080422 CL08 Attachment

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

1/42

Griffith City Council

Griffith Water Reclamation PlantRelocation Option

Invest igat ion Report March 2008

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

2/42

Griffith City Council

Griffith Water Reclamation Plant

Relocation Option

Investigation Report

HydroScience Consulting Pty Ltd

A.B.N. 79 120 716 887

Level 5, 350 Kent StreetSydney NSW 2000

Telephone: (02) 9249 5100

Facsimile: (02) 9279 2700

Email: [email protected]

Document Control

Approved for IssueRevision Author Reviewer

Name Signature Date

2 EJO AFR Andrew Fraser 7th March 2008

HydroScience Consulting Pty Ltd 2007

This document shall remain the property of HydroScience Consulting Pty Ltd. Unauthorised use

of this document in any form is prohibited
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

3/42

Page 2

Y:\Jobs\A046 Griffith WRP Concept Design REF\Documents\A046-002_Relocation_Option_Report\Documents\Draft -Final\A046-002_GCC_WPR_Relocation_Options_Rev2.doc

Execut ive Sum mary

Introduction

Griffith City Council (GCC) owns and operates the Griffith water reclamation plant (WRP), whichreceives and treats wastewater from Griffith and surrounding areas. In order to meet the

requirements of the Department of Environmental and Climate Change (DECC), GCC hascommenced work on upgrading the WRP in its current location on Duchatel Road, west ofGriffith. To date, a concept design and a review of environmental factors (REF) study havebeen completed.

Council has resolved to investigate the option of relocating the WRP to the Bilbul STP site. Thisreport compares project costs and schedules for upgrading the Griffith WRP at the existing siteand relocating the WRP to the Bilbul STP site.

Bilbul STP Site

The Bilbul STP site is located approximately 12 km east of the Griffith WRP and approximately4 km from the eastern end of Griffith urban area. The existing Bilbul treatment plant consists of a

lagoon system serving the village of Bilbul. The effluent is discharged into three effluentevaporation ponds. nother treatment plant owned by the De Bortoli winery is located directly tothe north-east adjacent the Bilbul STP.

Relocati on Assessment

Design capacit y

The relocated WRP will be designed for hydraulic capacity of 50,000 equivalent persons (EP) andbiological capacity of 60,000 EP. These are the same loadings as proposed for the Duchatel

Road Upgrade (HSc 2007).

Sewerage collection system modifications

Modifications to the existing sewerage collection system are required to redirect sewage to theBilbul site. This will be done by redirecting the four main pump stations in Griffith to pump to theeast, through a combination of existing and new rising mains. The system will be separated intotwo streams to deliver wastewater to pump station PSG4 located in the east side of the city.

Transfer facil ities

The new transfer pump station will be constructed adjacent to PSG4 to deliver the wastewaterto the Bilbul site through an 8 km, dual 500 mm diameter rising mains. The pump station will bedesigned with variable speed drives (VSD) to adjust the pumping rate to provide wastewatercontinuously to the treatment plant.

WRP facil it iesIt is anticipated that the Bilbul STP site evaporation pond area will be used to construct a newtreatment plant and the sludge holding ponds will be converted to wet weather storage.

The treatment plant would be similar to the one proposed for the Duchatel Road upgrade,comprising inlet works, wet weather storage, civil site works, membrane bioreactors (MBR)treatment, UV disinfection, chemical dosing, biosolids management, control building and

effluent management facilities.

Some facilities that exist in the Duchatel Road site are not available in the Bilbul site, includinginlet works, wet weather storage, chemical storage tanks, effluent ponds and sludge disposalareas. These will be required to be constructed at the Bilbul site at additional cost. In addition,

site services including access road, water supply and power supply will need to be upgraded.

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

4/42

Page 3


The Bilbul site would enable a more compact design than the Duchatel Road site, as there areno existing structures on site. This may act to reduce the cost of civil works, pipework andinternal roads.

Eff luent m anagement f acil it ies

Treated effluent will be used on site, with the excess effluent discharged to a MurrumbidgeeIrrigation (MI) drainage canal adjacent to the Bilbul site, subject to MI approval and DECCissuing a licence. It is understood GCC will pursue the opportunity for agricultural reuse in thefuture. It is not considered likely that transferring effluent back to Griffith for urban reuse will beeconomically feasible.

Regulatory requirements

The existing Bilbul STP does not have a DECC license to discharge treated wastewater. The

upgrade is likely to require an environmental impact statement (EIS), a more onerous processthan the REF completed for the Duchatel Road site.

Relocating the WRP to Bilbul will require a new licence from DECC and a Section 60 approvalfrom the Department of Water and Energy (DWE).

Cost Estimate

The estimated total construction and operating costs for the two alternative sites, excluding GST,are shown in Table 1. The costs include the modifications required to the collection system andthe transfer system to the Bilbul STP.

Table 1: Stage 1 Prelimi nary Cost Esti mate

WRP location

Total Cost

($ million)

Operating Cost

($/year)

Bilbul site $ 50.6 $1,689,000

Duchatel Road site $ 24.0 $1,607,500

Timing

The project schedule could be impacted substantially if the option to relocation the facilities isselected. It is anticipated that the projects will be delayed 12 -18 months plus extra constructiontime.

The pollution reduction program (PRP) issued to GCC by the DECC requires GCC to upgrade theGWRP by June 2009. The PRP is part of the licence for the operation of the GWRP, and GCCmay face prosecution if it does not comply with the PRP. It is unlikely that the target date of

June 2009 could be met with either option. DECC representatives have indicated, however,that provided GCC proceeds with the upgrade project without delays, DECC would considerextending the time to meet the requirements of the PRP.

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

5/42

Page 4


Contents

Execu t ive Summar y.................................................................................................................................2 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................................2Bilbul STP Site .................................................................................................................................................................2Relocation Assessment ...............................................................................................................................................2Cost Estimate................................................................................................................................................................3Timing .............................................................................................................................................................................3

Conten ts ......................................................................................................................................................4 1 Background ..........................................................................................................................................7

1.1 Griffith Water Reclamation Plant Upgrade .....................................................................................................71.2 Previous studies.....................................................................................................................................................71.3 Objectives..............................................................................................................................................................7 1.4 Methodology ........................................................................................................................................................7

2 Bilbul STP Site.....................................................................................................................................9 2.1 Location.................................................................................................................................................................92.2 Existing Facilities ....................................................................................................................................................9

3 Relocat ion Assessmen t ............................................................................................................... 11 3.1 Wastewater Loading .........................................................................................................................................11

3.1.1 Hydraulic loading ............................................. .................................................... ........................ 113.1.2 Biological loading......................................................................................................................... 113.1.3 Proposed design loading............................................................................................................. 11

3.2 Effluent Quality....................................................................................................................................................123.3 Transfer Facilities .................................................................................................................................................12

3.3.1 Sewerage collection system upgrades...................................................................................... 123.3.2 Stream 1......................................................................................................................................... 163.3.3 Stream 2......................................................................................................................................... 163.3.4 Transfer pump station ................................................ ..................................................... .............. 193.3.5 Transfer rising main .................................................... .................................................... ............... 193.3.6 Other collection system facilities ................................................. ............................................... 19

3.4 Site Facilities.........................................................................................................................................................203.4.1 Water.............................................................................................................................................. 203.4.2 Power supply................................................................................................................................. 203.4.3 SCADA ........................................................................................................................................... 20

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

6/42

Page 5


3.4.4 Stormwater drainage.................................................................................................................... 203.4.5 Land ............................................................................................................................................... 203.4.6 Access .................................................... .................................................... ................................... 203.4.7 Site work ........................................................................................................................................ 21

3.5 Treatment Facilities ............................................................................................................................................213.5.1 Facilities similar to both WRP locations....................................................................................... 233.5.2 Inlet works...................................................................................................................................... 233.5.3 Sedimentation tanks..................................................................................................................... 233.5.4 Civil site works........................ .................................................... ................................................... 233.5.5 Wet weather storage................................................. .................................................... ............... 233.5.6

Control building ................................................ .................................................... ........................ 24

3.5.7 Chemical storage and dosing .................................................................................................... 243.5.8 Sludge disposal............................................................................................................................. 24

3.6 Effluent Management Facilities .......................................................................................................................243.6.1 Introduction............................................. .................................................... .................................. 243.6.2 Murrumbidgee Irrigation discharge............................................................................................ 243.6.3 On-site recycled water uses........................................................................................................ 253.6.4 Agricultural reuse.......................................................................................................................... 253.6.5 Effluent management assessment.............................................................................................. 25

3.7 Regulatory framework.......................................................................................................................................254 Env ironmental Assessmen t ....................................................................................................... 26

4.1 Requirements ......................................................................................................................................................264.2 Odours..................................................................................................................................................................26 4.3 Flora and Fauna .................................................................................................................................................264.4 Geology and Soils ..............................................................................................................................................264.5 Groundwater ......................................................................................................................................................264.6 Heritage ...............................................................................................................................................................26

5 Cost Est imat es ................................................................................................................................ 275.1 Construction Costs .............................................................................................................................................275.2 Operating Costs .................................................................................................................................................27

6 Impact on Sew er age Charges ................................................................................................... 28 6.1 Introduction.........................................................................................................................................................28 6.2 Modelling .............................................................................................................................................................28

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

7/42

Page 6


7 Implem entat ion............................................................................................................................... 31 7.1 Time Frame ..........................................................................................................................................................317.2 Schedule..............................................................................................................................................................31

8 Abbrev iat ions and Glossar y...................................................................................................... 33 9 Ref er en ces......................................................................................................................................... 35 Appendix A .............................................................................................................................................. 36

Existing Sewerage Collection System Capacity Analysis ...................................................................................36Appendix B .............................................................................................................................................. 37

Proposed Sewerage Collection System Capacity Analysis ...............................................................................37

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

8/42

Page 7


1 Background

1.1 Gri f f it h Water Reclamati on Plant Upgr ade

Griffith City Council (GCC) owns and operates the Griffith water reclamation plant (WRP),located on Duchatel Road approximately 3 kilometres west of the Griffith city centre. The WRP

receives and treats wastewater from residential and industrial customers in Griffith andsurrounding areas.

Treated effluent is discharged to Murrumbidgee Irrigation (MI) drainage canal which conveysthe water to Main Drain J, Mirrool Creek and Barren Box Swamp.

The Department of Environment and Climate Change (DECC) requires an improvement to thequality of effluent in order to reduce the environment impact of the WRP. In addition, residentsof West Griffith have been impacted by odours from the plant.

GCC has resolved to upgrade the WRP in order to address these issues.

1.2 Previous stud iesIn 2004, GCC commissioned a study that considered possible alternatives to upgrading the WRP,including possible relocation sites (WSL 2004). This study evaluated selection criteria in aworkshop forum to rank possible site. The selection criteria was based on 14 criteria including,

but not limited to, the following:

Buffer zone;

Prevailing wind;

Flora, fauna and natural heritage issues; and

Land Cost

Based on this investigation, Council decided that upgrading the WRP at the existing site was thepreferred option. Design of upgrades to the Griffith WRP have progressed to a concept designlevel and included a review of environmental factors (REF).

The adopted process for the upgraded WRP is membrane bioreactor (MBR) treatment. This is amodern process that will meet the water quality objectives specified by DECC. The MBR processhas low odour impact, and it is expected that odours from the upgraded plant will not affectresidential properties (HSc/Hyder 2007).

1.3 Objectives

This investigation was commissioned by GCC in response to concerns by residents of West Griffith

regarding the proposed upgrade of the WRP in Duchatel Road.

The objective of this report is to estimate the cost and other impacts of constructing a newWRP in a different location, and compare them to the proposed upgrade at the Duchatel Road

site.

The site of the existing Bilbul sewage treatment plant was adopted as the alternative location.

1.4 Methodology

This investigation reviewed site factors and identified works required for relocating the WRP tothe Bilbul site including:

Transfer facilities

Site facilities

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

9/42

Page 8


Treatment facilities

Effluent management facilities

Regulatory Framework

The main treatment process and effluent management for the Bilbul site will be similar to thoseproposed for the Duchatel Road site, as defined in the concept design report (HSc 2007).

Additional works required for the relocation have been identified.

A preliminary environmental assessment has been carried out in order to identify any majorissues associated with relocating the WRP to the Bilbul site.

Capital and operating costs have been developed to provide differential costing between thetwo sites. The cost estimates are based on the Department of Water and Energy (DWE)Reference Rates Manual, suppliers prices and HScs experience. NSW financial planning model(FINMOD) has been used to calculate the required typical residential bill to fund this option for

the next 30 years.

Scheduling impacts to GCC time frame in completing the construction of a new WRP have

been assessed and compared to the current project time line.

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

10/42

Page 9


2 Bi lbul STP Si te

2.1 Location

The Bilbul sewage treatment plant (STP) is located on the corner of Low and Prior roads in Bilbul,approximately 12 km east of the Griffith WRP and approximately 4 km from the eastern end of

Griffith urban area as shown in Figure 1. The site is approximately 5.5 ha in size (WSL 2004),measuring approximately 320 m long by 160 m wide. The surrounding land use is mainlyagricultural and is divided up into 20 ha blocks.

2.2 Existing Facilities

The existing treatment plant consists of a lagoon system serving the village of Bilbul. The plantwas constructed in 1990 and is designed with a capacity 310 equivalent persons (EP). Thetreatment plant consists of primary and secondary oxidation lagoons designed for 33 days ofdetention at average dry weather flow (ADWF) and a maturation lagoon designed for 30 daysof detention at ADWF (Public Works 1990). The oxidation of the Biological Oxygen Demand(BOD) occurs without mechanical aeration. The effluent is discharged into three evaporationponds. Another lagoon is used for holding effluent during a wet year.

To the north-west of the site, three sludge lagoons are used to digest the sludge thataccumulates in the lagoons.

A separate treatment plant, serving the De Bortoli winery, is located adjacent to the Bilbul STPwithin the same block of land, directly to the north-east. Plant upgrades are currently beingconstructed.

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

11/42

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

12/42

Page 11


3 Relocation Assessment

3.1 Wastewater Loading

The hydraulic and biological loadings for the Griffith catchment area have been estimated inthe Griffith Water Reclamation Plant Upgrade Concept Design Report (HSc 2007).

3.1.1 Hydraulic loading

WRP relocation to the Bilbul STP site would include the flows from Griffith and from Bilbul. Theprojected 2035 loadings for the relocated WRP are shown below in Table 2.

Table 2: Design Parameters (year 203 5)

Parameter Total EP

Current loading 25,238

Growth (excluding Lake Wyangan) 14,630

Lake Wyangan area 8,625

Bilbul area 265 1

Total 48,493

Note 1: Based on a total estimated ET of 104 (GHD 2003) in 2030 plus 1.6 additional ETs per year.

3.1.2 Biological loading

The biological loading is expected to be similar to the existing site. A peak BOD concentrationof 400 mg/L was adopted by GCC for the Duchatel Road site upgrade. This loading is slightly

higher than normal domestic strength sewage, reflecting the potential for higher loads from

industry.

3.1.3 Proposed design loading

Loading to the WRP will remain as previously proposed for the Duchatel Road site. Table 3 liststhe preliminary design parameters used in estimating the cost for the relocation option.

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

13/42

Page 12


Table 3: Design Parameters

Design Criteria

No Parameter Unit Stage 1 Stage 2

1 EP loadings EP Hydraulic 37,500

Biological 45,000

Hydraulic 50,000

Biological 60,000

2 Average Dry Weather Flow (ADWF) ML/day 7.9 10.5

3 Peak dry weather flow (PDWF) ML/day 15.8 14.0

4 Peak wet weather flow (PWWF) 1 ML/day 23.7 31.5

5 Average BOD mg/l 250

6 Peak BOD mg/l 400

7 Total Suspended Solids (TSS) mg/l 460

8 Total Nitrogen (TN) mg/l 509 Total Phosphorus (TP) mg/l 14

10 Electrical Conductivity (EC) S/m 1200

11 pH pH unit 7

Note 1: PWWF is 3 *ADWF.

3.2 Eff luent Qualit y

While the DECC is yet to be consulted about the required effluent quality discharged from theBilbul site, it has been assumed that they would be similar to the PRP requirements for theDuchatel Road. These are shown in Table 4.

Table 4: Effluent Quality Criteria

No Parameter Unit Limit

1 Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) mg/l 10

2 Suspended Solids (SS) mg/l 15

3 Total Phosphorus (P) mg/l 0.3

4 Total Nitrogen (N) mg/l 10

5 Ammonia (NH3-N) mg/l 2

6 Oil and Grease mg/l 27 Thermo Tolerant Coliforms Cfu/100 ml 200

8 pH pH unit 6.5-8.5

3.3 Transfer Facili ti es

3.3.1 Sewerage coll ecti on syst em upg rades

The existing sewerage collection system delivers wastewater from the Griffith catchment area tothe WRP located in the west side of the city via four main pump stations identified as PSG1,

PSG2, PSG3 and PSG4. Figure 2 shows the schematic of the existing Griffith sewerage system.

Modifications to the sewerage collection system would be required to redirect the sewage tothe east side of Griffith. This would include redirecting the four main pump stations. A

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

14/42

Page 13


combination of existing and new rising mains would be needed to connect these pump stations.It is proposed that the collection system be separated into two streams to deliver wastewater topump station PSG4 located in the east side. The option of providing multiple pump stations on asingle rising main exist, however only a maximum of two pump station connections arerecommended for each stream. This will provide a more flexible operational scheme collection

system and similar peak flows for each stream. A schematic of the proposed modifications isshown on Figure 3.

Stream 1 would include, collecting wastewater from the following areas:

Current residents east of the city centre and Willandra Avenue via pump station PSG3;

Future residential development planned for North Griffith, Hanwood and South Griffith;

and

Future industrial development planned for South Griffith (Stage 2 and 3).

Stream 2 would include all the wastewater from residents currently connected to pump stationsPSG1and PSG2 and future residential development planned for South Griffith (Stage 1).

The remaining sewage collected at pump station PSG4 will be directed to a new transfer pumpstation located adjacent pump station PSG4.

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

15/42

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

16/42

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

17/42

Page 16


The proposed modifications required to the existing collection system to deliver wastewater tothe Bilbul STP site are described below and shown on Figure 4. The transfer would proceed oncea new treatment plant has been commissioned. A detailed plan of the proposed shutdownschedule would be required to reconnect the rising mains. The sewerage system collectionwould be maintained during construction and shutdown timing would be critical, for there will

only be a very limited time available for shutdown.

3.3.2 St ream 1

Connect pump station PSG3 to rising mains: Approximately 400 metres of new dual300mm rising mains are required to connect the existing rising mains to a location whereit is anticipated the north Griffith facilities will be connected in the future. From there, thediameter of the dual main will be increased to 375mm to provide for the future capacityfrom the north Griffith development. The new dual 375mm diameter rising mains will be

approximately 300 metres long and will connect to rising mains located east of the breakpressure facility. From there the wastewater will be delivered to pump station PSG4 viathe existing RG1A, RG1B and RG4 rising mains.

Upgr ade pump s tati on PSG3 and PSG7: Pump station PSG3 and PSG7 will be upgradeas part of the existing development plan. The capacity of pump station PSG3 will

eventually be increased to provide two pumps sized for the ultimate capacity and astandby pump. Pump station PSG7 will be upgraded in the future to deliver theanticipated flows from the North Griffith development to the Duchatel Road site oncethe outflow capacity is reached (GHD 2006). These upgrades required for the relocationbut are considered similar to planned upgrades proposed for the Duchatel Road siteand therefore costs have not been included for the relocation.

Connect PSG7 to ri sing main s: Planned development for the North Griffithdevelopment includes connecting pump station PSG7 to the Griffith WRP viaapproximately 2,300 metres of pipeworks. The relocation will require pump station PSG7be connected to the new dual pipeline via approximately 1,800 metres of pipeline todeliver wastewater collected at pump station PSG7 to the eastern side of the city. These

improvements would be required in the future once flows from the North Griffithdevelopment increases above the outflow capacity of PSG7. The construction cost forthe pipeline extension for the current planned development and the construction costthat would be required for the improvements associated with this relocation option areconsidered similar. Therefore, costs for these facilities have not been included in theestimated cost for the relocation project for it is considered that the cost is alreadyincluded in the anticipated development.

Connect South Grif fi th Industr ial: Two areas located on the west side of Griffith havebeen planned for future development in stage 2 and stage 3 (GHD 2003). If these areaswere developed the rising mains would need to be extended to PSG3 to deliver these

flows to the west side of the city. The extension would include approximately 2,400

metres of dual 200mm rising mains.

3.3.3 St ream 2

Connect pum p stat ion PSG1: PSG1 will be redirected to the east by connecting the

dual 200mm rising mains RG2A and RG2B. Based on estimated flows anticipated frompump station PSG1 a diameter of 250mm is selected. RG2A and RG2B rising mainsbetween PSG1 and the intersection point with PSG2 are in poor condition and will needto be replaced. At present these rising mains are only used during maintenance of risingmain RG4. All the current flow from pump station PSG2 goes directly to rising main RG4.The options for this connection would be to build 2 new rising mains from pump stationPSG1 or direct pump station PSG1 directly into rising main RG4. For the purposes of thisstudy, it is anticipated that PSG1 will be combined with flow from PSG2 and delivered to

pump station PSG4 via new pipeworks to keep the two streams separate. This optionwould be developed further if the Bilbul site option is selected.

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

18/42

Page 17


Upgrade pum p st ation PSG2: Pump station PSG2 will be upgraded as part of theexisting development plan.

Upgrade rising mains RG2A and RG2B: Upgrades for rising mains RG2A and RG2B willbe required for either alternative downstream of pump station PSG2. Costs for theseupgrades have not been included in the additional cost estimate for the relocated WRP.

Connect rising mains RG2A and RG2B: The dual rising mains identified as RG2A andRG2B will be used to deliver wastewater from pump stations PSG1 and PSG2 to acommon location between the two pump stations where a new 600mm pipeline will beconnected. The new 600mm pipeline will be approximately 1.9 km long and will be usedto deliver wastewater to pump station PSG4.

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

19/42

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

20/42

Page 19


3.3.4 Transfer pump station

A new transfer pump station located adjacent PSG4 will be required to deliver all wastewatercollected in the Griffith area catchment, and possible wastewater collected in the futuredevelopment for the Lake Wyangan area catchment, to the Bilbul site. The pump station will besized for peak wet weather flow of 6 x ADWF typical for sewage pump station.

The upgrading of the pump station will be staged as shown in the following Table 5.

Table 5: New tr ansfer pum p st ation capacity

Stage 1 Stage 2

No. of pumps 1 duty, 1 standby 2 duty, 1 standby

Capacity (L/s) 1 550 L/s 730 L/s

Note 1: Pump station capacity equal to 6 x ADWF.

Construction of the pump station wet well will include space for one additional pump that willbe installed in stage 2.

3.3.5 Transfer rising main

New pipeline facilities will be required to deliver wastewater from PSG4 to the Bilbul site. The

route is approximately 8 km. GCC would like to build a dual rising main for this purpose. Dualrising mains will provide an alternative means of delivering wastewater to the Bilbul site if onepipeline is out of service for any reason.

A preliminary assessment of the anticipated route for the potential pipeline was conducted on22 January 2008. The pipeline route crosses two MI canals. The first canal is a supply canal,adjacent to the proposed location of the new transfer pump station. The second canal is Main

Drain J, located along Burley Griffin Way. Main Drain J is the main drainage canal within theMurrumbidgee Irrigation Area, transferring runoff water from agricultural and urban areas toMirrool Creek and Barren Box Swamp.

A preliminary cost for the proposed transfer pipeline has been estimated using the following

criteria:

Ductile iron pipe material;

Maximum velocity at ultimate peak wet weather flow of 2.0 m/s;

Minimum velocity of 1.0 m/s during current peak wet weather flow; and

Detention time not to exceed 5 hours where possible.

Based upon these criteria, the dual rising mains are sized at 500mm diameter for amaximum flow of 1.9 m/s during ultimate PWWF and a minimum flow of 1.4 m/s duringcurrent PWWF with both pipelines is use.

The pump station will be designed with variable speed drives (VSD), enabling GCC to adjust thepumping rate to avoid peaks at the treatment plant and save energy. The VSD will beprogrammed to automatically increase the flow to achieve scouring velocity at regular intervals.

3.3.6 Other collection system f acil it ies

Other upgraded sewerage collection facilities are required to meet anticipated population

growth in the area. These facilities are not included in the cost estimate provided in this reportsince they are required regardless of whether the WRP is relocated.

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

21/42

Page 20


3.4 Site Facilities

3.4.1 Water

There is no water supply currently connected to the site. A 150mm water main locatedapproximately 1.5 km from the site would be connected to the Bilbul STP.

3.4.2 Power supply

No power supply is currently connected to the site. Power is available at the adjacent De Bortolitreatment plant, but it is not known if the infrastructure is sufficient to supply power to theproposed WRP.

If this option is developed further, Country Energy will be contacted and the closest availableconnection made. Energy supplied to the GWRP will be purchased from councils nominatedenergy vendor via the Country Energy distribution network.

The preliminary estimate of the required power is 800 kw (1000 kVA) for Stage 1 and 1000 kw(1250 kVA) for stage 2. It is proposed to install 1500 kVA on site, through two 750 kVAtransformers. Power factor correction equipment will also be incorporated into this supply

network to reduce wasted energy. This needs to be evaluated again during detailed design.

No allowance has been made in the cost estimates for bringing in power from a distance. If thisis required, it would add to the cost of the relocation.

3.4.3 SCADA

SCADA is used to monitor and control the system remotely. It is expected that the SCADAsystem for the Bilbul site will be similar to the one proposed for the Duchatel Road site.

The SCADA network will communicate with GCC wide area SCADA system and other treatmentfacilities over Councils existing radio based link.

3.4.4 Stor mw ater dr ainage

The site drains to MIs drainage canal located along Prior Road. The stormwater drainagesystem will be retained. This will be limited to clean stormwater. A foul drainage system willcapture stormwater which may be contaminated.

The existing evaporation pond berms would be levelled and the site would be allowed to drainover the natural course and into the MI drainage canals.

3.4.5 Land

It is anticipated that there is sufficient area within the Bilbul STP site for construction of the newtreatment facilities and wet weather storage. Further analysis is required to verify that the area

selected for development in this study is available.

If the site is not available, additional land will need to be purchased. The cost of acquiring 4 haof land is estimated at $20,000, a small amount when compared to the total project cost.

3.4.6 Access

The existing access road to the Bilbul Site branches off from Lowe Road. It is proposed tomaintain this point for site access. The road will need to be upgrade as part of the proposeddevelopment at the Bilbul site and is included in the cost estimate.

The internal road system will be similar to the one proposed for the Duchatel Road site. It willallow easy access for vehicles to the site components. Access is required for light vehicles used

by the operators, as well as for large trucks delivering chemicals and components of equipment.

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

22/42

Page 21


3.4.7 Sit e work

Fencing around the site will be maintained north of the evaporation pond and around thetreatment lagoons. Construction of a new fence and gate will be required around the site.

3.5 Treatm ent Facilit ies

The Bilbul site is sufficient to construct a new MBR treatment plant, provided that evaporationponds can be utilised. A preliminary site layout is shown on Figure 5.

The treatment facilities will be similar to those described in the concept design for the DuchatelRoad site upgrade (HSc 2007), with the following differences:

A new inlet works will incorporate coarse and fine screens

Excess wet weather flows will be diverted to wet weather storage ponds after screening,but without primary sedimentation.

A new chemical handling area will be used

Digested sludge will be disposed of off-site

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

23/42

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

24/42

Page 23


3.5.1 Facil it ies sim ilar t o bot h WRP location s

A list of new facilities that have been proposed for the Duchatel Road site that will bemaintained for the Bilbul site is shown below. It is anticipated that costs for these facilities willremain the same for either alternative.

Biological treatment tanks (bioreactors)

Membrane system

UV disinfection

Biosolids dewatering facilities and standby (geotube) systems

Control building with air blowers, motor control room, lab and office

Chemical dosing facility

3.5.2 Inlet work s

The Duchatel Road WRP has an existing inlet works that would be utilised for the upgraded plant,

with the addition of fine screens.

A new inlet works will be required at the Bilbul site, incorporating the following processes:

1. flow attenuation

2. mechanical coarse screen

3. grit removal

4. diversion to wet weather storage

5. fine screens

3.5.3 Sedimentation tanks

The existing sedimentation tanks at the Duchatel Road site are included in the plannedupgrade, to provide sedimentation to wastewater that is diverted for wet whether storage. Nosedimentation tanks are proposed for a new facility located at the Bilbul STP site.

3.5.4 Civi l si t e works

New treatment components at the Duchatel Road site were sited in areas available fordevelopment. Consequently, the bioreactors will be located some distance from the inlet

works.

The Bilbul site would allow a more compact design, locating the inlet works in close proximity to

the bioreactors. Additionally, no conflicting existing facilities were identified in the preliminarysite assessment that would need to be avoided when routing civil site works.

3.5.5 Wet weather storage

When the flow into plant exceeds the capacity of the bioreactors or in case of major failure inthe bioreactor equipment, flows will be transferred to the emergency/ wet weather storageponds.

The Bilbul site will need storage similar to the planned storage at the Duchatel Road site ofapproximately 40 ML. It is assumed for this study that the sludge holding ponds located in thenorth-west portion of the site will be cleaned and converted to wet weather storage. If therelocation option is selected, further evaluation will be required to insure that these ponds maybe used. Also, depths of these ponds need to be confirmed. For purposed of estimating costthe depth of these ponds are assumed to be similar to the depth of the pond at the Griffith WRP.Based on a surface area assessment, a total of two ponds will be required. One pond will

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

25/42

Page 24


remain for sludge holding during the construction and utilised for either sludge drying oradditional wet weather storage once construction has been completed.

3.5.6 Control bui lding

A control building would be constructed to house the motor starters for the electricalequipment, the SCADA system, the air blowers, the laboratory, site office and staff amenities.

The building for the Bilbul site will be larger than the building in the Duchatel Road site, as theexisting building at the Griffith WRP will be maintained to house some of the motor controls.

3.5.7 Chemical storage and dosing

Chemical storage tanks and dosing pumps exist at the Duchatel Road site, and will be utilised

for the proposed upgrade.

For the Bilbul site, a new chemical storage and dosing facility will be required. These will includea bunded area, tanks and dosing pumps.

3.5.8 Slud ge di sposal

GCC plans to utilise permanently installed mechanical dewatering equipment and incorporatethe dewatered biosolids into the soil on site at the Ductatel Road site. The Bilbul site would needto provide the same equipment for dewatering but does not have the land available to disposeof the dewatered sludge onsite. This study assumes that the Bilbul site option would require anew dedicated disposal truck that could transport the sludge to a landfill. Capital cost forpurchasing the disposal truck and operational cost for hauling the sludge have been included inthe cost estimate.

3.6 Ef f luent Management Facili ti es

3.6.1 Introduction

The existing Bilbul STP uses evaporation for effluent management. The additional surface arearequired to use evaporative ponds sized for the Griffith WRP are prohibitive.

The MBR treatment process adopted by Council for the Griffith WRP and proposed for a newtreatment plant on the Bilbul site provides high quality water suitable for many types of recycling.

The main areas proposed for the Bilbul site for using recycled water will be similar to the existingsite as follows:

Discharge to MI drainage canal

On site maintenance and irrigation

Irrigation reuse for agricultural lands

These effluent management areas are discussed further in this section. It is unlikely that effluentfrom the Bilbul site will be transferred to Griffith for urban reuse due to distance.

3.6.2 Murrumbidgee Irrigation discharge

MI controls the water supply and drainage system in the area. The existing Griffith WRP

discharges to the drainage system which eventually flows to Mirrool Creek.

A drainage canal exists along the north-west edge of the Bilbul site that could be used todischarge effluent similar to the approach used at the Duchatel Road site. Discharges for bothoptions would flow into the through Main Drain J and Mirrool Creek to the Barren Box Swamp, for

reuse by downstream irrigators. MI agreement would be required.

Facility improvements would include an outfall box and improvements to the existing canalbetween the site and Main Drain J. The size of the drainage canal is likely to have sufficient

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

26/42

Page 25


capacity to receive flows from the WRP. A complete analysis of the canal capacity, includingan environmental assessment would be necessary if the relocation option was selected.

3.6.3 On- site recycled water uses

An on-site recycled water system could be utilised in a manner similar to the approach taken forthe Duchatel Road site. Such uses include hosing down, sludge dewatering, screening and gritwashing. The recycled water would also be used for landscape irrigation.

3.6.4 Agricultural reuse

The location of the Bilbul STP site, in the midst of an agricultural area, creates an opportunity forusing recycled water on farms. Council has advised that there may be opportunities to supplyrecycled water for irrigation on private land for horticulture, viticulture, orange orchards and ricefarming. During drought periods when allocations are reduced it is likely that all of the usersdescribed above would be interested in this and would be able to take all the effluent from theWRP.

As identified in previous studies, salinity may be an issue for this type of use. The influent to theplant has high salinity, with electrical conductivity (EC) around 1200 s/cm (around 800 mg/L of

dissolved salts). None of the conventional sewage treatment processes, including the MBRprocess, reduce the salinity of the water, and therefore it can be expected that a similar level ofsalinity will exist in the effluent of the plant. Typically crops and grasses that may be consideredfor reuse of the effluent have tolerance for salinity levels of up to 800 s/cm (around 500 mg/L).The high salinity of the effluent is likely to limit the agricultural use of effluent, unless it can bereduced.

Options available that could reduce salt concentration include dilution with canal water, sourcesalt reduction, reverse osmosis (RO) and/or electro dialysis removal (EDR). These options are

similar for both sites.

3.6.5 Effluent management assessment

Initially, effluent would be reused on-site, with the excess discharged to the MI Canal, subject toMI and DECC approval. It is expected GCC would pursue opportunities for agricultural reuse inthe future.

For both location options, the approach to effluent reuse would be similar. One advantage atthe Duchatel Road site would be that the existing storage ponds could provide approximately500 to 600 ML of effluent storage which would be vital in any future effluent managementscheme. At this time, effluent storage ponds will not be required for the MI discharge option. Ifthe MI discharge option is not available, effluent storage ponds would need to be added at theBilbul site. Cost for this potential addition has not been included in the cost estimate below.

3.7 Regulator y f ramework

The existing Bilbul STP does not have a licence to discharge treated effluent. If the proposedGriffith WRP was relocated to the Bilbul site, DECC licence and the Department of Water andEnergy (DWE) section 60 approvals would be required.

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

27/42

Page 26


4 Env ir onm ent al Assessment

4.1 Requirements

What follows is a preliminary environmental assessment for the existing STP Bilbul Site. The existinguse of the site is sewage treatment. However, constructing a water reclamation plant with a

capacity of 50,000 EP may be considered a significant change from the current use.

The environmental assessment required for relocating the WRP to the Bilbul site will be either areview of environmental factors (REF) as completed for the Duchatel Road site, or a moredetailed assessment in the form of an environmental impact statement (EIS).

The upgrade of Bilbul STP may not be an exempt development under clause 107 of the StateEnvironmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007. It is more likely to fall within the category ofDivision 18 Sewerage Systems in the SEPP Infrastructure, which requires an EIS to be prepared. Asignificance of impact assessment is required to determine if an EIS is required.

It is expected that the use of recycled water may require the preparation of a separate EIS.

4.2 Odours

The site is located in the vicinity of 20 ha blocks used mainly for agricultural production. Most ofthe residential houses are located in Bilbul village which is approximately 1.2 km to the north.The proposed MBR process has low odours that are unlikely to impact neighbouring properties.The only potential source of odours is the inlet works, which will be provided with ventilation andodour treatment facilities.

Even though odour impacts are likely to be negligible, GCC may nominate a buffer zone of400m, similar to that at the existing STP. It appears that no houses are within 400 m from the BilbulSTP, the closest being approximately 600 m to the north. This needs to be confirmed.

4.3 Flora and Fauna

The Bilbul site is located on agricultural land that has been heavily modified and degraded. Thesurrounding area is also agricultural land with similar characteristics. It is not likely that the floraand fauna will impact this project. A complete Flora and Fauna assessment will be needed ifthis option is chosen.

4.4 Geology and Soils

There are likely similar geology and soil constraints present at both WRP locations. If the Bilbul siteoption is selected, further site specific investigations will be require to confirm mitigationmeasures. Since a sewage treatment plant exists on the Bilbul site there is a potential for landcontamination. During construction mitigation for land contamination will need to be

managed.

4.5 Groundwater

Geotechnical and a field investigation will be required for the Bilbul site if further consideration isproposed. It is possible that high groundwater table is a constraint, similar to the Duchatel Roadsite. These are listed in the REF for the upgrade of Griffith WRP (HSc/Hyder 2007).

4.6 Heritage

As the site has been disturbed, it is unlikely that heritage issues exist. However, a heritageassessment would be required for the new site if Council was to progress the relocation of theWRP to the Bilbul site.

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

28/42

Page 27


5 Cost Estimates

5.1 Constr uction Costs

The estimated construction cost for the GWRP and the relocation site option, excluding GST, areshown in Table 6.

Table 6: Preliminary Cost Estimate for relocation option

$ million, excluding GST

Total Cost

Option Construction

Design andProject

Management Contingencies Stage 1 Stage 2

Bilbul WRP Cost 1 $21.6 $2.5 2 $4.3 $28.4 $6.0

Transfer Facilities 3 $15.6 $1.9 4 $4.7 $22.2 $2.4 5

Total for Bilbul site $37.2 $4.4 $9.0 $50.6 $8.4

Total for DuchatelRoad site 6 $18.75 $1.5 $3.75 $24.0 $6.0

Notes:1. Including effluent management as described above

2. Including EIS

3. Excluding decommissioning cost for GWRP or abandoned pipelines

4. Including concept/detailed design and REF

5. Only includes additional cost for collection and transfer facilities if relocation is selected

6. From HSc 2007.

5.2 Operati ng Costs

The annual operating costs are listed in Table 7.

Table 7: Esti mated Annual Operati ng Costs

Annual Operating Costs Qty Unit Unit cost Total

Labour1 10,650 HRS $70.00 $745,500

Chemicals 1 LS $150,000 $150,000

Power2 1,350,000 KWH $0.11 $148,500

Supplies 1 LS $50,000 $50,000Equipment and Maintenance 1 LS $55,000 $55,000

Sampling and Laboratory Analysis 1 LS $300,000 $300,000

Membrane Replacement ($2M per 10 years) 1 LS $200,000 $200,000

Sludge Hauling Cost (approx 80 trips per year) 1 LS $20,000 $20,000

Membrane Cleaning (2 membrane per year) 2 LS $10,000 $20,000

Total for Bilbul Site $1,689,000

Total for Duchatel Road site $1,607,500

Note 1: including an additional 250 HRS for hauling sludge to landfill.Note 2: including an additional 400,000 KWH for operation of the transfer facilities.Note 3: Source (HSe 2007).

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

29/42

Page 28


6 Impact on Sewerage Charges

6.1 Introduction

As shown in the previous section, relocating the WRP to the Bilbul site is estimated to costsignificantly more than upgrading the plant at the Duchatel Road site.

The NSW Financial Planning Model (FINMOD) was used to assess the impact of the relocation onsewerage user charges. FINMOD is a long-term financial planning tool used by local waterutilities in NSW to forecast the required user charges for water supply and for sewerage services.The input data to FINMOD includes growth rates, developer charges, operation maintenanceand administration cost and capital works program. FINMOD is owned and maintained by theDWE.

6.2 Modell ing

Two cases were created using FINMOD, one for each locations. The input data for both cases issimilar with the exception of the capital works program and operations cost.

The results of the modelling indicate that:

For the Duchatel Road site, the estimated typical residential bill (TRB) will need toincrease from the current $376 pa to $440 pa.

For the Bilbul site option, the TRB will need to be increased to $525 pa.

These figures are in 2008 dollars. This will need to be adjusted annually for the effect of inflation.

Upgrading the WRP at the Duchatel site will require borrowing in the order of $23 million whilerelocating the WRP to the Bilbul site will increase the required borrowing to $48 million.

Graphic presentation of the input data and the results is shown below.

Figu re 6: Typical Resident ial Bills

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1 Duchatel Road 2 Bilbul

Typical Residential Bills (2007/08$)

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

30/42

Page 29


Table 8: FINMOD Inputs

Inputs Duchatel Road Bilbul Site

Average Growth Rate (%) 1.9 1.9

Inflation Rate (%) 2.5 2.5

Borrowing Interest Rate (%) 6.5 6.5

Investment Interest Rate (%) 5.5 5.5

Typical Developer Charges ($/ET) 1,769 1,769

Total Capital Works (2007/08 $M) 74.5 103

Grants for Capital Works (2007/08 $M) 0.0 0.0

Minimum Cash and Investment

(2007/08 $M)

1.4 0.4

Cash and Investment at Final Year

(2007/08 $M)

8.2 13.9

Borrowings Outstanding at Final Year(2007/08 $M)

0.8 1.4

Figu re 7: Total Capit al Work s

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

1 Duchatel Road 2 Bi lbu l

Case 1 Case 2

Total Capital Works (2007/08 $M) 74.5 103.0

Total Capital Works

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

31/42

Page 30


Figur e 8: Borrow ing Outstanding

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

50000

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

50000

1 Duchatel Road 2 Bilbul

Borrowing Outstanding

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

32/42

Page 31


7 Implementation

7.1 Tim e Frame

The pollution reduction program (PRP) issued to GCC by DECC requires GCC to upgrade theGWRP by June 2009. The PRP is part of the licence for the operation of the GWRP, and GCC

may face prosecution if it does not comply with the PRP.

As discussed later in this section, it is unlikely that the target date of June 2009 could be met witheither option. DECC representatives have indicated that provided GCC is proceeding with theupgrade project without delays, DECC would consider extending the time to meet therequirements of the PRP.

7.2 Schedule

The project schedule will be impacted substantially if the option to relocate the WRP to the Bilbulsite is selected. Council would need to complete the following project tasks:

Review of environmental factors (REF) or EIS;

Concept design, including new concept design for transfer facilities not included in theprevious report.

The new transfer facilities add complexity to the design and are likely to extend projectconstruction. The reason is that the WRP in the Bilbul site must be ready and commissionedbefore the transfer system is commissioned. There are also no backup facilities as exist in theDuchatel Road site. The commissioning will require additional planning and resources.

Further, relocating the plant to the Bilbul site will require the construction of pipes in the Griffithurban area. These construction activities would have impact on the residents of Griffith.

Figure 9 below compares the schedule of the two options for upgrading the GWRP. If GCCselects the Bilbul site option, it is anticipated that the projects will be delayed approximately 12-18 months.

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

33/42

Key Projec t Task

Griffith WRP

REF and Co nc ep t Design Rep orts/ Ado ption

Mem brane Selection Tend er/ Select ion/ Ad op tion

Detailed Design Tend er/ Design/ A do ption

Construction and Commissioning

Tend er/ C onstruc tion/ Co mm issioning

WRP Relocatio n to Bilbul

EIS* and Conc ep t Design Rep orts/ Ado ption

Detailed Design Tend er/ Design/ Ad op tion

Construction and Commissioning

Tend er/ C onstruc tion

* If EIS is not req uired an REF and conc ep t d esign would ta ke 6-8 months

Consu lt ing Eng ineer Task Council Adopt ion

Griffith C ity Council Task Contracto r Task

2009 2010

Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4Q4 Q1

2007

Q4 Q1 Q2

2008

QQ2 Q3

Legend

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

34/42

Page 33


8 Abbreviat ions and Glossary

ADWF Average dry weather f low.

Biologicalloadings

The amount of biological matter (typically expressed in BOD) arriving atthe plant.

Bioreactor The part of the WRP where the biological process of bacteriaconsuming the organic matter is carried out.

Biosolids Also know n as sludge.

The by product of wastewater treatment, contains mainly organicmaterial.

BOD Biochemical oxygen demand.

A measure of organic pollutants in wastewater (both soluble andparticulate)

CFU Colony forming unit.

A measure of microbiological pollution, typically as CFU per 100 millilitre

of water.

DECC Department of Environment and Climate Change.

Previously EPA. The department that regulates environmental

discharges through licences.

DWE Departm ent of Water and Energy.

Previously DEUS. The department that oversees water and wastewateroperations by local government in NSW.

EP Equivalent p ersons (or equivalent popu lation).

The loadings generated by one person. In this report the hydraulicloading of 1 EP is 210 L/day; and the biological loading is 70 gram BOD.

FINMOD Financial planning software for NSW water utility.

GCC Grif fi th City Council.

The local water utility in the Griffith LGA, owner of the WRP andproponent of this project.

GWRP Gri ff it h Water Reclamati on Plant .

The facility that treats wastewater on Duchatel Road, Griffith.

HSc Hydro Science Consul ti ng.

Authors of this report.

Hydraulic

loading

The flow rate to the plant.

L or l Litre.

L/s Litres per second.

LGA Local govern ment area.

MBR Membrane bior eactor.

A secondary / tertiary wastewater treatment process based onmembrane for solids separation.

Mg Mil l igram

1/000 of a gram.

MI Murrumbidgee Irr igation.

ML Megalitre.

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

35/42

Page 34


A million litres.

ML/d Megalitres per day

PDWF Peak dry weather f low.

PRP Pollution reduction program.

Part of DECC licence, requiring Council to upgrade the performance

of the treatment plant.PS Pum p Stat ion

PWWF Peak wet w eather f low.

RAS Return activated sludge.

The sludge stream that is recycled to the activated sludge process.

SCADA System cont rol and data acquisit ion.

The software system used to monitor and control the plant.

SS Suspended so lid s.

Also known as non filterable residue (NFR). The measure of particulate

pollutant in the wastewater.Thermotolerantcoliform

Also known as faecal coliform.

Indicator bacteria used to measure the microbiological pollution.

TPS Transfer pump station.

TRB Typical residential bil l .

UV Ultr aviolet (l igh t).

Process use for disinfection.

VPN Virtual pr ivate network .

The system of communication between the plant and GCC central

computer.VSD Variable speed drive.

A device that operates electric motor at variable speeds. Whencoupled to a pump, allows operating the pump at variable flow rates.

WAS Waste acti vated sl udg e.

The sludge stream that is removed from the process, to becomebiosolids.

WRP Water Reclamation Plant.

Also known as wastewater treatment plant or wastewater treatmentworks.

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

36/42

Page 35


9 References

7. HSc 2007. Griffith City Council Upgrade of GWRP Options Report; HydroScienceConsulting.

8. HSc/ Hyder 2007. Upgrade of GWRP Review of Environmental Factors (REF);

HydroScience Consulting and Hyder Consulting.9. Public Works 1990. Griffith Sewerage Augmentation Bilbul Sewerage Treatment Works,

Civil Drawings.

10.WSL 2005a. Griffith City Council GWRP Upgrade - Concept Design Report; EcowiseEnvironmental; WSL Consultants Pty Ltd.

11.WSL 2005b. Griffith City Council GWRP Upgrade - Water Recycling Investigation; EcowiseEnvironmental; WSL Consultants Pty Ltd.

12.WSL 2004. Griffith City Council Griffith Water Reclamation Project Report on Re-Location

Workshop; Ecowise Environmental; WSL Consultants Pty Ltd.

13.GHD 2006. North Griffith Sewerage Scheme Review Sewerage Masterplan; GHD Pty Ltd.

14.GHD 2003. Griffith Long Term Capital Works Plans Report on Sewerage; GHD.

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

37/42

Appendix A

Existing Sewerage Collection System Capacity Analysis

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

38/42

Client:

Project:

Currency: ADWF = 240 L/EP/day Used by GCC for the initial estim

Date: ADWF = 210 L/EP/day Used by HSc for the current esti

Prepared By: PWWF = 6 x ADWF

Checked By:

Existing Co llection System Ca pa city

Discharge

Size

(no 1)

Discharge

Size

(no 2)

Velocity (w/

one in

operation)

Velocity (w/

both in

operation)

Pump Station L/s ML/d mm mm m/s m/s ET EP ADWF (L/s)

PW

PSG1 100 8.64 300 300 1.415 0.354 2,609 6,000 17

PSG2 160 13.82 200 200 5.096 1.274 4,174 9,600 27

PSG3, one pump 140 12.10

PSG3, two pumps 230 19.87 300 300 3.255 0.814 6,000 13,800 38

PSG4 196 16.93 600 0.694 5,113 11,760 33

Existing Co llec tion System Load

Pump Station ET EP

ADWF

(L/s)

PWWF

(L/s) ET EP ADWF (L/s)

PW

PSG1 1,857 4,272 12 71 1,962 4,512 11

PSG2 5,176 11,904 33 198 5,466 12,571 31

PSG3 (both pumps) 2,648 6,090 17 102 2,796 6,431 16

PSG4 710 1,632 5 27 749 1,724 4

10,390 23,898 66 398 10,973 25,238 61

1 Based on PWWF capacity in GHD Griffith Long Term Capital Works Plans, Report on Sewerage (May 2003)

2 Based on loading at 210 L/EP/day and total daily loadings of 25,238 (HSc 2007)

Planned Development

Received by

Pump ET EP ET EP ET EP ET EP

Area Station

Collina PSG4 850 1,955 250 575 640 1,472 276 635

South Griffith Residential PSG3 700 1,610 350 805 750 1,725 286 657Yoogali PSG4 200 460 80 184 0 0

Hanwood PSG3 50 115 50 115 55 127 0 0

South Griffith Industrial (S1) PSG2 695 1,599 43 99

South Griffith Industrial (S2/S3) PSG3 361 830 662 1,523 63 146

Lake Wyangan3

PSG7

1 Based on GHD Griffith Long Term Capital Works Plans, Report on Sewerage (May 2003) Total (excluding Lake Wyangan)

2 Based on total projected 2035 loading (excluding Lake Wyangan) of 14,630 EP (HSc 2007) Lake Wyangan

3 Based on GHD, North Griffith Sewerage Scheme, Review Sewerage Masterplan (December 2006) Total Load for Planned Development

HydroSc ience Consulting Pty Ltd .

Hydraulic Capacity estimated at 240L/EP

Stage 1 (2001-2010)1

Stage 2 (2011-2020)1

EJO

Griffith City Counc il (GCC)

Stage 3 (2021-2030)1

Australian dollars, GSTexc luded

GWRP Reloc atio n Optio n - MBR Plant

GAZ

March 4, 2008

Current Load estimated at 240 L/EP/day1

to 20352

Pump Capacity

Current Loading 2

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

39/42

Appendi x B

Proposed Sewerage Collection System Capacity Analysis

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

40/42

Client:

Project:

Currency: ADWF = 240 L/EP/day Used by GCC for the in

Date: ADWF = 210 L/EP/day Used by HSc for the cu

Prepa red By: PWWF = 6 x ADWFChecke d By:

Existing Collection System Capacity Anaylsis

Current Pump

Station Capacity

Recommended

Pump Station

Capacity

Pump Station ET EP

ADWF

(at 210 L/EP/day)

(L/s)

PWWF

(at 3 x ADWF)

(L/s)

PWWF

(at 6 x ADWF)

(L/s) (L/s) (L/s) Notes

PSG1 1,962 4,512 11 33 66 100 No 100

PSG2 6,204 14,269 35 104 208 160 Yes 208 Simila

PSG3 6,123 14,083 34 103 205 230 Yes 205 Simila

PSG4 3,045 7,004 17 51 102 196 No N/A Replac

PSG7 3,750 8,625 21 63 126 121 N/A 126

48,493 118 354 707

Proposed Collection System (Steam 1)

Rising Main A

Diameter

Rising Main B

Diameter Approx PWWF

Approx Velocity

w/one main

Approx Velocity

w/ two mains

Pipe Receive Flow from (mm) (mm) (L/s) (m/s) (m/s) Notes

RG3A, RG3B (Exist) PSG3 300 300 205 2.902 1.451 No upgrade required

N1 A/B PSG3 300 300 205 2.902 1.451 No upgrade required

N2 A/B PSG3 and PSG7 375 375 331 2.998 1.499 No upgrade required

RG1AorB and RG4 (Exist) PSG3 and PSG7 500 300 331 1.687 1.240 No upgrade required

RG4 PSG3 and PSG7 600 0 331 1.171 No upgrade required

N6 A/B South Griffith 200 200 80 2.548 1.274 No upgrade required

Proposed Collection System (Stream 2)

Rising Main A

Diameter

Rising Main B

Diameter Approx PWWF

Approx Velocity

w/one main

Approx Velocity

w/ two mains


N3 A/B PSG1 250 250 100 2.038 1.019 No upgrade required

RG2A, RG2B (Exist) PSG1 200 200 100 3.185 1.592 Upgrade will be required, pipeline i

RG2A, RG2B (Exist) PSG2 200 200 208 6.624 3.312 Upgrade will be required, similar fo

N4 PSG1 and PSG2 600 0 308 1.090 1.090 No upgrade required

Is

Upgrade

Required?

Future Capacity to East Side of City

HydroSc ienc e Consulting Pty Ltd.Griffith City Counc il (GCC)

GWRP Relocatio n Optio n - MBR Plant

Australian d ollars, GSTex clud ed

Marc h 4, 2008

EJOGAZ

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

41/42

New Transfer Pump Station (TPS)

ET EP

ADWF

(at 210 L/EP/day)

(L/s)

PWWF

(at 3 x ADWF)

(L/s)

PWWF

(at 6 x ADWF)

(L/s)

Recommended

Pump Capacity

(L/s) Notes

Stage 1 16,304 37,500 91 273 547 550 One Pump

Stage 2 21,739 50,000 122 365 729 730 Two Pumps

New Conveyance Facility Pipeline (N5 A/B)

Rising Main A

Diameter

Rising Main B

Diameter Approx Flow

Approx Velocity

w/one main

Approx Velocity

w/ two mains


ADWF (Stage1) NTPS 500 500 91 0.464 0.232

PWWF (Stage 1) NTPS 500 500 550 2.803 1.401

PWWF (Stage 2) NTPS 500 500 730 3.720 1.860

8/8/2019 080422 CL08 Attachment

42/42

SYDNEY

Level 5, 350 Kent StreetSydney, NSW 2000

ph: 02 9249 5100

fax: 02 9249 2700

www.hydroscience.net.au

Experience.

Innovation.

Integration.

Quality.

DESIGN PLANNING

Advanced wastewater treatment

Water recycling and reuse

Water treatment

Pumping stations

Pipelines and channels

Irrigation

Integrated water cycle management

Development servicing plans

Best-practice management

Demand/drought management

Strategic business planning

Financial and triple bottom line