed, Crites, 1984) determines the wastewater constituent that
is the limiting design parameter and then determines the
treatment area required for that substance. This approach bases
design directly on wastewater characteristics and site
conditions rather than on other indirect secondary
relationships. For typical domestic wastewaters, the limiting
parameter wi I I usual ly be either the volume of water itself (as
constrained by the hydrological capabi I i t ies of the soi I s) or
the ni troten content to protect the qual i ty of troundwater
which may be a drinking water source.
If the potential for downgradient troundwater use exists
then the US EPA recommends that percolate qual i ty should be
equivalent to drinking water standards at the proiect boundary.
If extraction for drinking water is not possible then the
requirement does not prevai l. At Vest Dover for example,
essentia.[ly al I of the percolate should emerBe as subf low in
the adiacent surface streams with no intermediate extraction
for drinking water.
for nitroten remor"l. Typical values for forests ranBe from
Lo
I
!
T
T
').:(I
I
t
t
t00-300 kglhalyr depending on the tyPe of tree, tste, harvest i ng
practices and other fac.tors.,.B-ase.d on the data discussed
previously, the calculated nitrogen removal at West Dover is
about 14, kg/halyr, but at Volfeboro, NH it is oniy 60
kglhalyr. These calculations are based on assumptions retarding
the"actual" treatment area at both Iocations. It is Possible
that the actual wetted area at Wolfeboro is smaller than
assumed, thereby accountint for the low calculated uptake.
Taken totether the two values confirm the validity of the
criterira in the design texts.
Phosphorus is an additional design concern because of the
potential envi ronmental impact on the receiving surface waters.
A design based only on drinking water standards wi ll not be
concerned wi th phosphorus, so addi tional Procedures are
necessary. It is essential during the planning and design
stages to assess the phosphorus impact and if removal is
necessary to det.ermine the site capabilities for that purpose.
Some authorities specify a minimum percolate detention time in
the soil to insure that there is time (and space) for all
essential reactions to occur prior to emergence in the surface
water. A more aCCurater 3Dd more exPenS i ve ProCedure i S to
't
obtain and test soi I samples from the potential flow Path to
determine their phosphorus retention capacity. A rapid method
for preliminary site assessment is Presented below.
-i..
iE :,
!
E
l
LI
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
T
T
T
I
I
I
T
T
t
I
It is derived f rom
high hydraul ic loadings
conservative estimate for
basic equation is:
the US EPA des ign procedures for very
on cgar.se.soils, so should provide a
most forest soi ls in New England. The
Where:
Px = Po.-kt
Total P at a distance x on the f low path,mg/L
Total P in applied wastewater,mg/L-
O.O4E at pH 7, d.-l (pH 7 gives the lowest value)
detention time, d
(x)(w)/(Kx)(c)
distance along flow path, m
Px
Po
k
t
x
w
Kx
= sBturated soil water content, use O.t+ m3 lrr3
hydraul ic conduct ivi ty
m/d. So: Kv = v€rtical,
hydraulic gradient for
vertical flow.
The equation is solved in two steps. First for the
ver t i ca I f low component, from the soi I sur face to the
subsurface flow barrier (if one exists) and then for the
lateral -f low to the ad jacent sur f ace water. The ca lcu lat i ons'a
are based on assumed saturated conditions, so the lowest
possible detention time will result. The actual vertical flow
-? ..'.-iJ r:;?, in most cases wilt be unsaturated so the actual detention time
. ;- in this zone will be much longer than calculated with this
G
of soil in direction x,
K;r = horizontal-
flowsystemrG=lfor
.f.
.l
"+'-
L4,
,
:
t
J,
I
procedure. If the equat ion predicts acceptable removal, then
there is some assurance that the-site should perform reliably
and detai led tests should not be necessary for prel iminary
work. Detai led tests should be conducted for final design of
large scale projects
@[{CLUS lotls
. Vastewater treatment by land appliiation in forests is a
reliable and an environmentaly compatible concept. It has
become the most common form of land treatment in northern New
EnBland, and that use i s I ikely to expand.
2. The glaciated nature of upland forested sites does not
usually represent ideal conditions on a microscale due to
: " irregular slopes, thin soi ls, shallow bedrock, and wet areas.
However, experience at operational systems indicates. excellent
.; overal I performance even with these internal constraints. Many
of these local constraints can be improved over time in an
operat ional system. That approach i s preferred to clear ing,
site regrading and then reforestat ion
3. The experience at West Dover clearly indicates that a
thorough site investitation i s essential for design of al I
.' :- ..at least estimated.
t
t
t
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
t
il
{..i',
'F-l'#,#f'.ti;o* melt and runof f f rom land treatment' : " ,il: r,*r' .
.:, <1.r( - '
,ji.- bia rignif icant impact on receiving
i.- ; .',
!.r..i.*1 site is operated in the winter months.t'
:
s i tes shou I d not be
waters even if the
t'
':, 'i
i+,..,
.i,.
ia' a' :
*...* .'l
f',s
aIIl!
I
1-3
5. Both rr itroten and phosphorus can be ef fectively manaBed on
foresteri sites at the desi.gq loadings currently in use.
sustained high Ievel ni trogen removal wi I I require a tree
harvest program at some point in the operat ion. The phosphorus
removal r:apability of most soils will exceed the "design life"
of most engineering works. However, it that time is ever
reached there is.no need to abandon the site since phosphorus
could still be removed by precipitation in a pretre:tment step.
6. wastewater disinfection should not be -a routine process
requir.ement nor should secondary treatment since the forest
eco-systenr will provide better treatment for the less oxidized
forms o:[ wastewater. pathoten removal is'essential for
recreational operations where. direct and immediate public
access is expected.
REFEREIICE,S
Allen, D, (1985): Personal communication, New Hampshire water
Supply and Pollution Controi Conmission, Concord, NH.
Bouzoun, J.R., D.W. Mea I s, E.A. Cas se I I , ( l9g2): A Case Study
of Land rreatment in a cold climate - west Dover Vt, usA CRREL
Report 82-44, USA CRREL, Hanover, NH.
Earleyr.D.J., H.W. Hosker, (1982): Tree Response to Sewage
Ef f luent Appl icat ion in ivol f eboro, NH, Dept. Forest Resources,
Univ. New Hampshire, Durham, NH.
I
I
T
T
i
T
I
I
T
T
T
t
t
T
I
I
T
I
a
I
t
i
T
T
T
I
I
I
,l
T
I
t
I
I
Flanders, ll.A. (1983): Evaluat ion of Wastewater Renovat ion by
Spray Irrigation - Wolfeboro, New-Hampshire, l97t-1981, Masters
Thesis, Civi I Engineering Dept., Northeastern, University'
Boston, MA.
Martel, C.J., B.C. Sargent, W.A. Bronson (1982): Energy
Conservation at the West Dover, Vermont Water Pollution Control
Facility, CRREL SR 82-24, USA CRREL, Hanover, NH.
McKimrH.L.l et El, (19t2): wastewater Applications in Forest
Ecosystems, CRREL Report 82-19' USA CRREL, Hanover, NH.
Pound, C.E., R.W. Cr i tes (l973lt Wastewater Treatment and Reuse
by Land Aptpl ication, Vol I &.2, EPA 66012-73-006, US EPA ORD'
Washington, DC.
Reed, s.c., R.w. cr i tes ( l98a ): Handbook o f Land Treatment
. SVstems iior Industrial and Municipal Wastes, Noyes
Publications, Park Ridge, NJ.
Reed, S.C.r €t al (1972)z wastewater Management by Disposal on
the Land, CRREL SR 17l, USA CRREL' Hanover, NH.
Reed, S.C. (1984): Nitroten Removal in IUastewater Ponds, CRREL
Report t4-ll3' USA CRREL' Hanover, NH.
5epp,E (1965): Survey of Sewate Disposal by'Hi llside sprays,
Bureau of Sanitary Engineeringr Catif6rnia Dept. of Health,
. .a
Berkeley, CA.
:(1971): Ef
Vastes, Penn
Park, PA.
fects of Trees and Forests in
State University, RePrint Series
t
I'I,
I
E.?'*.:,Neutralizing
f,lr-ir- universir
L6
T
I
.1
T
I
T
T
T
t
T
T
I
I
I
T
T
{*
.ti;t
US EPA (l9tl): Process Design Manual - Land Treatment of
Municipal wastewater; EPA,62-5 lt-81-013, US EPA, CERI,
Cincinnati, Otrl.
Willard, T (19t5): Personal Communication, State of Vermont
Agency of Environmental Conservation, Dept. of Water Resources
and Environmental Engineering, Montpelier, VT.
ACKI{OIYLEDGMENTS
The assistance provided by MI: _Wally Bronson' chief
operator at West DoverrVT, and M-r. Gordon Reade, chief operator
..at WolJeboro, NH, was essential to this study. The assistance
and information furnished by Mr Dan Allen, NHWSPCC, and Mr. Tom
Wi I lard f rom the State of Vermont i s gratef u I ly acknowledged.
i- 3ii, .- ;--t- -:l
I
'-ub
HED@
The World's Irader In Snowmaking Technology
Is Pleased To Introduce Its
Put HED@ on your team and save
Time, Money and Energy!
See us at the upcoming National Tlade Show for further de
HEDCO
Dvision of The Dcwcy Elcctronics Corp.
27 Muller Rood, Ooklond, NJ 07436
(2Or) 337-4700
tails.
aa9
Saralevo 1984xSupplien lo Winter OymPics:
Soroievo 1984 ond' Colgory 1988.
t;'' .
Snowmaking can be very
inexpEnsive
when yod use HEDCO
HEDCO'S SNOWCUB NT
ELECTRIC POWERED MACHTNE
BASIC SPECIFICATIONS
I welstrt: 1600 tb.
I Anchoringr Prorisions: 2-Hand operated extend and retract scraflI sze: ;:ff;il,
I EetctricI Dernand: 480V,3-ptnse,60Hz,35l(W
I Air: 12dm,1co psi
I
Fan: 29'direct Jrive 3,60O RPM
I
T
I
T
T
T
I
t
T
Water Pressure: 150-500 Psl max
Water Connection: l.5" Qulck Disconnect
Project Mount Motion: 360o Azlmr.fth +0o to 80o
Elevatlon
Thror: 40'- 130'
Nozzles: 12 Centrally Controlled
Valves: 3 selfdralnlng system drain
built ln
I sYsrEM sPEclFtcAnoNs
Equals 1,000 cfm Compressor
I AirTemperature WaterThruput Snou, on the Ground Compacted
_ @ 60% Rel.hum. 3poF 4o0 psi lnlet to 25 lbs/sq ft, per 12 hrs.
I 28.soF q'-
3o gpm .15 acre feet
25oF 6o gpm .31 acre feet
I zr,oF 9o gpm .48 acre feetI 15oF 150 gpm .&5 acre feet
OoF 200 gpm* 1.13 acre feet
I r Flow b pressure{lmited wer 150 gpm.
Compare the energy cost of HEDCO Snowmakers against the
cost of your present system!
I
t
I
I
T
t
I
T
t
T
APPENDIX C
SITE APPROVAL APPLICATION
I
T
I
I
t
T
T
I
T
2.
t
I
I
I
I
T
I
I
COLORADO DEPARIUE.IT oF HEALTI{Ifater Quallty Coatrol Dlvleloa
4210 East L[th Avenue
Deuver, Colorado 80220
A?PLICATION FOR SI?E APPROVAI FOR CONSIRUCTION OR EXPANSION OF:
A) DOIESTIC WASTEWATEE, I?,IAT}TM[T T{ORKS (INCLUDING TRXATME}TT PIAMTS,
oUTFAIJ SEI{ERS, A}ID LIFI STATIONS) OVER 2,000 cpD'cApAcrTy.
E) rrTERCEproRS (rF RtQurRxD By c.R.s. 25-8-702 (3))
APPLICAI{T: Ski Suqljlght, Inc.
ADDRESS! 10901 - ll7 Road, G'lenwood Springs, CO g160l pHONE:945-7 49).
Coasultlog EngLueerre Naoe and Addrees: Uaste Engineering, Inc.
2430 Alcott Street, Denver, co'lorado gDll pHoNE: 433-27gg
A. Sumnary of lpforpatLop regardlng n€w seerage treatpent plapt:
1. Propoeed Locarloa: (Legal Deacrlptloo) t{E l/4, sl,,l 1/4, sectlon 33
Tornshlp TSouth , Range 89 I'lest ,
Garfie'ld €ounty.
Type aud capaclty of treatoent faclllty proposed: processes Used Aerated lagoon
and Iand treatment
Hydraullc 30,000 Organlc .. 6!"-w
3.
T
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
Preaeat PE 225
Locatlos of faclllty:
Deelgn PE !!0 I Doroestlc 100 Z Industrlal
Attach a oap of the area whlch lacludes the fo11owlng:
(a) 5-n11e radlus: aIL eewage treatDetrt plants, 1lft
water eupply latakee.
(b) 1-olle radlus: habltable bulldloge, locatlon of
an approrloate lndlcatlon of the
4.Effluent dlsposal: Surface dlscharge to ratercourEe
Subaurface dlsposal-Iaod X
Evaporatlon 0ther Snovmak-i ng
5.
6.
7.
atations, and dooestlc
potable water we1Is, and
topography.
Four Mile Creek
q!t!g.rr.,tgI 9pg11ty. claeslfl-catl-on qf recelviug warercouree(s)Recreation Class 2;Aquattc Life Class-I; Water Supply: Aqr.icu'l ture-Proposed Effluent Llhltatlons'de'ielofed ln ConJunctlon wlth Plannlng and Standards
Sectlon, I{QCD: E0Dfe!!--;ogl1 sslll110_-Bfl*,,f"fgl couforo 5000/12,000/100m'l
lotal Resldual. Chlorln._:0@
-gl1 Arooonla'r'v/ 11:2/ rt7J. Other_
tlll1 a State or Federal grent be eought to flnaoce any portloD of thls project? No
Present zoolng of slte area? Cormercia'l Limited
1inA"0r$l3ri."1-f.}*ts j:.'d1us or slte?AgricuItura1, Agricultural/Rural/Rura1 Density
ergeL \vJr J/.llhat 18 the dlstance downstrean froo the dlscharge to the Dearest domesElc water
supply lntake?Town of Silt (approximately 22 m.i1es)
(Natre ot supply)
I
T
I
(Address of Supply)
llhat le the dletance downstreao frou the dlecharge to the neareot other polnt of
(Richard f.lartin) l'lcKnown Ditch
-1-
I{QC}-3 (Revtsed 8-83)
(Natre of UBer)
dlversLou? 2,000 ft.
I
8. Who has the responslblllty for operatlng the proposed fac111ty?
Ski Sunliqht Corp.t
I
I
t
9. Who owna the laad upon whlch the fac1l1ty will be construcred?
Ski Sunlight Corp.
(P1easeattachcop1esofthedocumeotcreat1ngauthor1ty@
coDstruct the propo8ed faclllty at thl8 elte.)
10. E8tlDtted proJect cost: 960.OOO
Iltro ls flnanclally responelble for the cotrBtructlon and operatl,on of the facllity?
Sk'i Sun'l iqht Corp.
U. Naoes and addresees of'all rater and/o! satrltatlon dlstrlcts wlthln 5 o11es
downstreao of proposed rraste$rater treattreot faclllty slte.
NONE
I
T
t
I
(Attach a separate sheet of papefl-aecE-safyJ
L2. Ie the faclllty ln a 100 year flood plala or other Datulal hazard area? No
If so, rhat precautlonc are belng taken?
Haa the flood plaln been deslgnated by the Colorado Wate! Conservatlon Board,
DepartEent of Natural Resources or other Agency? n/a
(Agency Name)
If eo, what le that deslgoatlon?_n/a
13. Please lnclude all addltlooal factors that rolght help the I.Iater Quallty Control
Dlvlsloa nake an laforned declslon oD your appllcatlon for slte approval.
This applicatiol,n is an upgrading of the existing aeration lagoon system permitted
under liQ-QQ38598 The petlrit is to 'improve the arrrnonia treatment capabil'ities
on the facilities. No capacity expansion is requested.I
T
I
I
B. Infornatlon regardlng l1ft statlons. n/a
1. The proposed Llft Etatloo when fu1ly developed 1111 generate the followlng addltlona
load: Peak Hydraullc (l,lcD)P.E. to be served
2. fs the slte located la a 100 year flood plalo?.
If yes, on a aeparate Bheet of paper descrlbe the protectlve neasures to be taken.
3. Descrlbe eDergeucy Bysten la case of statlon and/or power fa11ure.
I
I
t
T
t
I
4. Nane and address of facl1lty provldlng treatDeot:
5. The proposed 11ft BtatloD when fu1ly developed wt11 lncrease the loadlng of the
treatDent plant to Z of hydraullc and Z of organlc capaclty and
agrees to treat thls wastewater? Yes No(TreatEent Agency)
----Date-
-2-
WQCD-3 (Revlsed 8-83)
Slgnature and Tlt.Le
1.
I
T
t
I
t
T
C. If the fac11lty w111 be located on or adJacent to a 61te thst ls owned or oanaged by a
Federal or State ageacy, eend the agency a copy of thls appllcatlon.
D. Recomendatlon of governnental authorltlee:
Please addreas the fol1ow1ng lssues 1o your recomeadatlou declslon. Are the proposed
facllltles coaslsteot rrlth the cooprehenslve plan aud auy other plan6 for the area,
lncludlng the 201 Faclllty Plan or 208 l{ater qua11ty UaDagenetrt Ptan, as they affect water
quallty? If you have any further connents or questloos, please call 320-8333, Extenslon
5272.
Reconnend Reconneod No
Date Approval Dlsapproval Couoent Slsnature of Reoresentatlve
Hanagetrent Agency
2.
3.
4.
I
I
Local, GoverDDent: C1Eles or Towns (lt
Elte 16 lnslde boundary or wlthln three
ul1es) and Sanltatlon Dlstrlcts.
5.
6.I
Local Heal.th AuthorlEy
-
7.I
I
T
I
councl]' ot Governoents/t(eglonal P].annin8
State Geolo8lBt
(For l1ft Etatlons, the slgoature of the State Geologlst ls not requlred. Appllcatlons for
treatDetrt plants requlre all slgnatures.)
I certlfy that I an fan11lar rlth the requlretrents of the "Regulatlons for Slte Appllcatlons
For Dooestlc Wastenater TreatneDt Worksr'and have posted the slte ln accordance wlth the
regulatlous. An eoglneerlng report, as descrlbed by the regulatlons, has been prepared and ir
encloeed -
I
t
I
I
T
I
Slgnature of Appllcant TYPED NA}IE
-3-
WQCD-3 (Revlsed 8-83)
DATE-
t
I
T
I
t
I
I
t
t
I
T
I
I
T
I
T
t
T
T
ATTACHMEI,IT TO SITE A?PLICATION
ro accordance trlth c.R.s. 1981, 25-g-702 (2)(a), (b), aod (c), and the..Regularlons for SlteAppllcatloas for Dooestlc wastewater Treatnent l{orks", the l{ater Quallty control Dlvlslon musdeteroiae that each Blte locatloa la coaalsteot lrlth ihe loagr"tge, comprehenslve plannlng fothe area ln wtrich lt 18 to be located, that the plant on the proposed slte 1111 be nanaged tonlalnlze the Pote[tl.al adverse lEpacte oD water qua1lty, and Dust encourage the consolidatlonof rastewater treatDeot rorke whenever feasible.
Ia oaklng th18 deterDinatloa, the Dlvlslon requlres each appllcaDt for a Bite approval for adoEestlc rraateuater treatuent rorke to aupply au englneerlng report descrlblng iire project anahowlng the appllcartts capabllltles to Eanage ald operate itre iattfty over tte Llfe of theproJect io deternlue the potentlal adverae lnpacts oo ,.t"r qua1lty. The report "t.tt Uuconeldered the cululnatlon of the plannlng plocess and as a mlnlurr. aha1I adiress thefollowlag:
Servlce area deflaltlon lnc1ud1ng exlstlng populatlon and populatlon proJectlons,flow/loadlng proJectlons, and reiatlonshll io'other water ind ,r"ter"i"r-treairnenr pranrsin the area.
Propoeed efflueat llllLtatloD8 as developed ln coordlnatloa rf,1th the plannlng and Standarrlsectlon of the Dlvlslon. (Allow olnLoum four weeke processlng tlme.)
Aaalysls of ex{stlag facllltles lncludlag perfornance of those facilltles.
Analysle of treatuent alternatlvee consldered.
Flood pJ.ala and aatural hazard analysls.
Detalled deBcrlptlon of seleeted aLternatlves lncludlng legal descrlptlon of the 61re,treatEent aysteE descllptloD, deslgn capacltles, and operatlonal stafflng needs.
Legal arrangeoeDts ehowlog cortrol of slte for the proJect 1lfe.
ItrBtltutloBal arraogeneDts 8uch a6 contract and/or covenant terns for all users whlch wilbe flnallzed to accoropllshed acceptable waate treatnent.
IlatrageDeut c8Pabl1ltles for controlllng the wastewater throughout and treatment wlthln thcapaclty llultatlons of the proposed treattlent works, 1.e., user co[tracts, operatlngagreeEenta, pretreattreDt requlreEents.
Flnanclal systeE whlch has beea developed to provlde for necessary capltal and contlnuedoPelat1on, Dalateoance, and replacemetrt through the Llfe of the pio5ect. Thls wouldloc1ude, for exanple, autlclpated fee structure.
Inpleurentatlon plan and schedule 1nclud1ng eBtluated constructlon tlne and estlmatedBtart-up date.
Dependlng on the proposed proJect, gome of the above ltens nay not be appltcabl.e to address.In euch casesr alnply lirdlcate oD the appllcatloa foro the non appllcauiifty of those.
-4-
wQcD-3 (Rev1sed 8-83)
T
T
T
T
T
I
I
t
I
t
I
I
I
I
t
t
T
I
I
I
I
T
t
I
I
I
T
T
I
I
I
T
T
T
T
I
T
I
Sun'l i ght
I nn [,le'l I
ri\\ S'rill:zi\iwl'i\ ..''\\.,.
\\i'
-l-i-,r\ {1'l l '.9ji(.o
rlo
Land App.
Si tes
SITE MAP
Ski Sunlight Lagoon
Land Application Site
Scale 1:24,000
WASTIT ENGINEERING, INC. ' 6/88