Wastewater Report

Due: Nov .29th

What Is Wastewater
Wastewater is water that was affected and/or contaminated by environmental externalities, such
as chemical or biological wastes, usually, a by-product of human activities. As it relates to the
following paper, wastewater comprises of water discharged by domestic, commercial, industrial,
agricultural, and other entities. The mixing of different sources creates wastewater not suitable for
drinking or other purposes until some process of purification is made. A further subset of
wastewater is sewage which is contaminated by urine and feces (organic particles) in addition to
other liquids and solids (inorganic) as described above. In order to transfer the wastewater to its
treatment destination, a system of pipes, pumps, channels and other means are used.

History of D.C. Sewerage System

District of Columbia has one of the oldest sewerage systems in the United States. It dates back to
the early 19th century. The early systems were not interconnected, but rather, they were built to
drain water (storm, ground, etc) away from the streets. Water was discharged into the nearest
body of water which was then and still is the Potomac River. As population grew following the civil
war, water pollution and widespread epidemics took thousands of lives. Those initial problems led
the federal government to investigate the sources of those problems and create the necessary
mechanism to avoid similar situations in the future. A board of Engineers appointed by President
B. Harrison recommended that the new discharge points to be located far away from the Potomac
River in order to prevent the sewage flows to directly and indirectly return into the city water
systems. The discharge point was to be located at Blue Plains which is now widely known as the
Blue Plains Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant.

DC Water and Sewer Authority (DC WASA)

The DC WASA (District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority) is an independent authority
created in 1996. Prior to that, it was a part of the DC Government. It is important to note few
major differences in its financial shape before and after it became independent. Prior to 1996, DC
SAWA had virtually no cash reserves in the bank, had no bond rating as it never issued debt, had
over $35 mil. In delinquent accounts, and costumer service needed a major overhaul. After it
gained its independence, the DC SAWA has accumulated approx. 6 month worth of cash
reserves, earned AA bond rating, reduced its delinquent accounts to just over $6 mil., and
drastically improved its costumer service center and satisfaction. Furthermore, the DC SAWA
improved its meter reading after implementing its automated meter reading thus increasing its
revenues as a result.

The DC WASA provides wastewater collection and treatment service to more then half a million
people in the District of Columbia, and also to nearly a million and a half people of nearby
Maryland and Virginia. The DC WACA purchases its drinking water from Washington Aqueduct
(operated by the army corps of engineers), and it operates the Blue Plains Advanced Wastewater
Treatment Plant (“BPAWTP”), which is the main focus of this paper. The Blue Plains Plant is the
largest advanced wastewater treatment plant in the world and it covers 150 acres with the
capacity of more then 370 mgd and has a peak capacity of over a billion gpd. The DC WASA
establishes its own rate and fees for all services provided. Its distribution system consist of over
1,300 miles of piping’s, 5 pumping stations and reservoirs, 4 storage tanks, over 35,000 valves
and 9,00 hydrants.

Despite the enormous service area it has to cover, the DC WASA rates and competitive compare
to other cities in the region. It has a solid costumer base which consists of federal, municipal and
county governments, commercial entities, and residential costumers.

Mission
The mission of DC WASA is to serve all its customers with outstanding service by providing reliable and cost-effective
water and wastewater services in accordance with best practices.

Vision
DC WASA provides world-class water and wastewater services as a leading environmental steward.

Values
• Respectful, responsive, and sensitive to the needs of our customers and employees
• Ethical in professional and personal conduct
• Vigilant to ensure optimal health, safety, and environmental outcomes
• Dedicated to teamwork and cooperation
• Committed to equity, trust, and integrity in all we do1

Wastewater Collection

As discussed previously, the wastewater collection system is a vast collection of pipes, sewers,
filtration stations, pumping stations and etc. According to the DC SAWA engineering division, the
array of sewers is generally made of iron, concrete, PVC and other materials. The system
consists of over 1,800 miles of various sewers (large interceptors and small collection spots).In
2007, the DC SAWA entered into a review term of its infrastructure, the first since the 1950’s.
This assessment is performed to review the condition and workability of the system, verify
capacity, and determine the needs of investment in new capital projects. The result of such a
comprehensive review is to make certain the DC SAWA continues to lead the way in productivity
and technological superiority in this field. According to its 2007 Annual Report, approx. $6 million
in annual funding is allocated for construction projects that are to be recommended in the
assessment.

1
2007 DC SAWA Annual Report
Wastewater Treatment

The Blue Plains Advanced Wastewater Treatment Plant collects wastewater from the District of
Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia suburbs. To be more specific, areas of Montgomery and Prince
George’s counties in Maryland are served, and Fairfax and Loudoun counties in Virginia. When
this plant was first put into service, in the early 20th century, it was designed to serve a growing
population of the district that was approx. 650,000 people. The operation costs were low and the
discharge amounted to approx. 100 mgd.

Following a sharp increase in population and industry (the addition of Maryland and Virginia
territories as well), the capacity of the treatment proved to be inadequate. In 1959, the Blue Plains
plant was expanded to 240 mgd to accommodate the respective demand. In the following
decade, booming demand and pressure on the facility proved once again too much for its then-
current technological level, and, in the following two decades, the advanced wastewater
treatment facility portion was constructed to accommodate the processing to above 300 mgd.
Currently, according to the latest information available from the company, The Blue Plains plant
treats approx. 370 mgd.

The Blue Plains Plant is the largest of its kind in the United States. Despite the fact that other
metropolitan areas have facilities with greater capacities, only Blue Plains provides high level of
treatment with its nitrification-denitrification and filtration process. Accordingly, the highest
standard by which the plant operates is consistent with its being held to the premier effluent
discharge standards by the EPA (treated water is discharged to the Potomac River).

These limitations are as follows:

Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand 5.0 mg/L

Total Suspended Solids 7.0 mg/L

Total Phosphorous 0.18 mg/L

Ammonia Nitrogen (NH-3N) 5/1 -10/31 1.0 mg/L

11/1 - 4/30 6.5 mg/L

Dissolved Oxygen 5.0 mg/L

Total Chlorine Residual 0.02 mg/L

pH 6.0 to 8.5

The wastewater treatment process at the plant consists of preliminary treatment, secondary
treatment, nitrification-denitrification, effluent filtration, chlorination-dechlorination, and post
aeration. The process is described in depth in the following section.

Wastewater Treatment Process

Treatment phase2:

Debris and Grit removal - raw wastewater .is screened

2
http://www.epa.gov/reg3wapd/npdes/blueplainsfactsheet.htm#7
Primary Sedimentation – sewage flows into primary Sedimentation tanks3. The tanks have a
volume of more then 39 million gallons.
Secondary Reactors - Six centrifugal blowers supply oxygen to reactors through coarse bubble
diffusers to support the growth of microorganisms.
Secondary Sedimentation Basins – Secondary treatment continues with the mixed fluid from
the reactors to the basins where solids-liquid separation takes place
Nitrification-Denitrification 4 - This step was implemented as a direct result of the Chesapeake
Bay Agreement to reduce total input of nitrogen into the Potomac River by 40% (see explanation
in footnotes).
Nitrification Sedimentation Basins – Nitrification/Dinetrification process continues with mixed
liquid from the odd and even side nitrification reactors flowing to their respective sedimentation
basins.
Dual Purpose Sedimentation Basins – With a total volume of 22 million gallons, these basins
are capable off settling mixed liquid from either the secondary or Nitrification-Denitrification
process.
Filtration and Disinfection 5 - This process is integral in order to remove solids from the
Nitrification/Denitrification to produce a clear wastewater for discharge to the Potomac River. The
filtration facility has 40 effluent filters arranged equally in even and odd positions. Those filters are
what make the wastewater deposit its solids in them.

Chlorination/Dechlorination6 - The final stage in the process. It is an important step in ensuring

the elimination of photogenes and odor.

Billings

The following table shows the current rates in effect for the district.

3
The primary sedimentation tanks are designed to reduce the velocity of the wastewater flow for organic solids (called raw sludge) to
settle. Scrapers present in the tank move continuously along the floor of the tank to deposit the raw sludge in hoppers for removal. The
scum which floats to the surface is directed by water jets to the sludge sump. The raw sludge is then pumped to the sludge digesters
for biological treatment. Approximately 60% of suspended solids and 35% of BOD removal efficiency can be achieved at this stage.
(http://www.ce.siue.edu/Rproject/SIST/Primary/pts.html)
4
Simultaneous nitrification-denitrification (SNdN) is a wastewater treatment process. Microbial simultaneous nitrification-
denitrification is the conversion of the ammonium ion to nitrogen gas in a single bioreactor. The process is dependent on floc
characteristics, reaction kinetics, mass loading of readily biodegradable chemical oxygen demand, rbCOD, and the dissolved oxygen,
DO, concentration. (Tchobanoglous, G., Burton, F. & Stensel, H. Wastewater Engineering. 4th Ed. Mc Graw Hill, Inc. New York,
2003.)

5
As the discharge requirements for treated secondary effluent become more restrictive, effluent filtration is becoming a more integral
part of secondary treatment. Because a high quality effluent is produced after filtration, the potential for reusing treated effluent is
being examined by a number of municipalities, especially those in the water-short areas of the southwestern United States. A new
concept of filtration in reuse applications and an innovative filter technology is being used to help alleviate some of these problems.
(http://www.wwdmag.com/The-Importance-of-Filtration-in-Wastewater-Reclamation-article234)

6
Chlorine is the most widely used disinfectant for municipal wastewater because it destroys target organisms by oxidizing cellular
material. Chlorine can be supplied in many forms, which include chlorine gas, hypochlorite solutions, and other chlorine compounds
in solid or liquid form. Some alternative disinfectants include ozonation and ultraviolet (UV) disinfection. (EPA – Wastewater
Technology Fact Sheet Chlorine Disinfection)
Current Rates

Rate Class Current Rate (Effective 10/1/2008)

Water Rate $2.30 per CCF (hundred cubic feet)

Sewer Rate $3.47 per CCF (hundred cubic feet)

The Right of Way (ROW)

Rate/Payment In Lieu of $0.52 per CCF (hundred cubic feet)
Taxes Fee

Groundwater Sewer $2.33 per CCF (hundred cubic feet) for commercial properties that
Charge are under construction.

The DC Government $1.98 per month for residence

Stormwater Fee $0.364 per CCF (hundred cubic feet) of the total water and sewer
billings used for commercial, Federal, Municipal,DCHA
$0.254 per CCF (hundred cubic feet) of the total water and sewer
billings used for multifamily

In Addition, DC SAWA is going to propose a rate increase in order to fund its 3.1 billion dollar ten
year construction in progress. This is done in order to replace the aging infrastructure and
improve reliability and service quality, meet regulatory requirements, and help clean the
Anacostia and Potomac rivers.7

In the News

DC SAWA is no stranger to the media. Throughout the years an impressive collection of

news article was archived. The following two articles bear relation to the district’s
lead contaminations which was discovered in 2004. The original lead contamination
happened in between 2001 and 2002, when the DC SAWA became aware of a lead
problem in public waters but failed to disclose the issue. The contamination was
indeed bad. Water samples in numerous houses exceeded national standards. As
time passed and DC WASA failed to take appropriate measures, more homes were
found to be contaminated.

“Months later, when the issue became front page news, the situation changed rapidly. Residents inundated
WASA's water hotline with calls and overwhelmed water testing laboratories with requests for their tap water to
be tested for lead contamination. District elected officials immediately called for an emergency public meeting,
and established an inter-agency task force to investigate and manage the problem.” 8

For example on January 31, 2008, an article in the Washington Post had the following
article:

“D.C. Water and Sewer Authority officials faced heated questions and concerns last night from a small group of
residents and activists at a meeting about the utility's idea to scale back its replacement of lead water pipes
across the city. General Manager Jerry N. Johnson told about a dozen residents that District drinking water
meets federal guidelines since a chemical was added in 2004 to prevent lead leeching from pipes and that no
significant health issues have been detected. The authority also replaced nearly half of its 35,000 lead pipes in
public space at a cost of $93 million, Johnson said.”9

7
http://www.dcwasa.com/customercare/rates.cfm#meteringfees
8
Joseph Foti,"Lead in Our Water - A Washington, DC Mystery","World Resources Institute",March 22, 2008
9
Clarence Williams Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, January 31, 2008; Page B02
In March of the same year, another article surfaced about the lead service lines. Since the
water contamination crisis which happened in 2004, there is a public distrust with
DC SAWA and their plans to further safeguard its water sources. According to the
article,

“The foremost issue facing WASA is whether to continue with its ambitious program to replace the city's 35,000
lead service pipes. The program, which has already cost $93 million and will require an additional $315 million,
is under review because of the apparent success of the new water treatment in lowering lead leaching. Then,
too, most homeowners aren't replacing the pipes on their property, calling into question the effectiveness of
partial replacement. Add in the considerable cost, and authorities who are under the gun to make other major
capital improvements with limited resources are right to pause and take stock.”10

A recent article published in the Washington Post was in relation to the upcoming rate
case in which DC SAWA is planning to petition for a rate increase. According to the
article, there is an ongoing negotiation between the district and the federal
government for a possible subsidy of the infrastructure improvement project.
Without federal grants, subsidy, or loans, a rate hike would be unavoidable.

“Water and sewer bills in the District will increase dramatically if the federal government does not bear the
burden of a $2.2 billion sewage management plan mandated to reduce pollution of the region's waterways. The
project is required to meet the city's obligations under the Clean Water Act, but there is no guarantee of federal
funds. In the next few months, the D.C. Council will consider a proposal to add a charge to water and sewer
bills to help pay for the project. Without federal support, the typical residential monthly sewer bill will soar. By
2025, when the work must be completed, bills could be substantially higher -- up to $110 from $30, said Olu
Adebo, acting chief financial officer of the D.C. Water and Sewer Authority.”11

As we can see, the problems are not absent in the district. There are many challenges
which would be faced by DC SAWA and its costumers in the coming years. The
challenges are great and the solutions will not always sit well as we can see from
the talks about the rate case.

Regulation

Besides the Environmental Protection Agency which regulates DC WASA, the DC WASA is
governed by an eleven member Board of Directors. There are two main groups on
the board. Six members are representing the district (Price George’s Country,
Montgomery County, and Fairfax County). Although independent, WASA and the
District each have to present its part of the budget. After is budget is comprised, it is
presented to congress for approval.

The daily operations of DC WASA are administered by a General Manager who reports to
the Board. Being an independent entity, DC WASA can respond to changes in the
operation and financial environment quicker then the pre-1996 era.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)

In 1972 the federal government created the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
which gave the permission to discharge from pipes, channels, tunnels, and any other point
sources12 into waters of the United States (See 33 U.S.C. § 1342(a)(b)(1) and (2)). There are two

10
Is D.C. Water Safe? Independent testing could put to rest concerns about WASA. Monday, March 3, 2008; Page A16
11
A Mandatory Sewage Plan In Search of Federal Funding D.C. Residents Would Pay If Government Won't. Sopan Joshi
Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, September 26, 2008; Page B01
12
(f) Point source categories- The Administrator shall promulgate regulations establishing categories of point sources which he
determines shall not be subject to the requirements of subsection (d) of this section in any State with a program approved pursuant to
subsection (b) of this section. The Administrator may distinguish among classes, types, and sizes within any category of point sources.
(http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/laws/section402.html)
kinds of NPDES permits, an individual permit and a general permit. The first is specifically tailored
to accommodate an individual facility. The later applies to several facilities which have similar
kinds of discharge and are located in a specific area.

In the District of Columbia, the Mid-Atlantic EPA’s office of Watersheds administers the NPDES
permit tracking and the Office of Compliance and Enforcement handles the enforcement of the
permits13.

“All permit requirements are based on the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. § 1251 et seq.), hereinafter referred to
as the Act, and NPDES regulations (40 C.F.R. Parts 122, 124 and 133).”

Various agencies and public bodies oversee the NPDES permit program based on legal
requirements in the Clean Water Act and other legal requirements contained in the NPDES
regulation itself.14 Section 405 of the Clean Water Act refers to the NDPES program. It is
according to the CWA that the EPA has the power to set effluent limits to ensure the highest level
of protection. According to the statutory laws embedded in the CWA, anyone who wishes to
discharge wastewater or other pollutants must obtain an NPDES permit. If any entity proceeds
with the discharge prior to obtaining such a permit, its action would be considered illegal.

Number of
Facility Permit
NPDES # CSO Receiving Streams
Name Type*
Outfalls

DC0021199 D.C. major 54 Anacostia River, Anacostia River, East Side, Anacostia River, West Side ,
WASA Potomac River, Potomac River, East Side , Rock Creek, Rock Creek, East Side,
(Blue Rock Creek, West Side 15
Plains)

As it relates to the Blue Plains wastewater plant, on April 5, 2007 new limits on the amount of
nitrogen that can be discharged were placed in order to improve the water quality in the district’s
waters.

“The nitrogen reduction from 8.5 million pounds per year to 4.7 million pounds per year is part of a modification
to the facility’s operating permit. To meet the new limits, the D.C. Water and Sewer Authority, which owns the
plant, will need to upgrade the facility under a timeline outlined in a forthcoming consent agreement with EPA.
This action is part of EPA’s Chesapeake Bay initiative to reduce the amount of nitrogen, phosphorous and
sediments entering the bay.”16

A section from the news release in relation to the above discussion is illustrated below:

“PHILADELPHIA (April 5, 2007) – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has set new limits on the amount
of nitrogen that can be legally discharged by the Blue Plains wastewater treatment plant to help improve water
quality in District of Columbia waters and the Chesapeake Bay…

This action is part of EPA’s Chesapeake Bay initiative to reduce the amount of nitrogen, phosphorous and
sediments entering the bay,” said Donald S. Welsh, regional administrator for EPA’s mid-Atlantic region.
“Meeting these reductions will be key in our efforts to help restore the Chesapeake Bay and the waterways in
and around our nation’s capital.”17

13
http://www.epa.gov/reg3wapd/npdes/index.htm
14
http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/cwa.cfm?program_id=0
15
http://www.epa.gov/reg3wapd/cso/data_dc.htm
16
http://www.epa.gov/reg3wapd/npdes/blueplains.htm
17
http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/56d5d55f70218074852572a000657b5d/136f166a228bf6088525
72b40055a8aa!OpenDocument
The Blue Plains Wastewater plant falls under the jurisdiction of the EPA, region III. As discussed
in the following section, the NPDES permit had some changes implemented in relation to the
facility.

NPDES and the Blue Plains Wastewater Plant

As discussed in the previous section, the Blue Plains NPDES permit underwent some
modifications. EPA, Region III, modified the permit which was originally issued in 2003 to DC
WASA, under which the Blue Plains Wastewater Plant falls. The EPA originally decided to
consider modifications due to certain issues raised by organizations like the Friends of Earth and
the Sierra Club among others18. The EPA offered for public comment a draft which contained the
desired modifications. For example, in the December 14, 2006 Proposed Modification19,

This proposal was limited to comments on the following:

“1. Replace the nitrogen discharge goal with a final nitrogen limit, effective upon permit issuance - rather than
interim limit and modified goal- reflecting the Ambient Water Quality Criteria for the Chesapeake Bay and its
Tidal Tributaries (EPA-903-R-03-002), which have been incorporated into the District of Columbia Water Quality
Standards, as well as the water quality standards of the Commonwealth of Virginia and the state of Maryland.”20

B. Comments receive from the Blue Plains Regional Committee (BPRC) of the District of Columbia Council of
Governments (COG). The following comments were received by letter dated October 4, 2006, from James A.
Caldwell, BPRC Chair, Montgomery County.

1. Total Nitrogen Requirements. The BPRC submitted comments in support of those submitted by WASA.
Specifically, its comments are summarized as follows: Comment: The proposed interim limit of 8.6 million
pounds per year should be replaced with more appropriate and achievable limits. The operational restraints of
the plant render the proposed limits to be too stringent due to anticipated increased loads to the plant and
constraints of process upgrades. BPRC recommends interim nitrogen limits of 10.5 million pounds per year
during construction and 9.550 million pounds per year before and following process upgrades.21

As shown above, the EPA received comments from various sources including but not limited to
WASA, The Blue Plains Regional Committee, and the Chesapeake Bay Foundation.

“The final modified permit includes a total nitrogen effluent limit of 4.689 million pounds
per year. This limit “reflects[s] the final nitrogen allocation given to the facility as a result
of the Chesapeake Bay Agreement.” Permit Fact Sheet, 2. Through the Chesapeake
Bay Agreement process, EPA and the Bay states (Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, New
York, Pennsylvania and the District of Columbia) established “cap load allocations”
necessary to achieve EPA’s water quality criteria for the Bay for nitrogen, phosphorous
and sediment.22”

18
FOE and Sierra Club have a substantial interest in WASA’s petition for review. They have members who use and enjoy the water
resources impacted by wastewater discharges governed by the permit. The Movants have long been committed to ensuring the permit
is fully protective of water quality, have been involved in multiple appeals of previous versions of the Blue Plains NPDES permit,
have commented on every draft version of the permit, and have litigated to ensure that the permit meets all requirements of the CWA
and the District’s water quality standards
19
For each of the comment periods, EPA received comments from six entities: the State of Maryland, the Commonwealth of
Virginia, the District of Columbia Water and Sewer
Authority (WASA), the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, the Blue Plains Regional Committee of the District of Columbia Council of
Governments (COG), and Friends of the Earth and the Sierra Club by their counsel, EarthJustice. In addition, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service and the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine
Fisheries Service commented on the December 14, 2006 request for public comment.
20
http://www.epa.gov/reg3wapd/npdes/pdf/blueplains_response.pdf (page 2)
21
http://www.epa.gov/reg3wapd/npdes/pdf/blueplains_response.pdf (page 7)
22
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT No. 08-1251
Summary

The District of Columbia is indeed a remarkable area. The challenges and opportunities go hand
in hand. As in any other area, population growth, industrial expansion, legislative limitations and
regulations all add to the dynamic future which lays ahead. As we saw, standards for various
processes have improved greatly. Although there are numerous challenges to overcome, the
future of wastewater treatment and as a result a betterment of society seems to be a promising
goal. The environment is constantly changing and so does our technological capabilities. With the
appropriate regulations in place, the future can be bright with no doubt.

REFERENCES

A Mandatory Sewage Plan In Search of Federal Funding D.C. Residents Would Pay If
Government Won't. Sopan Joshi Washington

Ann Davis, The Wall Street Journal. New Fears Heat Up Debate on Chemical Risks. (May 30,
2002).

Clarence Williams Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, January 31, 2008; Page B02
EPA – Wastewater Technology Fact Sheet Chlorine Disinfection)

Improving Service – Cleaning the Environment (April 2008). District of Columbia Water and Ser
Authority

Is D.C. Water Safe? Independent testing could put to rest concerns about WASA. Monday, March
3, 2008; Page A16

Joseph Foti,"Lead in Our Water - A Washington, DC Mystery","World Resources Institute",March

22, 2008

National Small Flows Clearinghouse, Small Flows Quarterly. The Role of Biomats in Wastewater
Treatment. (Fall 2001).

Tchobanoglous, G., Burton, F.L., and Stensel, H.D. (2003). Wastewater Engineering (Treatment
Disposal Reuse) / Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., 4th Edition, McGraw-Hill Book Company.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Municipal Wastewater Disinfection Design Manual.

(1986).
Water Environment Federation. Wastewater Disinfection Manual of Practice FD-10. (1996).

2007 DC SAWA Annual Report

http://www.ce.siue.edu/Rproject/SIST/Primary/pts.html

http://www.wwdmag.com/The-Importance-of-Filtration-in-Wastewater-Reclamation-article234

http://www.dcwasa.com/customercare/rates.cfm#meteringfees

http://www.dcwasa.com/about/facilities.cfm

http://www.epa.gov/reg3wapd/npdes/blueplainsfactsheet.htm