1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The following provides a summary of current facility and process challenges, design period flows
and loadings, effluent goals, shortlisted process alternatives, and recommendations to prioritize
future improvements for the Grand Forks Wastewater Treatment Facility (GFWWTF):

1. Current Facility and Process Challenges:

a. Long forcemain residence times and anaerobic, corrosive, and odorous influent.
b. High industrial discharge of inorganic solids and biochemical oxygen demand
(BOD) loadings influent to the GFWWTF and lack of primary clarification.
c. High nitrogen loadings influent to the GFWWTF, high alkalinity supplementation
requirements, and lack of adequate nitrified effluent recycle capacity for the
anoxic Reactor 1.
d. Hydraulic limitations of the 48-inch ductile iron pipe connections of the Main
Building, the Distribution Building, and bioreactors.
e. Complexity of bioreactor aeration manifold for dissolved oxygen concentration

DRAFT
control in individual bioreactors.
f. Complexity of balancing individual Microbubble Flotation (MBF) basin hydraulic
loadings and ineffective heavy/inorganic solids removal from MBF basins.
g. Future maximum month flows will cause exceedance of MBF recommended
solids loading rate (SLR) values, requiring expansion of secondary liquid-solids
separation capacity.
h. Lack of emergency backup power generator having capacity to operate one or
more 800 HP Turblex blowers and providing opportunities for energy efficiency
through power supplier-sponsored load management program implementation.
i. Lack of long-term biosolids management strategy implementation.
j. Distribution Building occupancy and failing to meet current code requirements of
the National Fire Protection Association, Standard 820 (NFPA 820).
k. Unreliable facility access road in winter weather.

2. Design Period Flows and Loadings in 2040 (Table 1 -1):

a. Average Day Flow 13.8 million gallons per day (MGD)
b. Maximum Month Average Day Flow 18 MGD
c. Peak Hour Flow 37 MGD
d. Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) 46,347 lb per day
e. Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) 13,841 lb per day
f. Total suspended solids (TSS) 88,046 lb per day
g. Total phosphorus (TP) 1,938 lb per day

GFWWTF Facility Planning Report P00105-2018-019 Executive Summary

 Table 1- 1. Projected 2040 Loadings.

Flow Flow COD cBOD TKN TSS VSS TP

Source Type (MGD) (lb/d) (lb/d) (lb/d) (lb/d) (lb/d) (lb/d)
City of Grand Forksa AA 5.6 33,172 14,036 1,871 16,423 13,960 468

Pop. 70,116 MMAD 10 36,457 15,500 2,300 20,500 17,425 514

PH 27 47,000 20,000 2,950 26,400 22,440 660

East Grand Forksa AA 1.2 3,748 1,585 237 2,782 991 79

Pop. 8,733 MMAD 1.5 4,730 2,000 500 4,400 1,560 95

PH 1.9 7,500 3,200 630 5,500 1,970 120

Simplot AA 2.3 10,500 2,992 2,705 13,016 1,560 575

MMAD 2.65 53,790 16,560 6,744 44,809 10,306 663

PH 3.3 58,300 18,000 7,331 48,706 11,690 826

Red River Biorefinery AA 0.66 2,477 1,651 220 1,930 1,090 67

MMAD 0.82 6,000 4,000 550 4,800 2,050 167

PH 0.82 12,000 7,500 900 4,000 2,250 273

DRAFT
Ingredion b
0.01 358 163 13 100 83 2

Landfill Leachate b
0.07 1,892 789 1,633 465 449 81

Liquid Waste/Septage b
0.02 2,200 1,080 1,251 5,672 2,800 250

Reserve Capacity b
2.5 20,000 6,255 850 7,300 3,650 166

Total Annual Average 13.8 74,347 28,551 8,780 47,688 24,583 1,689
Total Maximum Month Average
18.0 125,427 46,347 13,841 88,046 38,323 1,938
Day
Total Peak Hour 37.0 149,250 56,987 15,558 98,143 45,332 2,378
Notes:
a. Infiltration and Inflow (I & I) is included in the municipal flows.
b. Ingredion, Landfill Leachate, Liquid Waste/Septage, and Reserve Capacity flows and loads are equal across
different flow conditions.

3. Effluent Goals:
a. BOD < 25 mg/L
b. TSS < 25 mg/L
c. Total nitrogen < 10 mg/L
d. Total ammonia < 2 mg/L
e. TP < 1 mg/L

4. Shortlisted Process Alternatives:

Seven alternatives (a total of 17 variations) were evaluated. The following three
alternatives were ultimately selected for Kepner-Tregoe comparison.

a. Primary Clarification (PC) and Anaerobic Digestion (AD)

b. Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR) Retrofit of Bioreactors and IFAS
c. Membrane Bioreactors (MBR)

GFWWTF Facility Planning Report P00105-2018-019 Executive Summary

 5. Recommendations Prioritizing Future Improvements:
a. Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR) Retrofit of Bioreactors was recommended for
liquid process improvements.
i. A pilot study of inorganic solids removal via RAS/WAS sidestream
hydrocyclone is recommended in the 2021-2022 Capital Improvements
Plan (CIP)
ii. An MBF operations stress-test is recommended in the 2021-2022 CIP
iii. A RAS hydro-cyclone pilot test is recommended for selective wasting of
inert suspended solids
iv. IFAS capacity enhancement, when required, based upon increases in
loading and how the reserve capacity is utilized
b. Waste activated sludge dewatering and air drying near secondary cell 1 (SC-1)
was selected for biosolids management.
c. GFWWTF General Improvements
d. Facility backup power generation
e. Biosolids removal from primary cell (PC) 2

DRAFT
6. Recommended Phasing of Future Improvements:
a. Phase 1 - Yard Piping, General Improvements, Septage, and Backup Power
Generation
i. Yard piping to route influent to west end of distribution channel and
distribution channel piping to provide parallel bioreactor operation
capability
ii. General improvements related to maintenance, lighting, egress, C1D1
zone compliance, mechanical HVAC, equipping MBF-7 for future solids
loadings, etc., discussed in Section 5 of report:
1. Headworks, Process 101, MBF-7 equipping, MBF effluent channel
skimming
2. Distribution Building: Channel Zone, Blower Room, Garage and
Electrical Rooms
iii. Pond Diversion Vault: Septage Hauler Pad
iv. Emergency Backup Generator
v. Redistribution of solids within PC2
b. Phase 2 – BNR Retrofit of Bioreactors
i. Conversion of bioreactors for parallel operation, each bioreactor
containing its own anaerobic, anoxic, swing, and aerobic zone and its own
internal intermediate mixed liquor recycle loop
ii. Further capacity enhancement via IFAS, hydrocyclone, or a combination of
the two based upon actual future influent loadings and pilot test results
c. Phase 3 – Biosolids Management Facilities
i. WAS dewatering facility
ii. Air drying beds
iii. Related equipment
GFWWTF Facility Planning Report P00105-2018-019 Executive Summary
 d. Phase 4 – Bioreactor Installation of IFAS
i. IFAS module installations
ii. Dedicated IFAS blower installation

A design, bidding, and construction phasing schedule is presented for the recommended
alternative, Alternative 2 – Biological Nutrient Removal Retrofit of Bioreactors and IFAS (Table 1
-2, Figure 1 -1). A phase-specific cost estimate for the recommended alternative is also given
below (Table 1 -3).

Table 1- 2. Recommended Phasing Timeline for Preferred Alternative.

Phase Description Design Bid Construction

Yard & Process Piping, GFWWTF
Phase 1 General/Misc. Improvements, Biosolids 2021 2022 2022-2024
Maintenance

Phase 2 BNR Modification of Bioreactors 2023 2024 2024-2027

DRAFT
Biosolids Dewatering and Air Drying
Phase 3 2027 2028 2028-2031
Facilities
Bioreactor Installation of IFAS, if
Phase 4 2028 2028 2029-2031
necessary

Table 1- 3. Opinions of Total Project Costs (millions $).

Estimated Construction General Requirementsb,

Phase Costa Contingencyc, and ELAd Phase Cost Estimatea
Phase 1 8.7 5.0 13.7
Phase 2 20.0 11.2 31.2
Phase 3 15.6 8.1 23.7
Phase 4 5.0 2.8 7.8
Total 49.3 27.1 76.4
Notes:
a. Estimate is in 2020 dollars.
b. General Requirements, 7.5% of Construction Cost.
c. Contingency, 20% of the sum of Construction Cost and General Requirements.
d. ELA (Engineering, Legal, and Administration), 20% of the sum of Construction Cost, General
Requirements, and Construction Contingency.

GFWWTF Facility Planning Report P00105-2018-019 Executive Summary

 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 203 203

Ph
Design Bid

Ph Construction

Ph

Ph

Figure 1- 1. Recommended Phasing Timeline for Preferred Alternative.

DRAFT
GFWWTF Facility Planning Report P00105-2018-019 Executive Summary