Beale Air Force Base, Wastewater Treatment Plant, Marysville, CA
Civil-Environmental Engineering
Sanitary Sewer System Study Update for the Wastewater Treatment Plant
Project Description:

Haling and Associates (H&A) in association with Metcalf & Eddy (M&E) provided engineering services for investigation and study activities required to assess the Wastewater Treatment Plant at Beale AFB, CA.

 

The wastewater treatment plant has had problems meeting the current NPDES permit limitations for copper, cyanide, and TPH-D when discharging to Hutchinson Creek.  Permit limits for mercury and surfactants (MBAS) also have been exceeded within the past two years.  To address these problems, the Base has set a long-term goal of eliminating discharges into Hutchinson Creek.  Effluent disposal by means of the other two options (golf course irrigation and land disposal) are considered to be viable long-term solutions.

However, until a sufficient track record is established documenting the ability to land base 100 % of the WWTP effluent, Beale AFB believes it is prudent to retain its ability to discharge to Hutchinson Creek.  While this will maintain the status quo, it does not address the WWTP capability to meet current or new more stringent discharge limitations.  Therefore and until land base disposal of all effluent is achieved; the WWTP processes will need to be upgraded to meet these waste discharge requirements.

H&A reviewed the findings of previous environmental data related to the WWTP and evaluated options to meet surface water discharge requirements being imposed by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board.   Scope of services included:

 

Investigation Plan

 

Alternatives Analysis/Sanitary Sewer System Study

The alternatives considered consisted of the following:

“Rightsizing” the Existing Trickling Filter Plant, Extended Aeration/Oxidation Ditch, Sequence Batch Reactors, Lagoons, Advanced Wastewater Treatment, No action

A narrative of environmental issues, justifications and permits necessary for each option was provided. 

A cost analysis based on current approved government cost analysis, including a life cycle cost study of annualized and present worth of operations and maintenance costs was made for each option.

An estimate of the most probable construction costs presented in a Microsoft Office Excel spreadsheet and on an AF DD 1391 form was also submitted.

 

H&A prepared a matrix comparing the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative.  A numerical score will be assigned to each alternative based upon the relative importance of listed criteria.  These criteria will include present worth cost, ease of maintenance, operability, track record, land use, overall complexity, reliability, chemical usage, process flexibility, energy requirements, effects on the environment, etc.  The alternative indicated with the highest score will be the preferred alternative.