Laserfiche WebLink
<br />consistently evolving regulations. The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission <br />has implemented a co-op program which trains operators in the EP A comprehensive <br />performance evaluation CCPE) assessment techniques for water treatment plants. <br /> <br />The comprehensive performance evaluation is an approach developed by the U.S. <br />Envirorunental Protection Agency to improve surface water treatment plant performance <br />and help assure cost-effective compliance to the surface water treatment rules (SWTR). (4) <br />The approach consists of two steps, comprehensive performance evaluation CCPE) and <br />comprehensive'technical assistance (CT A). A CPE is a thorough evaluation of an existing <br />treatment plant including assessment of the unit treatment processes capabilities and the <br />impac~ of the operation, maintenance and administrative practices on optimal performance i <br />of the plant. CT A is used to op~mize performance of an existing plant by systematically . <br />addressing factors that limit performance identified during the CPE. Therefore, the CPE <br />approach can be utilized to evaluate the abili ty of a water fil tration plant to meet the turbidity <br />and disinfection requirements of the surface water treatment rule and then facilitate <br />achievement of cost effective compliance. In some cases, a CPE may result in costs- <br />savings and/or increase capacity. The CPE uses a{our step approach: 1) evaluate major unit <br />processes, 2) conduct performance assessment, 3) identify limiting factors, and 4) prepare <br />a report offindings. The TNRCC through the co-op voluntary utility program conducted a <br />CPE at the Brown County Water Improvement District #1's plant in October of1996.(5) <br />The results of the initial CPE are summarized on the following figures. Figure 6 depicts the <br />raw water turbidity to the plant. Figure 7 depicts the raw water turbidity in terms of percent <br />frequency. Figure 8 depicts the settled water turbidity variations for the I2-month period. <br />Figure 9 depicts the percent fre,quency occurrence for settled water turbidity for the study ~ <br />year. It should be noted that the optimization goal of a settled water turbidity of2.0 NTUs <br />was initially met only 25 percent of the time. Figure 10 depicts the finished water turbidity <br />and the current regulatory standard of 0.5 NTUs. Figure 11 depicts the finished water <br />turbidity frequency occurrence for the 12-month period and indicates and depicts the Texas <br />Optimization goal for individual filters of 0.1 NTUs. It should ~e noted that the initial CPE <br />indicated the plant was achieving this goal less than 5 percent of the time. <br /> <br />;'" <br /> <br />Figure 6: Raw Water Turbidity <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />B ro w n Co u n ty W ID No.1 <br />M axirn urn Dally Raw Water Turbidity <br /> <br />,t ..........................................._................................................................................................. <br /> <br />S' <br />~ <br />.. <br />i <br />! <br />.. <br /> <br />... " .............. ......~......... . ................. ... ... .... ............................... <br /> <br /> <br />..\~..t..\.J.L.......................................... ........ ... .. . .. ......... <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />. <br />I.,..t <br /> <br />N.h" <br /> <br />0..... <br /> <br />,..... <br />Oat. <br /> <br />"""" <br /> <br />,..... <br /> <br />....,... <br />