HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 ApplicationP.O. Box 19OB
1OO5 Cooper Ave.
Glenwood Springs,
co 81602
(97O) 945-s7OO
(970) 945-1253 Fax
March 5, 2003
t* hr\,,#5**
RECEI\IED
plA' n g ?r/03
,,ffii^iE?',xlil,lLMr. Mark Bean
Garfield County Planning
108 Eighth Street, Suite 201
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Rock Gardens
Dear Mark:
Attached please find the site application for the proposed Rock Gardens Wastewater
TreatmentPlant. Theproposedwatertreatmentplantwillreplacenumerousseptictankand
leach field systems that currently serve the facility.
By copy of this letter, we have fonrrarded this application to the agencies listed below.
Rock Gardens Mobile Home Park
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
City of Glenwood Springs
NWCOG
Plese review the application for completion and we will then provide as many copies as
necessary.
lf you have any questions, please call our office at (970) 945-5700.
Very truly yours,
Zancanella & Associates, Inc.
h '.cL.'r
Thomas A. Zancanella,
cc: Ron Liston
Z:\20000\20739 Rock Gardens\garfield county-site app.wpd
ZaxcarELLA AND AssoqarEs, fic.
ErroNggnnc CoNsufiAxrg
.-lr \
ENGINEERING REPORT
AND
SITE APPLICATION
FOR THE
Rock Gardens
Wastewater Treatment Facility
Garfield County
Applicant:
Rock Gardens Mobile Home Park and Campground, LLC
c/o Kevin B. Schneider
o'",.1,,?330tffi I"33' ?: ., 1
Phone: (970) 945-6737
Prepared By:
Zancanella & Associates, lnc.
1 005 Cooper Avenue
Glenwood Springs, CO 81602
(e70) e45-5700
February 2003
Thomas A.Zancanella, P.E. #20481
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Estimated Proiect Gosts ...........3
Effluent Limitations ...................3
lnstructions. Equipment Operation & Maintenance ...............4
Operation & Maintenance Requirements ................4
Schedule ....................4
Aqencv .......5
Operator .....................5
Finances ....................5
REPORT ATTAGHMENTS ....................6
Table 1 - Rock Gardens Water Requirements ........ ...............6
Table 2 - Development Schedule .............7
Table 3 - Wastewater System Operation and Maintenance Budget.....................8
APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL ............... 10
SITE APPLICATION ATTACHMENTS ................14
Figure 1 - 5 Mile Radius Map........ ..........;...... ..........14
Figure 2 - 1 Mile Radius Map........ .......... 15
List of Wells Located Within a 1-Mile Radius .......16
Figure 3 - Flood Plain Map........ ............,17
Preliminary Geotechnical Study ............18
Authority Letter .......20
APPENDTX A .......21
Manufacturer / Equipment lnformation ........ .........21
l/
Engineering Report
Rock Gardens Wastewater
February 2003
Zancanella and Associates, lnc.
INTRODUCTION
Rock Gardens is approximately a 17 acre tract located in the center portion of Section 2,
Township 6 South, Range 89 West of the 6th P.M. as shown on the 1-Mile map, (See
Application AttachmentZ - Figure 2). The subject property is located generally south and east
of the village of No Name, on the south side of, and adjacent to, lnterstate 70. The existing
mobile home park and campground currently consist of cabins, mobile homes, RV spaces,
summer camp sites, single family dwellings and other buildings associated with the camping
and river rafting industry. Water service is provided by 2 wells and wastewater is currently
served by septic tanks and leach fields. Rock Gardens Campground and Mobile Home Park,
LLC proposes to expand the park to approximately 2 single family units, 11 camper cabins, 55
camper spaces, 51 RV spaces, 18 summer camp sites, a public flush toilet, a public faucet and
a paper service snack bar.
The proposed development will result in an estimated 76.3 Equivalent Residential Units (EaRs)
of water demand. A Closed Loop Reactor (CLR) wastewater treatment plant providing for
0.025 MGD of treatment is proposed for the development. This facility will discharge to the
Colorado River.
PLANT SITE AND SERVICE AREA
The proposed CLR plant will serve the development within the Rock Gardens property as
described in Site Application Attachment 6. The development will consist of a mixture of
domestic and recreational uses. The resultant water demand for the development equals 76.3
EQRs. An augmentation plan has been filed with the Division 5 Water Court (Case No.
02CW49) for this amount to provide additional water for the proposed development. Currently,
the breakdown of the EQRs is as shown in Table 1 in the Report Attachments. The project is in
the preliminary stages, so the distribution of EQRs may change as development plans
progress.
The plant will be located on the lower end of the property near the Colorado River, see Figure 2
attached to this report. This location allows for the minimum 100' setback between the plant
Engineering Report February 2003
Rock Gardens Wastewater Zancanella and Associates, Inc.
and habitable buildings. The plant will be covered. Access to the site will be via the entrance
to the mobile home park, which is its only access. The plant will be built in a single phase. The
effluent from the plant will be piped to a discharge point on the Colorado River just below the
plant. The location of the proposed wastewater plant in relation to otherwater and wastewater
facilities can be seen on Figure 1 and Figure 2 of the attached Site Application.
The proposed wastewater treatment facility is not located within the 1O0-year flood plain and
there are no other natural hazards that threaten the facility. We have included the FEMA Area
Flood Plain Map and the Preliminary Geotechnical Study by Hepworth - Pawlak Geotechnical,
lnc. (See Application Attachments 4 and 5).
ALTERNATIVES
Offsite
There is currently no facility in place to provide wastewater treatment for the proposed
development identified in this report. The buildings and camp sites are currently served by
onsite septic systems. Rock Gardens is not located in the service area of an existing
wastewater provider or 201 plan. ln a verbal discussion on February 13,2003 with Larry
Thompson of the Glenwood Springs Engineering Department, he indicated that Rock Gardens
is outside their current20l Plan. The applicant has proposed opportunities for consolidation
with the nearby CDOT facilities and has determined that consolidation at this time is not
desired by CDOT.
On-Site
Various on-site alternatives were evaluated for this project, which include:
1. Design and construction lndividual Sewage Treatment Systems (ISTS).
2. Design and construction of a Closed Loop Reactor System (CLR).
3. Design and construction of a Chromaglas SBR System.
These alternatives were dismissed, except for the CLR due to cost constraints, space
constraints or operational and maintenance costs.
2
Engineering Report
Rock Gardens Wastewater
February 2003
Zancanella and Associates, lnc.
PROPOSED FACILITY
The proposed system will consist of an E. A. Aerotor Closed Loop Reactor (CLR)treatment
facility. The CLR system, in our opinion, is the best solution to serve Rock Gardens' needs.
We are currently proposing a plant capacity of 0.025 MGD to serve the needs of the Rock
Gardens development. Rock Gardens will have an estimated flow rate of approximately 18,000
gpd, depending upon what combination of residential units, campsites, cabins, RV spaces, etc.
is in the final development plan. The effluent will be discharged to the Colorado River
immediately below the plant. This report contains the proposed treatment facility layout and
details required for site application submittal. Manufacture/s product information and drawings
have been included in Appendix A.
Estimated Proiect Costs
The total estimated cost for the construction of the Closed Loop Reactor plant would be
$319,000.00. Application Attachment Appendix A includes estimated costs for the CLR plant
alone.
Effluent Limitations
The Colorado River in the vicinity of the proposed wastewater treatment facility is classified for
the following uses:
1. Cold Water Aquatic Life Class 1
2. Class 1a Existing Primary Contact Recreation
3. Agriculture
4. Water Supply
To protect these uses, the Colorado Department of Health will determine a set of standards to
apply to the proposed Rock Gardens Treatment Facility. Preliminary Effiuent Limitations forthe
proposed treatment facility have been received from Ms. Karen Young, Colorado Department
of Health and Environment, Colorado Water Quality Control Division. A copy of the Preliminary
Effluent Limits can be found in Application Attachment 6.
3
Engineering Report
Rock Gardens Wastewater
February 2003
Zancanella and
lnstructions. Equipment Operation & Maintenance
Complete manuals and instructions for the operation and maintenance of all mechanical
equipment for the treatment facility will be furnished by the individual equipment providers
(Lakeside Equipment Corporation, et al.) and stored within the facility. Adequate tools, training
and technical assistance will also be provided by the contractof s representative to the operator
and management agency representative.
Operation & Maintenance Requirements
Safetv
Proper precautions shall be taken by the operator to avoid suffocation, exposure to infectious
diseases, electrical, mechanical, and chemical accidents.
General
The operator shall:
1. Have current Class C Wastewater and Class 1 Collections Certifications;
2. Check the operating conditions of the facility;
3. Make appropriate adjustments;
4. Perform other corrective measures and preventative maintenance as needed;
5. Document in writing all observations, changes, and adjustments made to the
facility; and
6. Complete and submit required monitoring reports as required by Federal, State,
and local regulatory agencies.
The staffing requirement for the facility is estimated at one operator to check on the facility 3 - 4
times a week.
Schedule
Table 2, attached to this report, presents an estimated development schedule for Rock
Gardens WastewaterTreatment Plant. lt is currently anticipated thatthe facilitywill be licensed
and operational by Mayl ,2004.
4
Engineering Report
Rock Gardens Wastewater
February 2003
Zancanella and Associates, lnc.
MANAGEMENT
Aqencv
Rock Gardens Mobile Home Park and Campground, LLC shall assume management
responsibility of the treatment facility. Their address and telephone number is:
c/o Kevin B, Schneider
o' ""f8:o'#Xffi "33 "'? uo,
Phone: (970) 945-6737
Operator
A State Certified Operatorwill be responsible forthe operation and maintenance of the facility.
A contract will be negotiated and entered into with a qualified operator upon completion of the
facility.
Finances
The facility construction will be funded by Rock Gardens Mobile Home Park and Campground,
LLC. Operation and maintenance costs will also be funded internally. The anticipated fees for
the operation and maintenance of the facilities are $29.73lEQR/month, see Table 3 attached to
this report for further details.
tr
Engineering Report
Rock Gardens Wastewater
February 2003
Zancanella and
REPORT ATTAGHMENTS
TABLE 1
Rock Gardens Water Requirements
6
!
o
oo
!c6
o;
o
9-s9n'=oq-9N-
;.ea;
!_E
=o!-OEos
^o
5oQo
il*FO:6
E85eo-
O=V(-) : _r.rJL > v)o>>o;f; Eo
Lll t 'hAH
-E O69. !EP N
EE E
60q!N Ofi"a :
tro Ixo!*= E S
= >c o+: - OE6 P &
o
o
(E
g
(Eo
oo
o
GI
=
otro
E
o(J
!,ooo
CLo
o.
@
ot
.E-oo*
=6EEF.o
co
Eo
'5
Eot
o
(E
=E'o
Gtr
Eo
IIJ
j
Iiop
.90o90s. Be x
HH;Ao @ ='9<9=and 3oo^o,a o-6AEEsEd3E=;;e.hg3E
oto,d
oc
N6)d
s)
ao
rri
t
+
o.!o
oo?
E.99
FOi9a I3'i
oo3st
E96F
(,
O-
3.Eeo6
-c oo'tr
o
E'Fg
^d rNtrO
o:o
'9 or
@90
o:o:
0)^Pr6EO-94
ts6F
oO-
e.E6'o 6
o, 'tr
o
Eo:L=
^oJNEO
-:E olo
.9 or
-9 5
o:o=
o
=
!Es[9;Efla'8!E
C', (\l (O (, l\ €O N l.- O O (, (Y,rrrrolr-oq\a?rrOOOOO--OOOOO
(')F(r(\(r)Olt-d)@OrN(O-rtro?rqoqqnrrOOOOO--OOOOO
EiQq,o)Ft-t-CDOF(\qu?s?aasaaaqq,qoooooooooooo
ssssssssssssoooooooooooo(0G,ro(Yr6locDoNtro6
etdddddilcddddd
oooooovo$(oooOOOO@OONnTOO
OOOOOTOOOOOO
NNNNNNNNNNNNoooooooooooocioooooooodoo
oooNoNooNoNo
-O-O-C)--O-O-
oooooooooooo
666()@OFO@Oondocidods+aicidcciFNNNNNNf-
to)t(O.<leFFd)-l@tu?o,lu?au?\\aI\au?
N Cr N (\ (r) (Y' (Y, (Y) (t 6a Ot (t
oooooo@€oooocc9qqc!.:oqqc!qqOOOOTFFOOOOO
oooNdrNCooNoNo()cfroocDooooooo
oooooooooooo
(oN(o$@+(o(o*(O$@ooooo(,ooooooNON-NFNNFN-Noi ; ai ni oi oi ci .i N Gi oi oi
N
.i
u.
O
C
o
oo
o\oYONco
o>ooocooa'6
-Eo LLlo_ob
EE
.q+!<
NcN
go
c
Eo
Eo'tr:oo
O
=c
fE>
oootq
6OroOro
OYO O'o
on ):EXh>:.9
EEAsFq&bE:q>(J oo
E!E:3o 6 9;=se,oho
ItrtO-J<
ci
t!o
LJJ
o'6
o
E
Eo
oIt
N
oi
t
(,)
c
E
E
:oI
O
EE
>Ye
oooooa
OO\oo\o
o:o o'€
>h6- =
__qE '6EH:qEU L g U III
-LU&bE:I > (J.9.o
E! 6:3o 6 9;'-oo6edrtrto-i<
[J
c?
@
@
u(1
U]
+
Engineering Report
Rock Gardens Wastewater Zancanella and Associates, lnc.
February 2003
TABLE 2
Rock Gardens Wastewater Treatment Plant
Development Schedule
7
I
I
dFa
3
!:
,9I
g
N
ooooo
o-
=o't
otr
.9ooo
tro
E
(llo
F
otrEE=oo
trD U)
F(E
==E90)L-c -g(J9a,Exo16.:<;'6' P#o-tr
Engineering Report February 2003
noif GarOens Wastewater Zancansllg end Associates'-lnc.
Rock Gardens Wastewater Treatment Plant
Wastewater System Operation and Maintenance Budget
I
ieo
E
0)>8_c=co)
c '13LC
\oo'=oooo-
-oB;6oaFotA.:a)
eo)
EgCO(Ee
PE.=a
=)Qq)!!
'orq
&. =-eo tp.r.r.r = !
E *L
<!_u=d'u*
E#s"
E eoo
.9
CL
E
Joo
@ $ @ Oi r co(o(9lo{ q q o? q \q\lr @ - (O O s$6)l@ @ @ @ @ N@6ll@ {r{
o o o o o oooq q q c q qqqo o o o o ocooo o o o .<t $@Nl.- r tf) @ O)CO(V)@ @ @ @ J6eN@@
ro
!q=XtL
rl o.:y
=E 6(a E-Fo
-oo\
ONCo
oL
o)o-o
C
.o
o
a
;c(!
co
o-co:LooaooL-^Oor;.oEoY'E.=EuaEEPfr E 9P a e
lzEfoeoco()66c6.o.c
=q,o-{.P;+CO)O:'.--!oo;iaR=EoE(r)Eurooo-
tttttt
+,o
c,)E'
-)
m
ootr
G?-o+,tr
l-
ftl
=E'tr.(Ec)F56o'ESaEl-L o
CLo
tr-o+,a
U'
l-o+,G
=orts,o
G
=
February 2003Engineering Report
Rock Gardens Wastewater Zancanella and Associates, lnc.
SITE
APPLICATION
Rock Gardens Wastewater Treatment Plant
Application for Site Approval for Gonstruction of:
A New Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant.
I
Engineering Report February 2003
Rock Gardens Wastewater Zancanella and Associates, lnc.
Colorado Department of Health
Water Quality Control Division
4300 Cherry Creek Drive South
Denver, CO 80246-1530
APPLICATION FOR SITE APPROVAL FOR GONSTRUGTION OF:
A NEW DOMESTIC WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
Applicants Name and Address:
Rock Gardens
c/o Kevin B. Schneider
1308 Countv Road 129
Glenwood Sprinqs. CO 8160'1
Phone: (970) 945-6737
Consulting Engineer's Name and Address:
Zancanella & Associates. lnc
1005 Coooer Avenue
Glenwood Sorinos. CO 81601
Phone: (970) 945-5700
A) Summary of lnformation Reqardinq new Sewage Treatment Plant:
1. Proposed Location: (Legal Description) SW 'li4 SE 1/4 Sec 2
Twp. 65 Rng. 89W
Garfield Countv
2. Type and capacity of Treatment Facility Proposed:
Processes Used: Closed Looo Reactor Svstem (CLR)
Hydraulic: 0.025 MGD Organic: 52 lbs. BODrlDav
Present PE: 0 Design PE: 228
%Domestic: 100 %lndustrial: 0
3. Location of Facility:
Attach a map of the area which includes the following:
10
Engineering Report
Rock Gardens Wastewater
February 2003
Zancanella and Associates, lnc.
(a) S-Mile Radius: All Sewage Treatment Plants, Lift Stations, and Domestic Water
Supply lntakes. (See Application Attachment 1)
(b) 1-Mile Radius: Habitable Buildings, Location of Potable Water Wells, and an
Approximate lndication of Topography. (See Application Attachment
2)
4. Effluent Disposal:
Surface discharge to watercourse: Colorado River
State water quality classification of receiving watercourse: Cold Water Aquatic Life Class 1,
Class '1a Existino Primarv Contact Recreation. Aqriculture, Water Supplv
Subsurface: nla Land: n/a
Evaporation: nla Other: nla
Proposed Effluent Limitations developed in conjunction with Planning and Standards Section, WQCD:
Awaiting response from CDPHE on Preliminary Effluent Limitations (see Application Attachment 5)
BODs: 45/30 TSS: 45/30
Fecal Coliform: 12.000/6.000 Total Residual Chlorine: 0.5
Ammonia: nla Other: n/a
5. Will a state or federal grant be sought to finance any portion of this project? No
6. Present Zoning of the site area: Residential General Suburban Densitv
Zoning within a '1 mile radius of site: Commercial Limited. Residential Limited Suburban Densitv.
Residential General Suburban Densitv
7. What is the distance downstream from the discharge to the nearest domestic water supply intake?
Aooroximately 20 Miles
Name of Supply: Town of Silt
Address of Supply: 231 N. 7th Street. Silt. CO 81652
What is the distance downstream from the nearest point of diversion?: 1700 feet
Name of User: No Name Creek Water Users Association
Address of User: 1276 County Road 129. Glenwood Sorinqs. CO 81601
8. Who has the responsibility for operating the proposed facility?: Rock Gardens Mobile Home Park and
Camoqround. L.L.C.
9. Who owns the land upon which the facility will be constructed?: Rock Gardens Mobile Home Park and
Camooround. L.L.C.
10. Attach documents that create the authority for the Applicant to construct the proposed facility.
(See Application Attachment 7)
11
Engineering Report
Rock Gardens Wastewater Zancanella and Associates, lnc.
February 2003
11.
12.
13.
B)
c)
Estimated Project Cost: $319.000.00 (CLR ptant).
Wlo is financially responsible for the construction and operation of the facility?
Rock Gardens Mobile Home Park and Camporound. L.L.C. (See Application Attachment 6)
Names and Addresses of all water and/or sanitation districts within a 5 mile radius downstream of the
proposed Waste Water Treatment Facility Site:
ls the facility in a '100 year flood plain or other natural hazard area: No
lf so, what precautions are being taken? nla
Has the flood plain been designated by the Colorado Water Conservation Board, Department of
Natural Resources, or other Agency?: No
lf so, what is that designation? N/A
Name of Agency: N/A
Please include all additional factors that might help the Water Quality Control Division make an
informed decision on your application for Site Approval:
?a-rrDa-r
Federal or State Ownership or Manaqement:
lf the Facility will be located on or adjacent to a site that is owned or managed by a Federal or State
Agency, send the Agency a copy of this Application. Colorado Deoartment of Tiansportation - No
Name Rest Area.
Recommendation of Governmental Authorities:
Please address the following issues in your recommendation decision. Are the proposed facilities
No Name Creek Water Association, 1276 Countv Road 129. Glenr,vood Sprinqs, CO 81601
12
Tl'ris yill be a new fac and Campqround.
This facilitv will remove a substantial number of existinq lsDS facilities.
Engineering Report
Rock Gardens Wastewater Zancanella and Associates, lnc.
February 2003
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and any other plans for the area, including the 201 Facility
Plan or 208 Water Quality Management Plan, as they affect water quality? lf you have any further
comments or questions, please call 320-8333, extension 5272.
DATE RECOMMEND
APPROVAL
RECOMMEND
DISAPPROVAL
NO
COMMENT
SIGNATURE OF
REPRESENTATIVE
1.
Rock Gardens Mobile Home Park and
Campground, LLC
2.
Local Govemment:
City of Glenwood Springs
3.
Garfleld Co. Board of Commissioners
4.
Garfield Co. Health Authority
5.
Garfield Co. Planning Authority
6.
NWCOG
I certify that I am familiar with the requirements of the "Regulations for Site Applications Process", and
have posted the site in accordance with the regulations Engineering Report, as described by
regulations, has been d is enclosed
Applicant Signature:
Applicant Name:
oate:2, | )=
(Typed)
13
Engineering Report
Rock Gardens Wastewater
2003
;, lnc.
February
Zancanella and
SITE APPLICATION ATTACH MENTS
Figure 1 -5 Mile Radius Map
Waste Water Treatment Plants
Municipal Water Supply lntakes & Wells
ment 1
14
Engineering Report
Rock Gardens Wastewater
February 2003
Zancanella and Associates, lnc.
Figure 2 - 1 Mile Radius Map
Habitable Buildings
Location of Potable Wells
Topography
15
R89W
LOCATIONS APPROXIMATE
Scolc in Fccl
WELL LOCATIONS & HABITABLE
BUILDINGS
WTHIN 1-MILE RADIUS FROM WWTP
ROCK GARDENS
FIGURE NO.
'I-E IDAIE:
t' - 2oil)' lF6ruory lJ, 20OJ
SHEET:'I OFl
".,Bffiffi;'S.#iniff",.
DRAI{{ EY: ICHKO EY: IAPPD BY:
BcplBCplTAZ
DRAWNG:
LocTopol.drg PROTJECT: 267ro
Engineering Report
Rock Gardens Wastewater
February 2003
Zancanella and Associates, lnc.
Application Attachment 3
List of Wells Located within a 1-Mile Radius
16
th
x
9,
c)
BEoEq)
=
llJz
J
'=\tr
I
oooo
oOoo
ulooNN
LrloO(o =ro
cf)
@
IUorr)
@N
[Uolo
(r)
N
I.JJOrr)NN
ttJoO$N
OooO =v(o
N
=
N
II
Z
:
E
IJJ
UJO
Lo
't
lolzt:loItlo
lo-
l>t<
looz
TUz
Jaz
oOOo
Ooao
aoo,
N
aOa(o
N
aorr)
(f)
N
aalr)v
ar()
f.-o)
aoF-o)
aoo ooao
aF-o)
Cf,N
U)(o
$$N
IJJzlaz
arot-(oo
o(o
tFo =z =z tU
U)
ua =U)=a tlJa uJa I.Ua =a =a =U)
o(o
t.Fa =U)
I
.l
O$v.Fa
IJJz ttJz =z =z u.Jz tuz =a =z =a r.rJz =z Bz
O$
E,Fa =U)
==lol
uJlotoL-
N N N N N N N N N N Ot!a
N
cr)
\ lo-v l9lE lti
# lbl E
oo o,
(f)$
O)
lr)(o
J
uJ
t!J
IIIJ IJl
l=l
)zl
l-l
=lI3llJlrxl
l3 r-
lrr-l
lollolz)
iF1lol
l=lil
tl
ltlli
i!llllllll
TU
o
-
tu
mo
U)z
tJJotr
(,
Y
Oo
x.
E
rJ)
@ O Os OoN
rr)
IF
o-t!o
c\t
g oqo
oq
N
oc
LO
oqotr)
Oq
(o
oJ
I.JJt
oq
to
]F
; ll)
r llJ
=(rt
@
tuolz)<ltrt
E
=roo
(0t
o-r
alzl
=olFr
oF
odztra:f
od
=oF
E,[!
LrJo
z
u
=
=I
t
=
Fto(Laz
tF
LLo
FrL
LIJo
co
tcJc:)
Ftro(L
U)z
tF
LLo
FL
LJJo
co
tcJc
:.)
zuto
odr
t
V.u-t
I
J
x.
[U-
C)
06
oa
oIF
O
J
Yx.
0_
I.JJ
o-
IJJJdo
az
I.JJot
(,
OcV
tr
(L
LrJ
oI
ulJ
coo
az
LIJo
u.
C'
O
C
x.
u.
o
M,
=o
I,JJ
Y(.)
v
=
ou
=oI
aoc
C
=
eo
.ooo
U'
U'
Lo
o
=lz
o)q)
L
O
o)
E(!z
oz
c
.o
.ooooo
L
o)
o
=j
o)
o)L
O
o
Eoz
oz
otu
=@
@
LrJoz
u
foo
trj
z v
U)
uJ
-
E.
uJ
[!
=lot-O(a
$
O)O(o
slooNsl
ro
3cN$
c
r)Nt)
lr)
,)D oN
o)o)
coNN
00oo$N
rolr)c,),jN<r
J)tN
ra,
o-
oz
=o
iz
Y
JJI
$@O
cr)(o
o
q
0,
.go
oo
€
(!
6
oo
oN
(')ooN
N
I
Engineering Report
Rock Gardens Wastewater
February 2003
Zancanella and
Figure 3 - Flood Plain Map and Explanation Letter
17
P.O. Box 1908
1005 CooPer Ave.
Glenwood SPrings,
co 81602
(970) 94n-5700
(970) 945-1253 Fax
6rr o rr ggnl r{6 Cor{ su;rAlrrs
February 13,2003
Mr. Kevin Schneider
Rock Gardens
1308 County Road 129
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Dear Mr. Schneider
Attached is our determination of the 100 year floodplain for the length of the Colorado
River adjacent to your property. The 100 year flow was based on the Colorado River
flow upstream of the Roaring Fork River, per the City of Glenwood Springs Flood
lnsurance Study, i.e. 32,500 cubic feet per second (cfs). This flow was reduced by
1770 c'fs, which was the flow in the Colorado River at Dotsero on April 23,2000.
April 23, 2000 was the date of the aerial photography used for the Glenwood Springs
aerial topography which was used as the base mapping for this floodplain study. This
base mapping was obtained from the City in AutoCAD format and used to develop river
cross sections. The river cross sections developed were then exported to the Army
Corps of Engineers HEC-RAS program. One output of this program is a profile of the
water surface elevation when the design flow is in the river. A copy of the profile output
is attached. Note that the river stations on the HEC-RAS output are not the same as
shown on the drawing, but HEC-RAS river station 11, just below the property, is equal
to station 20+00 on the drawing.
The drawing shows the general topography of the area with your property boundary and
the extent of the floodplain on the river bank adjacent to your property.
lf you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Very truly yours,
ZANCANELLA & ASSOCIATES, INC.
L*,.1--
itny P. Beck, P.E.
Colorado License +20630
Attachments
Z:\20000\20739 Rock Gardens\Floodplain Report.doc
Zac<can€LLA Ar<o AgsoqarES, fi(.
=
0)
o
LL
(oqo
(oqo
F\\roqo
f.-no
(o
C;
'n F,.|r)d
O)qo
|r)qo
COn t @
R
t,ao
@ao
loq Nno
Nqo
lr)
c?o o
Na o)q
p
B
oF
(')
o(o
c{
F-q
rr)(o
C.)
+q
NN
<fq
o)NN
oqt-oo
@o?
o)o$
q
N
@N
(r)
o
c\
o?
co
coN
(tq
CONN
qo|rJ
N
t
oq
t*lr)
N
o)
(fiNc{
Nq
(\ltN
o)o,
N
N
c.jlr)
N
lr){N
(r)
d
N
$oq
tN
@o{
COsN
\(f)
NN
F-fo
'rioN
a!
0)
;I
LL
oQ
q
F-F-(o
N
otorr)
c7)
N
c
F-$o
C\
|r)
u?
(o
o)N
@n
(.)
(o
cY
tr)on$
tr)qoo,
(r'
N\o)
(f)
@N
ra)
oq
t-N+N
o,q
rn(t
C!a(r)t-N
c7,
(o
u?
$(o
C.,
F.q
o)Nd)e{
c!d
(o
F-:
o,
Nq
lr)
@
N
coq oq
@@lr)
c'l
(o9|r)
@s(o
Nol
o)t+
(f,
O)
u?
Ns
m
q
F.
00
=E,O
6
a
F.ao c?
o,
oq
r)
o?
o)
N
Cd
+
(c;
co:q
o,
C\.1
N
rn
F-d
o)q
F-
lr)\
@
!o)
O)c?
o)
(oq
O)
oJ
Lr)q
(o
o
a?
co
Nq
ro
f.-q
@
q
@
oq
lr)
o)
-9U)
q
ul
o)N(o
Noqo
|r)
@Noco
(o
srooq
tr)
N(ool
Io
O)(oo,
oq
q
oqo
O)
@
q
o)o)(\lo;
()(o
q
(o
@
d
F-oF-
;
o
N
CJ
coI
O)
o
lr)
@@
ci
o)
o
d
$9F-c{
qo
o,o)
c
$ro
@N
qo
oo)c!
oco
cq
oc
F.(oF
q
o
co(o
;
-gtll
q
UJ
oqt
O)Nlr)
(oq
(o
o)F-lr)
Na
o)t-lr,
tr)
oi
@t..
rc)
F-q
@co
Nlr)
co
cci
@F.ro
q
(o
co
F-|r)
(oc!
r-@F-lo
ry(o
co
F-lr)
(ool
@Nro
o)(o
(f,
F-lr)
eY
CO
co
F'tr)
N
oc
N
F.ro
Nq
o,t
@f.-lr)
ro
o?
@Nlr)
(o
-@
F.-|f)
Nqoco
F|r)
lo
lol6INIrr)
I
I
I
I
q
o)F-F-
Lr)
@c!
o)F.F.lr)
q
@F-F.lr,
F-iqt
F-lFIF-llr)t
I
u)
oqoo)r\lo
9
cot-ro
ot:ocot-ro
(o
a?
F.t-(,
q
=
(',
oq
No)F.ro
oq
o)t-tr)
\
Nco
F.r)
N
oq
F.cot-(r)
N
u?
F-@F-lr)
coq
t-co
F-lr)
c{\(o
@F.|r)
N
lr)
@f.-lr)
N\
ao
coNtr,
Nq
@F.ro
N
Nlr)
()q
ao
F-tr)
@r
@F.()
o
oq
F-tr)
:
@F-tr)
@q
o)F-F.r)
o)roNl-
didF-. F.F-r F-tr)rlr)
(o
o?
@F-Ntr)
@f..F.|r)
ol
F.t-t-()
(o
c.j
F.F-
ra)
itrt-
IO\-
i=
dNt-(r)
@Nt-|f)
$
oq
(o
F-F.lr)
o
,;
F.F.|r)
9
F.tttr)
dNF-ro
oq
NF-(.
qoNNlr)
o
dF.t-|r)
q
NF-lr)
oq
co
@F-!o
c
@
@Nlr)
(o(o
F-|r)
o
(ci(o
F.rr,
(o
f.-
Lr)
o c)roqlqroq(ol <r co(ot@1(oF, t-rNlr)ll.orlr)
:
I
a
N(o
F.tr)
oc
N
@F-
Lr)
c
N
@F-r)
q
N
@F.tr)
t
iE,olF o
o;
N
co
F-
(.)
o
o
(f)
F.
co
:
N
(7)
q
(r)
f.-o
CO
co
(f)
F-
o
qo(r,
F.o(o
ocooNo
c
F.
CO
o
N
(.1
f.-
co
F-
(o
q
F-
(.)
coF-o
o:
(o
F-
q
ts
CO
oro
cii d(.)l(o
NNoloCOI(rJ
l
I
(e
F.o(,
oq
COt-
oc
F.O
od
CO
F-
CO
o
U)
o
E Nol (\l oor o,@ l\(o (,+N o)CO l.-tr)f cD N
o(!
0)t o
C'(.)tr
o(,
c,t
o(Il
4)
E,
oo
0)
o(!
0,
o(ooE
oq,t
oo
0)E
!o(u
0,t
(o
0)tr
O(!
q,t
(!
c)
E.
o(E
0)t
oo
d)
o(o
0)
E.
I
=lol(!loltrl
c6
0)
oo
o)
E.
o(o
0)t
(o
0)t
oo
0,t
o(g
0)e.
IL
0-
e
o1
0-i
l
ololol
-ciolGIqJl
0.
1
dl
uJI>i
Ei
0t.>l
u1
(El
!ioi
6lo.t
Ei:i
(gl
E]
at<l
flot
LlJ I
0,
IJJ I
I
I
I
I
-
Irl
E
tii
I
I
a
Yl
j
8cl
r.
Ic
Iz
o
I
E
E
,t
,
t!
I
E
FIGURE NO.
L
Engineering Report
Rock Gardens Wastewater February 2003
Zancanella and Associates, lnc.
Preliminary Geotechnical study, Hepworth-pawlak Geotechnicat, tnc.
18
I
Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc.
5020 County Road 154
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Pbone: n0-945-79E8
Faxz 970.945-U54
hpgeo@hpgeotech.com
i-rl-'
PRELIMINARY GEOTECEMCAL STIJDY
ROCK GARDH\S RV PARK P.U.D.
GARflELD COIiNTY, COLORADO
JOB NO. LOI77L
JAI{UARY L8,2002
PREPARED FOK
ROCK GARDET.{S RV PARK.r '-ATTN: KEYIN SCHNEIDER
1308 ROAD 129
GLEI\I\MOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO,8I.601
I
I
!
":.i
MPWORTE - PAWLAK GEOTECHMCAL, INC.
Jauuary L8,20Oz
Rock Gardens RV Park
Auu: Kevin Schneider
1308 Road 129
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Job No. l}L 77L
Subject: Report Transmittal, pleliminary Geotechnical snrdy, Rock Gardens RV
Park P.U.D., Garfield County, Colorado
Dear Mr. Liston:
As requested, we have conducted a preliminary geotechnical snrdy for the proposed
development"
The property is suitable for the proposed deveiopment based on geologic and
geotechnical couditions
Subsurface conditions encountered in the exploratory pits excavated at wo proposed
septic disposal areas consist of about 1 foot of topsoil overlying reiatively dense,
sligbtly sitty sanay gravel, cobbles aad boulders. Groundwater was oot encountered in
the pits to depths of 8Vz feet and the soils are slightly moist to moist.
Spread gssfings placed on the natural subsoils and designed for an allowable bearing
pior*, of 2,00b psf can be used for building support. Percolation rates at the tested
iocations indicate that the areas are suitable for an infiluatiou septic disposai system'
The report which follows dessibes our expioratiou, sluulurizes our fiadings, and
presents our recommendations zuitabie for planning aud preliminery desigu' It is
important that we provide consultation during design, and freld services during
constnrction to review and monitol g[g implemeutation of the geotechnical
recommeudations.
If you have auy questions regarding this report' please contact us'
Siucereiy,
IIEPWORTH - PA
,-. 1-t'-)r-'t--11-
Trevor L. Kneil
Rev. by: SLP
TLivrsw
I
WLAK GEOTECHMCAL, INC.
I
.;
I
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTEI.{TS
PIJRPOSE AND SCOPE OF STUDY . .
SITE COI.IDITIONS
GEOLOGIC SETTING
FIELD HPLORATION
STESURFACE COI{DMONS
GEOLOGIC ASSESSMENT
PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
FOI.JI{DATIONS .
FLOOR SLABS
STTE GRADING
ST'RFACE DRAINAGE
PERCOI-ATION TESTING
LIMITATIONS.
REFERENCES .
FIGURE 1 . GEOLOGY N{AP A]'ID EXPLORATORY PMS
FIGURE 2 . LOGS OF DPLORATORY PITS
FIGURE 3 . GRADATION TEST RESULTS
TABLE I. PERCOI.ATION TEST RESULTS
4
4
4
5
5
6
I. t-:I
1
PURPOSE AI.ID SCOPE OF STUDY
This report presents the results of a preliminary geotechnical study for the
proposed improvemeuts at Rock Gardens RV Park P.U.D., No Name, Garfield County,
Colorado. The project site is shown on Fig. 1. The Purpose of the sudy was to
evaluate the geologic and $$surface conditions and their impact on the project- The
sudy was conducted, in accordance with our proposal for geotechnical eugineering
seryices to Rock Gardens RV Park dated September 17 ,2001and revised ou September
ZB, ZOOL. Percolation test data and recommendations for septic disposal design were ..-:
previously presented in an interim report dated December 19,2001,Iob No. l0l77l-
A field exploratiou program cousisting of a reconnaissance, exploratory pits and
percolatiou testing was conducte6 6 sltnin information on the site and subsurface
conditions. 6 samFle of the zubsoils eftained, during the field exploration was tested in
the laboratory to derermine the classification. The results of the fietd exploration and
laboratory testing were analyzed to develop recommendations for project pl^nning and
preliminary desigu. This report summarizgs the data obtained dr:ring this snrdy and
presents oru coucfuuions and recommendations based on informatiou provided by Ron
Liston with LaDd Design Partnership and subsurf;ace conditions eucoutrterd.
PROPOSED IMPRO\IEIVIEI'ITS
The propo5gd irrTrovenents include conversion of some mobile home sites to
full-service RV spaces and the addition of common use recreational buildings. Minor
grading for the RV spaces is expdcted. We:uisume the recreational buitdings will be
single-story, wood Aame metal skin stnrctues with slab-on-grade floors. We anticipate
cuts and fills to be around 3 feet. Sewage treametrt facilities will also be included-
If developmeil plans change significantly from those describe{, we should be
notified. io re-evaiuatc dre recommendations presented in this rePort.
:
i
I
{ jiti.rr,,-,^ -
H.P GEOTECH
1
l
','r.t{:iffi
.l
I
_7-
SME COiYDMONS
The Rock Garden RV Park is located on an old alluvial fan in Glenwood Canyou
near the confluence of No Name Creek with the Colorado River. The property covers
parts of the southern half of Section 2, T. 6 S., R. 89 W. to the north and south of the
river. Development is only planned to the north of the river. The general topography
in the proposed development area is shown by the contour lines on Fig. 1. The old
alluvial fau surface over most of the proPerty has 1a average slope of about 8 %' A
steep, 30 foot hig!., terrace escarpmeut with an average slope of about 60 % .y Present
in the southern part of the deveiopmeut area and separates the old fan surface from a
low river terrace. The southern part of the developmetrt area is on the nearly level river
terrace and fill pad that stard about 6 to 10 feet above the river. No Name Creek is
located about 250 feet northwest of the property in a channel that is deeply eroded into
the old alluvial fan. Small resideuces and nailer homes occupy much of the fan surface
on the properry. The low terrace is undeveloped except for camp sites. Vegeadon
consists of oak and other brush.
GEOLOGIC SETTING
Glenwood Canyon iu the project area cuts through the southern flank of the
Laramide White River uptift. Regioual Eappitrg shows that the sedimeutary rocks in
'tis area dip steeply to the south and are cut by several suall displacement faults
(Kiritan and Others, 1997). The project site is located in the No Name graben that is
bognded by northwest trending faults on the northeast and southwest, see Fig. 1. These
faults are trot considered to be poteutially active (Kirlfran and Rogers, 1981). The
Leacivrue Lutrestotre (Ml) crops out on the north canyou side in the graben. Older
Paleozoic sedimeutary formations (Pz) are present on both the north ind south catryon
sides outside the graben.
Formation rock in the project area is ;:','ered by surficial deposits. Most of the
properry to the north of the river is on the old No Name Creek alluvial fan (Qafo). The
fan deposits consist of large boulder, cobble and gravel-sized rocks in a silry sand
matrix. Colluvium (Qc) derived from the old fan deposit uuderlies the terrace
.,-';-tuP-
H-P Georecx
I
-3-
escarpmeur in the southern part of the property. A low river terrace (Qt1) that stands
about 6 to 10 feet above the river is present in the southern part of the deveiopnent
area. The river terrace deposit consists of stratified, rounded gravel, cobbles and
boulders in a silty sand matrix. Much of the fan surface and river terrace has been
modified by cus and fills (af). Subsurface exploration will be needed to evaluate the
depth and cbaracter of the fills at proposed building sites, but most apPear not to exceed
about 10 feet deep.
FIELD EXPLORATION
The field exploration for the project was conducted on November 27 alad,
December L4,}OOL. Two exploratory pits were excavated at the locations shown on
Fig. 1 to evaluate the subsruface conditions in the hfilration septic disposal areas. The
pits were dug with a rubber-tired backhoe and logged by a representative of Hepworth-
Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc.
A sampie of the subsoils wa.s takeu with disturbed bulk sampling methods. The
depths at which the sample was taken is shown on the Logs of Exploratory Pits, Fig. 2.
The salrple was returoed to our laboratory for review by the project engineer and
testing.
SIIBSIIRFACE CONDMONS
Graphic logs of the subsurface conditiors encoutrtered at the site are showu on
Fig. 2. The subsoils consist of about 1 foot of topsoil overlying relatively den^se,
siightly siiry sandy gravel, cobbles and bouiders. These soils appear typicat throughout
the proposed rieveiopment area.
Laboratory testing performed on a sample obtained from Pit 1 consisted of a
gradation enalysis. Results of the gradatiou anaiysis performed on the disturbed samFle
lmhus 5 inch fraction) of the uatural subsoils are shown ou Fig. 3-
No free water was encountered in the pits to a depth of 8r/z feet at the time of
excavation and the subsoils were sliehtly moist to moist.
H-P GeorEcx
-4-
GEOL O GI C A,S SES SMEI\IT
The project geology should not preseffi major constraints to the proposed
developmeil. A hydrologist should determine if the low terrace and fill pad are dbove
the appropriate design flood level for the river. No Name Creek has eroded a deep
channel below the old fau surface and the old fan, in the project area, is no longer the
site of debris flows. Site specific soil aud foundation studies. for buiidings on the old
alluvial fan should evahrate the bearing capacity and settlement potential of the
foundations soils. Development qpecific geotechnical engineering sildies should be
conducted if large cuts and fiil are planned on the steeP terace escarpment. Occupied
structures should be designed to withstand moderately stroug earthquake ground
5h:king with little or no damage and not to collapse under stronger grouud shaking.
The region is in the Uniform Building Code, Seismic Risk Zone 1. Based on otu
curetrt uuderstanding of the earthquake hazard in this Part of Colorado, we see no
reason to increase the commouly accepted seismic risk zone for the area.
PRELIMINARY DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
The conciusions and recommendations presented below are based oo the
proposed improvements, field reconnaissance, subsurface conditions encountered in the
exploratory pits, and our experieuce in the area. The recommendations are suitable for
piaming and preliminary desigu, but site specific sodies should be conducted once
design plans have been finalized.
Fot-1t1941ICI{S
Bearing conditions couid vary ciepei^,rurg uu tne syc-r,ii., ..r.,,.. r,- v.J *c
buildings on rhe prope*y. Spread footings bearing on the naturai zubsoiis or compacted
stmcflual filt should be suitable for buildiug support. We expect the footings cal be
sized for au ai1:r'.'abte bearing pressure of 2,000 psf. Nested boulders and loose matrix
soiis may need treament such as eniarging footings or piacing compacted fi1l or
concrete backfill. Strucrural fill placed for buiiding support should extend beyond the
edge of the footing a distance greater than or equal to the depth of fiil beneath the
i'
li&,r*.' -.
H-P GE.TECH
-5-
footilg. The subgrade shouid be stripped of vegetation and topsoil and compacted prior
to f,ll placement. Fiil should be placed in even lifu and compacted to at least L00% of
the maximum standard Proctor density at a moisnre coutent near optimum. Foundation
walls should be designed to span local anomalies and to resist lateral earth loadings if
acting as retaining strucnlres. Beiow grade areas and lstaining walls shouid be
protected from wetting and hydrostatic loading by use of aa underdrain system. The
footings should have a minimum depth of 36 inches for frost protection'
FLOOR SLABS
Slab-on-grade constnrctiou should be feasible for bearing on the natuai soils or
compacted stnrctural fill. There couid be some post constnrction slab movement at sites
with collapsible matrix. To reduce the effects of some differential movement, floor
slabs shouid be separated from all bearing walls and columns with expansion joints'
Floor slab control joints shouid be used to reduce dlmage due to shriskage cracking. A
minimum 4-inch thick layer of freedraining gravel should r:nderlie floor slabs to
facilitate dleinage.
SITE GRADING
The risk of constnrction-induced siope instability at the site appears low
provided cut depths are limited and the 6pi]dings and RV spaces have adequate setback
from the sreep escarpnetrts along the Colorado River. Cut depths for the buiiding pads,
RV spaces and driveway access should not exceed about 10 feet. Fiils should be limited
to about 8 feet deep, and not euctoach steep downhill sloping a^'.ll ald ri''s;
escarpments. Embankment fills should be compacted to at least 95 Vo of the maximum
standard Proctor densiry near optimum moisture content. Prior to fill placemeut, the
Duugraus *^rul.Lr uc v.^ciB;J prLp..r\;s L1 ^-*-,*i J '-:;gtatiO', '.-dB filI and'
topsoii. The fiil should be benched into slopes exceeding 20% grade. The on-site soiis
excluding oversized rock and topsoil should be suitable for use in embadcrrent fiIls.
Permaneut rmretained cut atrd fiIl slopes should be graded at 2 horizoutal to
1 vertical or flatter and protected against erosion by revegetation, rock riprap or otier
Dtezns. Oversized rock from embankment fitl constructiou wili tend ro collect on &e
H-P G=orgc"
-6-
I
I
I
i
outer face. This office shouid review site grading plans for the project prior to
construction.
SIIRFACE DRAINAGE
The grading platr for the subdivision should consider nrnoff from deveiopment
located adjace.ut to the properry and at individual buiid^ing sites. Warer should not be
ailowed to pond which could impact slope stability and foundations. To limit
infiluation into the bearing soils next to buildings, exterior bacicfiIl should be capped
with about I to 2 feet of finer-graded soils, be weil compacted and have a positive slope
away from buildings for a distance of at ieast 10 feet. Roof downspouts and drains
should discharge well beyond the iimits of all backf.Il.
PERCOLATION TESTING
Percolarion tests were conducted oa November 28 and December 17,2001at the
locations designated by High Couutry Engineering. Frofile Pit 1 aud three percolation
holes were dug near the office building and Profile Pit 2 and nvo percolation holes were
dug near the bath house. The test hoies (nominal 12 inch diameter by LZ incd deep)
were hand dug at the bottom of shallow backhoe pits and were soaked with water oue
day prior to testing. The soils exposed in the percolation holes ars similal'to those
exposed in the profile pits shown ou Fig. 1 aud consist of about 1 foot of topsoii
overiying slightly silty sandy gravei, cobbies and bouiders. Results of a gradation
anaiysis performed ou a sample of the gravel are shown on Fig. 2. No free water was
eacoui.tereC to the pit depths of 8Vz feet. The percolation test results are presented in
Table I. Based ou the.subsurface conditions encountered and the percolation test
rg5ults, Lutr LcJLgu <Lrg4D D^lvulr. uv Dursrrrv r\.,r u -.i****-- o.y.^- 3::;c:d J;,..--^- -'-
civil engineer should design the infiltration septic disposal system.
LIMITATIONS
This snrdy has been conducted according to generaliy accepted geotechnical
engineering principles a.ud practices in this area at this time. We make no w:uratrty
r-P ^-lrEC.'
-.. .:'..#
either erpressed or impli.ed. The conclusions'and recornmendations submitted in this
report are based upon the data obtained from the fieid reconnaissance, review of
published geologic reports, the exploratory pits located as shown on Fig. 1, the
proposed type of construction'and improvements aud our experience in the area. Or:r
findings include interpolation and extrapolation of the subsurface couditioos identified at
the exploratory pits and variations in the subsurface conditions rnay trot become evident
1util excavation is performed. If conditions encountered during construction apPear
d.ifferent from those described in this report, we shouid be notified 5s that re-evaluation
of the recommendations may be made.
This report has been prepared for the exclusive use by our client for planning
and preliminary design purposes. We are oot responsible for technical interpretations
by others of our information. As the project evolves, we should provide continued
consultation, conduct additional evaluations and review and monitol &s impleExentation
of our recommendations. Siguificant desigu sfoengeS may require additional enalysis or
modifications to the recommendations presented herein. We recommend on-site
observation of excavations and foundation bearing strata and testing of stnrctual fiIl by
a representative of the geotechnical engineer-
Respectfrrlly Submined,
HEPWORTH - PAWLAK GEOTECHMCAL, INC.
:mQ (r{/I
Trevor L. Ifuell
Land Design Partnership - AtE: Ron Liston
H-P GEOTECH
Reviewed by:
ffiib:i4
,r"t \.?rll,rlo"* fr-1"'l::w \*"2,:..1.,_il{r-;
High Countr.v Deric Walter
lil
REI{ERENCES
Hepworth-Pawiak Geotechnical, 2001, Percolation Tests for the Proposed Rock
Gardens RV Park P(JD, Garfield Cotmry, Colorado: Prepared for Laad Design
Partuership. Glenwood Springs, Colorado (Job No. 101771, December 19,
2001).
Kirkhag, R.M. and Rogers, W.P., 1981, Eanhquake Potential in Colorado - A
Pretiminary Evahtation' Colorado Geological Survey Bulletin 43.
Kirktam R.M. and Others , 1997, Geology Map of the Glenwood Springs, Quodrangle,
Garfield Counry, Colorado: Colorado Geological Survey Map Series 31.
i
IIl. -t.
I
It*---.
H-P GEo:I:.
E(PLNV{TION:
Large Gnaded Areas
SEeam Allwium
Coiiuvium
Low RhrcrTenace
YoungAlwialFan
Cll ^-!!rMalFan
Leadville Umesbne
Oloer Fanezoic Sedimentary Rocks
af
Qal
Qc
afi
Aafy
Qab
MI
P=
U
-aaaa
D
Contact
Aptodrlab lmlixt
FauE
Appldnsblocdon
DotEuilsocotslod
U-up, D-down
Soil Profile Pit
Soil Percolation Test
Scale: 1 in. = 300 ft.
Conbur lnbrvaf 2 ft.
I
H
o I .*o.til
P1 t
'la
Rock Garden RV Park PUDHEPWORTH.PAWI.AK
GEOTECHNICAL, lnc.
- .b.it *t;7' j!tu-F.
Fig-'
Qt1
PROFILE PIT 1
ELEV. = 5836'
+4-61
-200-6
D:
TOPSOII slightly orgonic soidy silty cloy, dork brown'
PROFILE PIT 2
ELEV. - 5855'
o,olL
I
o-q,o
oo
I
o.oo
II/EST OF
ACCESS ORIVE
NEAR OFFICE
EAST OF
ACCESS DRI\E
NEAR BATH HOUSE
LEGENad
ffihffi
H.Sb.!:9
Lo:&;t
SAND AND GRA\EL (SM-GM); silty, with cobbles, medium dense to dense, slightly moist to moist'
brown, subongulor to rounded rocK-
GRAIEL COBBLES AND BOULDERS (GM-GP); slightly silty, sondy, dense, slighuy moist,
brown, subongulor to rounclec, rocl(
L_-lrI i Disturbed bulk somPle.
l-J
NOTES:
r pit 1 wos duo on November 27,2OO1 ond Pit 2 wos dug on Deeember 14,2OO1 with o boekhoe'
2. Locotions of the eplorotory pits were meosured opproximotely by pocing from feotures shown on the
siie pron provided.
J. Elevotions of the explorotory pits were obtoined by interpolotion between contours on the site plon
provided. Logs ore drown to dePth.
4. The explorotory pit locotions ond elevotions should be considered occurote only to the degree implied
by the method used.
5. The irnes between moteriols shown on the explorotory pit logs represent the opproximotc boundories
between moteriol troes ond tronsitions moy be groduol'
6. No rree woter wos encountered in the pits ot ..,e time of excovotinE. Fluctuotions in woter level moy
occur with time.
7. Loborotory Testing Results:*4 = Percent retoined on the No. 4 sieve
-2OO = Percent possing No. 200 sieve
HEPWORTH-PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.LOGS OF EXPLORATORY Plr)101 771
lrioRoaErEn Ar^LlEs -r- -lE raarisE
21
oao
t{l, 7 tfr5L ttn OaCtIl .lf,- t5L
DIAMETER OF OARIICLES IN MILUMEIERS
r/* tt/r f fd
rsrzs t8o 575 * ,J3 S
olrJ aO
lrJ
E,
F$
LrJ()
E,
lrJGro
;
6v,
o-
z
LrJoE,lrJo-
GRADAT1ON TEST RESULTSHEPWORTH-PAWLAK
GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
cr Y lD sLT
GRA\EL 61 %
IJQUID UMIT
SANO 33
SAMPIE 0F: Slightly Silty Sonoy Grove, with
Cobbles
Z SILT AND CI.AY 6
PLASIICITY INDEX %
FROM: Pit 1 ot 6 to 8 Feet
Olo
C/o
fro
lr:Tij
101 771 Fig. 3
HEewoRTH-PAwLAK GEorEcnruldAl, lNc.
TABLE I
PERCOL.ATI ON TEST RES U LTS
PAGE 1 ot 2
JOB NO. 101 771
HOLE NO.HOLE DEPTH
(INCHES}
LENGTH OF
INTERVAL
(MIN)
WATER DEPTH
AT START OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
WATER DEPTH
AT END OF
TNTERVAL
(INCHES)
DROP IN
WATER
LEl/Et
ilNCHES)
AVERAGE
PERCOLATION
RATE.
(MrN./rNCH)
P-1 23
water added
10 8%1Y.
e%7Y.1Y.
714 6Y.:1
6%5%1Y.
5Y.4%1
9Yz I 1Y2
I 6%11h
P-2 2A
water added
1OY2 o 1y,
9 7Y2 1Yz
7Yz 6%
6Y.E
5 314
o 7Y2
7Y2 o tlL
6 4Ya 1y,
I 7 1r-J 24
water added
7 6 1
E 5 1
5 4 1
8 7 1
7 o 1
6 5%,/.
5%4%1
Note: percoration resl irores uVere hand dug in the bottom of backhoe pits and soaked on
Novembet 27,2001. The te5. ,,-,cS Wele protected from freezing o'/ernight 'n;i:'
insulation. Percolation tests were conducted on Novembet 28' 2001' The average
percolation rates were based on the last three readings of each test'
ht
':r {- i. -l;
4
1y,
HEPWORTH.PAWISK GEOTECHNICAL, INC.
.TABLE I
PERC O LATI ON TEST RESULTS
PAGE 2 of 2
JOB NO. 101 771
HOLE NO.HOLE DEPTH
i;;'JCHES}
LENGTH OF
INTERVAL
(MIN)
WATER DEPTH
AT START OF
IIUTERVAL
(INCHES)
WATER DEPTH
AT END OF
INTERVAL
(INCHES)
DROP IN
\ruATEB
LEVEL
[NCHES)
AVERAGE
PERCOLATION
RATE
(MrN./tNCHl
5 9
8
8 1
10
P4 30
7 1
7 6y,Ya
6Yz 5 %
b 5rh Y.
5k 5 v,
5 4Yz 1A
4Y2 4 Y"
I 7y,Yz
P-5 25
7y,7 1A
7
=,,/=
Y.
6y,6 v,
6 5rA
5%5 Yz
4Yz Yz
4Y2 4 Y.
percolation test holes were hand dug in the bottom of backhoe pits on December 14 and
soaked on December 16, 2001. The test hores were protected f10m freezing overnight
with insuration. percotation tests were conducted on December 17, 2001. The average
percolation rates were based on the last two readings of each test'
Engineering Report
Rock Gardens Wastewater Zancanella and Associates, lnc.
February 2003
Application Attachment 6
Preliminary Effluent Limits (PELs) - Colorado Department of Public Health and
Environment, Water Quality Control Division.
19
l.Ir
it-
I
I
I
ST{TE OF COLOI1ADO
Bill Owens, Governor
Jane E. Norton, Executive Director
Dedicated to prctecting and improving the health and environment of the people of Colorado
4300 Cherry Creek Dr. S. Laboratory and Radiation Services Division
Denver, Colorado 80246-1530 8100 Lowry Blvd.
Phone (303) 692-2000 Denver, Colorado 80230-6928
TDD Line (303) 691-7700 (303) 692-3090
Located in Glendale, Colorado
hnp //www. cdp he. state. co. u s
October 25,2002
Thomas Zancanella, P.E.
Zancanella and Associates, Inc.
P.O. Box 1908
Glenwood Springs, CO 81602
RE: Rock Gardens WWTF, Garfield County
Dear Mr. Zancanella:
Colorado Depamnent
of Public Health
andEnvimnment
The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Water Qualify Control Division,
has completed your request for preliminary effluent limits (PELs) for the proposed Rock Garden
wastewater treatnent facility (WWTF). Your current proposal is for a mechanical WWTF with
a hydraulic design capacity of 0.025 million gallons per day (MGD).
This proposed facilifywould discharge into the Colorado River at the NW1/4 of SEl/4 Section 2,
T65, R89W, 6th P.M. in Garfield County. This portion of the Colorado River is identified as steam
segment COUCUC03, which means the Upper Colorado River Basin, Upper Colorado Sub-basin,
Stream Segment 03. This stream segment is composed of "Mainstem of the Colorado fuver from
the outlet of Lake Granby to the confluence with the Roanng Fork River." These identifications are
found in the Classification and Numeric Standards for Upper Colorado River Basin and North
Platte River (Planning Region 12).
Effluent limits for specific constituents are based on the tlpe of permit a facility wiil require after
construction. The Rock Garden WWTF, with its proposed hydraulic design capacity of 0.025
MGD, may require a general permit.
The preliminary effluent limitations were developed for the Rock Garden WWTF based on
effluent limits established in the Regulations for Effluent Limitations for a WWTF consisting of a
mechanical wastewater treatment process, as well as the water quality-based effluent limits
necessary for protection of the water quality of the Colorado fuver. A PELs evaluation is
attached to document the findings and decisions that were used to derive the PELs in Table 1.
1
,l
,]
i
Proposed Rock Garden WWTF
Thomas Zancanella, P.E.
October 25,2002
Page2
If you have any questions regarding this matter, piease contact me at (303) 692-3614.
Sincerely,
Ew
Karen Young
Environmental Protection Specialist
Permits Unit, Water Qualify Protection Section
Water Quality Control Division
cc: Tom Bennett, WQCD
Local Health Department
Jim Chubrilo, D.E., Steamboat Springs Office
, " , .,. , Tablel
Proposed Rock Garden W"\ryTF
Preliminary Effluent Limits for Discharge
to the Colorado River
BODs (mgil)45 (7-day average), 30 (30-day average)
BOD: (% removal)85 (30-day average)
TSS, mechanical plant (mg/l)45 (7-day average), 30 (30-day average)
TSS, aerated lagoons (mgil)1 l0 (7-day average), 75 (30-day average)
TSS, non-aerated lagoons (mg/l)160 (7-day average), 105 (30-day average)
TSS, mechanical plant (% removal)85 (30-day average)
Oil and Grease (mg/l)l0 (maximum)
pH (s.u.)6.5-9.0 (min imu m-maximum)
Fecal Coliform (#/ 100 rnl)12000 (7-day average),6000 (30-day average)
Total Residual Ch lorine (mgil)0.5 (daily maximum)
Rock Gardens WWTF Water Quality Assessment PEL
Wlrrn Quar.rrv Assnssnmxr
THE COLORADO RTYTN
Rocx Gannrxs WWTF
I. Introduction
The water quality assessment (WQA) of the Colorado River near the Rock Gardens Wastewater
Treatrnent Facility (WWTF) was prepared by the Colorado Departrnent of Public Health and
Environment (CDPIIE) Water Quality Control Division (WQCD). The WQA was prepared for the
development of Preliminary Effluent Limits (PEL) to facilitate issuance of a Colorado Discharge
Permit System (CDPS) permit for the Rock Gardens WWTF, and is intended to determine the
assimilative capacities available to the Rock Gardens WWTF forpollutants found to be of concern.
Figure 1 on the following page contains a map of the study area evaluated as part of this WQA.
The Rock Gardens WWTF proposed discharge is to the Colorado River. The ratio of the chronic
low flow ofthe Colorado Riverto the Rock Gardens WWTF design flow is 17,471:L. Analyses thus
indicate that assimiiative capacities are very large and the nearest upstearrl and downstrea:n facilities
have no impact on the assimilative capacities available to the Rock Gardens WWTF.
lnformation used in this assessment includes water quality data gathered from the WQCD Station 46
(Coiorado River near Dotsero) and stream flow data from USGS Gage 09070500. Both ofthese sites
are located approximately 16 miles upstream of the proposed WWTF outfall. The data used in the
assessment consists ofthe best information available at the time ofpreparation of this PEL analysis.
Table A-1
Assessment Summa
Name of Facilitv Rock Gardens WWTF
County Garfield
WBID - Stream Segment Upper Colorado River Basin, Upper Colorado
River Sub-basin, Stream Segment 03:
Mainstem of the Colorado River from the
outlet of Lake Granby to the confluence with
the Roaring Fork River.
COUCUCO3
Classifications Cold Water Aquatic Life Class 1
Class 1a Existing Primary Contact Recreation
Agriculture
Water Supply
Desimation Undesimated
PEL Page 1 of10 J.C.H. 10104/02
Rock Gardens WWTF Water Quality Assessment PEL
*--',.:
-Ltr3:4-|fr-,,l.M;.ziEEAitlE-
Figure 1 Rock Gardens WWTF
II. Water Quality
The Rock Gardens WWTF would discharge to the Colorado River segment labeled COUCUC03.
This segment is described as the "Mainstem of the Colorado River from the outlet oflake Granbyto
the confluence with the Roaring Fork River." Sfrearn segment COUCUC03 is classified for Cold
Water Aquatic Life Class 1, Class 1a Existing Primary Contact Recreation, Agriculture, and Water
Supply.
The standards in Table A-Zhavebeen assigned to stream segment COUCUC03 in accordance with
lhe Classifications and Numeric Standardsfor Upper Colorado River Basin and North Platte River
Basin (Planning Region 12).
PEL Page 2 of l0 J.C.H. 10104/02
Rock Gardens WWTF Water Quality Assessment PEL
In-stream Standards
Table A-2
for Stream Segment COUCUCO3
;:$f::::r3ii:1t1;:;ii.Li1Lr-;i.-l.:rlil\.i,,.:rt:i.t':*:-;piirli.r',;:iiirp/rr" iaa I'i'ni.!A i)d})ii?rli\S:t$\::lt',,1$'l
Dissolved Oxygen (DO) = 6 meil, minimum (7 mell, minimum during spawning)
pH=6.5-9su
Fecal Coliform: 200 colonies/100 rnl
Un-ionized ammonia acute = TVS
Un-ionized anrnonia chronic :0.02 me/l
Chlorine acute :0.019 mg/l
Chlorine chronic : 0.01I me/l
Free Cyanide acute :0.005 me/l
Suitlcie cnronic -- 1.002 ms/l
Boron chronic = 0.75 mg/l
Nitnte: I me/l
Nitrate = 10 me/l
Chloride chronic : 250 me/\
Sulfate chronic : 250 me/l
Total Recoverable Arsenic acute = 50 ueil
Dissolved Cadmium acute for trout and Dissolved Cadmium chronic = TVS
Total Recoverable Trivalent Chromium acute = 50 ue/l
Dissolved Trivalent Chromium acute and chronic = TVS
Dissolved Hexavalent Chromium acute and chronic : TVS
Dissolved Copper acute and chronic : TVS
Dissolved Iron chronic : 300 ue/l
Total Recoverable Iron chronic = 1000 ue/l
Dissolved Lead acute and chronic = TVS
Dissolved Manqanese chronic = 50 ueil
Dissolved Mansanese acute: TVS
Total Mercury chronic :0.01 ueil
Dissolved Nickelacute and chronic: TVS
Dissolved Selenium acute and chronic = TVS
Dissolved Silver acute and Dissolved Silver chronic for trout : TVS
Dissolved Zinc acute and chronic = TVS
Standards formetals are generally shown in the regulations as Table Vaiue Standards (TVS). Table
Value Standards are derived from equations that depend on the receiving stream hardness and
species of fish present. The mean total hardness (as CaCO3) of the available upstre:Lm data is used
in calculating the metals TVS.
The mean hardness was computed to be I23 mg/l based on sampling data from WQCD station
number 46 (Coiorado River at Dotsero) located on the Colorado River approximately i6 miles
upstream ofRock Gardens. This mean was calculated from 37 hardness samples collected between
1993 and 1998. The hardness value and the formulas contained in the TVS were used to calculate
the in-stream water quaiity standards for metals with the results shorvn in Table A-3.
PEL Page 3 of 10 J.C.H. r0t04/02
Rock Gardens WWTF Water Quality Assessment PEL
Table A-3 Site Specific Water Quality Standards
Calculated Using the Following Value for Hardness as
CaCOr: lZ3mgn
Cadmium, Dissolved
Acute 5.34 aell 1. I 36674.041 84ln(hardness)l[e(l'
1280n(hardness))-3'6867)]
Trout 4.63 Lsll l. I 36674.041 84ln(hardness)l[e(l'
I 28(ln(ha&ess)F3'828)l
Chroni<2.61 vdl l. I o 1674.041 84ln(traraness)lle(0'7852Qn(hardness))'2'715)I
Trivalent Chromium, Dissolved Acute 675.0 lourl e(0.8
I 9(ln0ardncss))r2.5736)
Chronic 87.8 -/t ,(0.8 1 9(ln(hardness))r0.5340)
[Iexavalent Chromium, Dissolved Acute 16 ae/1 Nurncric standards provided, formula not applicable
ivlllUllllc 11 Vil1 Numcric sondards provided, formula not applicable
Copper, Dissolved Acute 16.3 vg/l ,(0.%220n(hardness)F1.7408)
\/lllLrll.lr.10.7 'Jdl e(0.8545(ln(hardness)F
1.7428)
Lead, Dissolved Acute 80.85 vd1 I l'462034'l 4571 2ln(hardncs)lt'(l'273(ln(hardncss)Fl'aOI
vltr vlrl!3.15 u!s/1 I t.46203 4.1 4s7t 2tnft ardncss)l tr(
l'2730n(hardness)H'705)l
Manganese
Acute 31 99 VPl1 e(0.333
I (tn(hadtess)F6.4,676)
lvlU 1767 ttsl1 ,(0.333 I 0n(hadtess)F5.87a3)
Nickel, Dissolved Acute 557.9 vdl ,(0. 8,t60n(hardness)F2.253 )
lvruvuL 62.0 vsll ,(0. 8a60n(hardness))r0.0554)
Selenium, Dissolved Acute 18.4 ag/Numeric standards providcd, formula not applicable
Chronic 4.6 vg/l Numeric standards orovided. formula not amlicablc
Silver, Dissolved
Acute 2.90 Lil1 yr r(1.7 2(lnftvrdncss)F.52)
Troul 0.46 ad1 e(1.720n(hardness))-l
0.5 I )
Chronic 0.11 ttsll e(
1.72(ln(hardness)F9.06)
Uranium, Dissolved Acute 3017.9 UPl1 e( I . I 02 I 0n(hardness)F2.7088)
Chronic 1885.0 ail1 e(l . I 02 I (ln(hardncss))r2.2382)
Zinc, Dissolved Acute 139.7 -tl e(0.8473(lnOardno51l+O.86
I 8)
Chronic 140.8 vdl ,(0.8a730n(hardness))r0.8699)
PEL Page 4 of 10 J.C.H. 10104102
rt;; ::'/,if i,
'ti'.:; :.!r,-f:t'"' . . ''.'l! ,*:* ,i J't' ':i','
tlr-a-ie
!
i
I
Rock Gardens WWTF Water
Ambient Water OualiW
The WQCD evaluates ambient water quality based on a variety of statistical methods as prescribed in
Section 31.8(2)(aXi) and 31.8(2XbXiXB) of the Colorado Department of Public Health and
Environment Water Quality Control Commission Regulation No. 3l . Ambient water quality is
evaluated in this PEL analysis for use in determining assimilative capacities and in completing
antidegradation reviews for pollutants of concern.
To conduct an assessment of the ambient water quality upstream of the Rock Gardens WWTF, data
were gathered from WQCD water quality station 46 located approximately 16 rniles upstream h'om
the facility. Data were avaiiable for a period of record from October 1995 through September2000.
Data from this source reflects upsreair water quality. All parameters rvere found to be well within
the assigned standards. These data are summarized in Table A-4.
Table A-4 Ambient Water Quality Summary Table
Ambient Water Qualify for the Colorado River
Ambient Water Quality Summary Table
Num,ber
.,..,;!r'of.'..'1.t
Saiilesi:'
;Ahraiii,rr i, 1 t,il-r. l
.:Stream
Standard
DO (me/l))t 8.7 11 t2 11 7
pH (su)35 7.8 8.2 8.4 8.1 6.5-9
Fecal Coliform (#/100
rn])33 J 4 43 l0 200
Hardness (mg/l
CaCO3)37 100 120 136 123 NA
Al, Dis (ue/l)t7 0 0 45 l9 87
As, Trec (ueil)t7 0 0 0 0 NA
Cd. Dis (ue/l)37 0 0 0 0.077 2.6
Cu, Dis (ue/l)37 0 0 0.42 0.54 tl
Fe, Trec (ug/1)3t 54 244 905 507 1000
Pb, Dis (ue/l)t7 0 0 0 0.01 8 3.2
Mn. Dis (ug/l)37 6.4 9 13 l3 50
Se, Dis (ug/l)16 0 0 0.53 0.29 4.6
Ag, Dis (ug/l)36 0 0 0 0 0.11
Zn, Dis (ueil)JI 0 0 0 2.4 141
TRC (meil)42 0 0 0 0 0.01I
E. Coli. (#/100 ml)I 9 9 9 9 t26
Nitrate (mg/l)tt 0 0 0 0.03 l0
Nitrate+Nitrite (me/l))t 0 0 0 0.03 NA
NH:, Unionized (mgil)29 0.00076 0.0025 0.0093 0.004 0.02
PEL Page 5 of i0 J.C.H. t0/04/02
PEL
)".:
'' "5}th' ,,.
Pb:rcentile ll{ecn '',
Rock Gardens W'WTF Water QualityAssessment
III. Water Quantity
Colorado regulations speciff the use of low flow conditions when establishing water qualitybased
effluent limitations, specificallythe acute and chronic low flows. The acute low flow, referred to as
lE3, represents the one-day low flow recurring in a three-year interval. The chronic low flow, 30E3,
represents the 30-day average low flow recnrring in a three-year interval.
Low Flow Analysis
To determine the low flows available to the Rock Gardens WWTF, USGS gage station 09070500
(Coloracio River near Dotsero, CO) was tsed. Th.is flow gage provides a representative measurement
ofthe upstream flow because there ire no diversions or confluence of significance betrveen the flow
gage and the facility.
Daily flows from the USGS Gage Station 09070500 (Colorado River near Dotsero. CO) were
obtained and the annual 1E3 and 30E3 lorv flows were calculated using U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) DFLOW softrvare. The output from DFLOW provides caiculated acute
and chronic low flows tbr each month. Flow data from January l, 1990 through September 30, 2000
were available from the gage station. The gage station and time frames were deerned representative
of current flows and were therefore used in this analysis. Based on the low flow analysis described
previously, the upstream low flows available to the Rock Gardens WWTF were calculated and are
presented in Table A-5.
Table A-5
Low Flows for the Colorado River at the Rock Gardens WWTF
lE3
Acute 473 474 564 572 732 t09r 1231 l09l 1200 950 794 550 473
30E3
Chronic 677 577 677 677 685 tt4.4 1332 t275 I 106 854 726 678 677
fV. Technical Analysis
In-stream background data and low flows evaluated in Sections II and III are ultimately used to
determine the assimilative capacity of the Colorado River near the Rock Gardens WWTF for
pollutants of concern. For all parameters except ammonia a technical analpis of streem assimilation
capacity uses the annual low flow (lowest of the monthly low flows) as calculated in the low flow
analysis. For ammoni4 the regulations allow the use of seasonal flows when establishing
assimilative capacities. It is standardprocedure to determine assimilative capacities for eachmonth
using the monthly low flows calculated in the low flow analysis.
,l
i
Page 6 of 10 J.C.H. t0104102
i
I
ri:P.ffirTrSEF#
::..t*r#E{
Rock Gardens WWTF Water Quality Assessment PEL
The assimilative capacity analysis consists of steady-state mass-balance calculations for most
pollutants and modeling for other pollutants such as ammonia. A mass-balance equation is used to
calculate the maximum allowable concentration of pollutants in the effluent and accounts for the
upstream concentration of a pollutant at the existing quality, critical low flow (minimal dilution),
effluent flow and the water quality standard. The mass-balance equation is expressed as:
Mz=MtQt-MrQr
Qz
where:
Q1=Upstream low flow (1E3 or 30E3)
Q2: Average daily eflluent flow (ciesign capaciry)
2; = Downstrearn flow (Q1+ Qz)
Mr = Tn-stream backgrotrnd pollutant concentration at the mean
Mz= Calculated ma,rimum allowable effluent pollutant concentration
Mt = Maximum allowable in-steam pollutant concentation (water quality standard)
Pollutants of Concern
The following parameters were identified by the WQCD as pollutants of concern for this facilitlt
. Total A:rrmonia
o Fecal Coliform
o Total Residual Chlorine.
.PH
o TSS
o BODs
o Oil andGrease
There are no numeric in-stream water quality standards for BODs, TSS, and oil and grease. Thus,
assimiiative capacities for these parameters were not calculated in this PEL assessment. Appropriate
effluent limitations for these pararneters will be set by CDPS effluent limit guidelines.
Based upon the size of the discharge, the lack of industrial contributors, dilution provided by the
receiving stream and the fact that no unusually high metals concentrations are expected to be found
in the wastewater effluent, metals are not evaluated further in this water quality assessment.
Rock Gardens WWTF: The Rock Gardens WWTF is located in the NW1/4 of SE1/4 Section 2,
T65, R89W, 6th P.M. in Garfield County. The proposed design capacity of the facility is 0.025
MGD (0.03875 cfs). Wastewater treatnent is proposed to be accomplished using a mechanical
wastewater treahnent process. The technical analyses that follow include assessments of the
assimilative capacity based on this design capacity.
Nearbv Sources
An assessment of nearby facilities based on WQCD's Permit Tracking System database found 2
current dischargers to the Colorado River in Glenwood Springs downstream of the Rock Gardens
WWTF; The City of Glenwood Springs WWTF (CO-0020516) and Glenwood Hot Springs (CO-
0000141). There are 3 proposed Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) rest area
i
I
i
PEL Page 7 of 10 J.C.H. L0/04/02
"' i$ini"r'ffi
Rock Gardens WWTF Water Quality Assessment PEL
discharges upstream ofthe Rock Gardens WWTF in Glenwood Canyon. There are cr.urentinstream
temperature standards and effluent temperature limit guidelines being discussed by a workgroup of
the WQCD. This may effect the Glenwood Hot Springs effluent limits, but the Rock Gardens
WWTF discharge limits would not be effected by these issues. Because of the large river volume
available for dilution, the domestic natnre of the other discharge facilities, and the fact that other
facilities are located far enough away from the proposed Rock Gardens W''WTF, these facilities were
not considered in this analysis.
Based on infomration currently available, there is no indication that non-point sources arre a
significant source of pollutants of concern in this area. Any upstream non-point sources were
considered in the assessment of the upstream water quality.
Chlorine: The mass-balance equation was used to determine the assimilative capacity for chlorine.
There are nu;ruiuu ocrulcus dischargilg total residual chlorine within one mile ofthe Rock Gardens
WWTF. Because chlorine is rapidly oxidized, in-stream levels ofresidual cirlorine ire detected only
for a short distance belorv a source. Ambient chlorine was therefore assumed to be zero. Using the
mass-balance equation provided in the beginning of Section fV, the acute and chronic low flows set
out in Section Itr, the chlorine background concentration of zero as discussed above, and the in-
sEeam standards for chlorine shown in Section II, assimilative capacities for chlorine were
calculated. The data used and the resulting calculations of the allowable discharge concentration,
M2, ilfo set forth below.
Fecal Coliform: There are no point sources discharging fecal coliform within one mile of the Rock
Gardens WW13. It is standard operating procedure of the WQCD to perform a mass-balance
calculation to determine if fecal coliform standards are exceeded. WQCD procedure specifies that
the mass-balance be calculated using only the chronic low flow as set out in Section Itr. Using the
mass-balance equation provided in the beginning of Section fV, the background concentration
containsd in Section II, and the in-stream standards for fecal coliform shown in Section tr, checks for
fecal colifonn were conducted. The data used and the resulting calculations of the allowable
discharge concentation, M2, are set forth below.
Ammonia: Ammonia is present in the aqueous enyironment in both ionized and un-ionized forms.
It is the un-ionized form which is toxic and which is addressed by water quality standards. The
proportion of total ammonia present in un-ionized form in the receiving streem is a function of the
combined upsEearn and effluent ammonia concentrations, and the pH and ternperature ofthe effluent
and receiving stream, combined. Using the mass-balance equation provided in the beginning of
Parameter fu (cfs)Oz (cfs)Os kfs)Mr fus/l)Mt(ms/l)Mz(ms/l)
Acute Chlorine 475 0.0388 475.0388 0 0.019 233
Chronic Chlorine 677 0.0388 677.0388 0 0.011 192
Parameter Qr
(cfs)
Qz
(cfs)
Qt
kfs)
Mr
(it/l00 ml)
Mt
(t1/100 ml)
Mz
(#/100 ml)
Fecal Coliform 677 0.0388 677.0388 10 200 3,319,684
PEL Page 8 of 10 J.C.H. t0t04/02
\.:,:-..:-r:li_ra4r.r
Rock Gardens WWTF Water Quality Assessment
Section [V, the acute and chronic low flows set out in Section III, the mean ammonia background
concentration shown in Section II, and the in-stream standards found in the Colorado Total
Maximum Daily Load and Wasteload Allocation Gtidance and the CDPS Summary of Rationale
General Permitfor Domestic Wastavater Treatment Facilities that Discharge to Receiving Waters
with a Chronic Low Flow: Design Flow Ratio of 100: I or Greater for Ms, assimilative capacities for
chronic total ammonia were calculated. The data used and the resulting calculations ofthe allowable
discharge concentation, M2, are contained in Table A-6.
V. Antidegradation Review
As set out in The Basic Standards and Methodologies of Surface Water, Section 31.8(2)(b), an
antidegradation analysis is required except in cases where the receiving water i.s designated as "Use
Protected" where the fulI assimilative capacity of a receiving water may be used, or "Outstanding
Waters" where no degradation of a receiving water is allowed.
According to the Classifications and Numeric Standardsfor Upper Colorado River Basin and Nonh
Platte River Basin (Planning Region 12), steam segment COUCUC03 is Undesignated. Thus, an
antidegradation review may be conducted for this segment if new or increased impacts are found to
occur. However, the ratio of the flow of the Colorado River to the Rock Gardens W'WTF design
'-n
Table A-6
Ammonia Assimitative Capacities for the Colorado River
at the Rock Gardens WWTF
Design of 0.025 MGD (0.03875 cfs)
NH3, Tot (mgil) Jan 677.00 0.0388 677.0388 0.01 0.70 >30
NH3, Tot (mg/l) Feb 677.00 0.0388 677.0388 0.01 0.60 >30
NH3, Tot (mg/l) Mar 677.00 0.0388 677.0388 0.01 0.40 >30
NH3, Tot (mgil) Apr 685.00 0.0388 685.0388 0.01 0.40 >30
NH3, Tot (mgil) May 1144.00 0.0388 1144.0388 0.01 0.30 >30
NH3, Tot (mg/l) Jun 1332.00 0.0388 1332.0388 0.01 0.30 >30
MI3, Tot (mgil) Jul r275.00 0.0388 1275.0388 0.01 0.30 >30
NH3, Tot (mgil) Aug 1106.00 0.0388 1106.0388 0.01 0.30 >30
NH3, Tot (mgil) Sep 854.00 0.0388 854.0388 0.01 0.30 >30
NH3, Tot (mg/l) Oct 726.00 0.0388 726.0388 0.01 0.30 >30
NH3, Tot (mg/l) Nov 678.00 0.0388 678.0388 0.01 0.30 >30
NH3, Tot (me/l) Dec 677.00 0.0388 677.0388 0.01 0.50 >30
Page 9 of l0 J.C.H. t0104102
s$.etHffiig.i;':'i* {t F!,itrY4a,J,
PEL
i,?,
Rock Gardens WWTF Water QualityAssessment PEL
flow is 17,471:1 at low flows. Section 31.8 (3)(c) specifies that the discharge of pollutants should
not be considered to result in significant degradation of the reviewable waters if the flow rate is
greater than 100:l dilution at low flow. Thus, condition 31.8(3Xc) of the regulations is met and no
further antidegradation evaluation is necessary.
YI. References
Classifications and Numeic Standards for (Jpper Colorado River Basin and North Platte River
Basin (Planning Regton I2), Regalation No.33, CDPHE, WQCC, Effective June 30, 2001.
The Basic Standards and Methodologies for Surface Water, Regulation 3/, CDPIIE, Effective
October 31,2001.
CDPS Summary of Rationale General Permitfor Domestic Wastewater Treatment Facilities that
Discharge to Receiving Waters with a Chronic Low Flow: Design Flow Ratio of 100:1 or Greater,
CDPS Permit COG-584000, Statadda CDPHE, September 14,1994.
Antidegradation Significance Determinationfor New or Increased Water Quality Impacts,
Procedural Guidance, WQCD, Version 1.0 2001.
Page 10 of10 J.C.H. 10104102
Engineering Report
Rock Gardens Wastewater Zancanella and Associates, lnc.
February 2003
Application Attachment 7
Authority Letter
20
ROCK GARDEI{S MOBILE HOME PARK
& CAMPGROUND, LLC
Colorado Department of Health and Environment
Water Quality Control Division
4300 Cherry Creek Drive South
Denver, CO 80246
Re. Rock Gardens Wastewater Treatment Facility
To Whom It May Concern:
The undersigned is the owner of property which is the subject of an application to the
Colorado Department of Health and Environment for a Site Permit for a wastewater
treatment facitity. The treatment plant will serve the Rock Gardens recreational vehicle
and mobile home park which is located on said property. The undersigned will own and
maintain the wastewater treatment facility utilizing appropriately certified operators. A
site within the property has been made available for the treatment facility as specified by
plans prepared by Zancanella and Associates.
Owner, Rock Gardens Mobile Home Park &
Campground, LLC
1303 CR 129 Glenwood Springs, CO
(970)945-67s7
81601
d
til
,,1
f
1
1
,'fo',Tf Hl ##.
"
I E iq I $ 5l? ; I' "l FE, !. o f,ffif,ffiq0. - -
i.-,..'l i.
^l.ENDlfBNa
to DBED OF TRUsts
I
rro*0801r*r,001
rf
i n, $hle locn&rcnt to Lre€d of rltuot lo uedo arrd ontorbd lnto tble
A* d.y ol boconbeE, 1993 by and bctwocn XE?IB D. ECBNBIDBR aDdKI}IBERLE O. BCllttEID-ItE (Bobncl-derel, Borrcnucr, wtrosa addrees It t30g9*rtr-!gri 1Q91 Grcnweod Bprlngnl cororado' sr60r rr,,r i-rrr.-iau-i.Lr\rrNcsrloN a''d HEuNrs .r. iivrn6giou ltrvrngsro""p, i"nJ!"1-ilrr-"iiaddroaa t. 0170 a"colsirai-ci"irl Eiir,"J"i spir-"st'clloratro 01601.
i ,rc*,y_jLtvtn(rtTd N LbT+/)
.. _WIIEREAST- on {qr9! lS, t990, Sotn
*8"";r"..,.""r""tr#:,,.,"r="**,ftT$i+3fil*:lf,ij.#,il[il
€voE dlto thercwith for thi t"t"f[h+-rty six rhousand rive -iiuno-ied:
wtth lnteree! thereon. gaid Dccrpropertv located at 310g eountv .Rogd
-12-g-, Ereilooa 8pr!,agr,Coloradol _ ro16 pertlcu.tarfy ai-c-Jrfi'Ja f"'-i'*frf-U1-J' "1" attacbedhereto and nade a part horeat uy ttrie ief.;.;;;;---
I{IIBREA,, ralg- -Deed of rnrst wae .r€eoaded He:oh lB, lg90 l,,
H:L31lE:.it?"tr',tf """t'""9i."*riJri6E5'iil;fr -;;;4"'oi:'ilJ
i -HElnBAg, the partiac dcalre to anend eald uaed rot lnrst aahercinef,tor set fofth. ,
1,, NOll TEREFORE, for- g99d grq valuable conelderatJ.on, thereoeipt .and auf f iclency "r_rir,iou G h";;;;;;k;"Ji.ii'Ia, rahberde*and Llvingctonr ag ee -ag f,ollorar
I
f" .rlio.rfE*Sffiffi;y r5,rll;Pndment to Deed ot rrust shatr
i
"":r-'.*"-,.ffi [L+l]i"f#ffi ;"i"il:Xt;i:*,.'[f, [l;ilirr*:;Hundred Strry rlwo and 0zlr00 Doir;;;1*i[{,t'si.fii.'
I
l* ".' ; r..tHEf;kf H i,l}' rt"i;*:lf l'j t "J. I::ll .
r,1, t hc Daed or
I
r5*lu-+"*ffi ffiLffi **.""ir8l"Tf"*l;i"f;*,rrxrjl'"1fi I'":'.*00/100 Dorler: to pitiolpar ana in[ireet Payeblc tu r9r payrenta ofo's rhougand one Eunired B;;1y ri"i--i"a "ogTroo Dorrqro(sl,175.G6). E"q --',
p'o,iSia.n
"oy ,lttitl.T"",":!Ei*l:and romaLng ln iull force "nJ-e-tt""t.I
fU WfmtBSS IiHBRBOF rtre partles baveot Erult on the day-and yaar ltrrt thlslt€br ndnent to
STATE OP COIORADO
COT'UTY OT GAREIALD
i on thia J* d:r-,?l f,f+g rrq[, brrqso o,er theuade*igned, e TdEE-ry viurio rn lna t5r sarr "ir-ti; pcreonal.riappeared xcvLn B. gchicl.der .nd rinuerti-s.- -s.h"L-id-";", Der.onrrrvksown to no or o.ovpd-t;-; oii-tiTu.ii; ;i ;;i;il;il#-#ffi;:I
ffi u*,".*"#i:i::i,h"Bc;amci1J,l+;=*S"{"_:"ii;ii!qn.r.nrrruncnt
u$u;&T.r11,ii#.u;!.t-r#3vis.iri"::;h:;*ti**i,r"ruru;rr;:
.,,H'-lxillji$J,iiril*#' )
u#
l
I
... . t..i.;L'
Llullllllllllllililtillill]lilm il ilil llt lllr3e7330 o2t ts / zoo2 t0 : t8t 0 rsig Fb3b-lr'il'iobnFt o0 2 i 10.00 o o.O0 G0RFIELD cOUilTt CO---
0-
^b*t)-
Recorder
QUITCLAIM DEED
THIS DEED, made this I lth day of February,2OO2 , betrveen Kimberly S.
Schneider AKA Kimberly S. Mechling of the *County of Garfickl and State
of Colorido, grantor(s), and Kevin B. Schneider and Kathleen C.
Schneider whose legal adfuess is 1308 County Road 129, Glenwood
Springs, CO,- of the County of Garlicld and State of Colorado, grantee(s),A'8lbo,
WITNESS' that the grantor(s), for and in consideration of rhe surn of TEN DOLLARS AND NO/100 DOLLARS,
the reCeiOt and SUfficiencv ofwhich i< herchw rclrnmwla;loarr ha.,a ,-,-i.-r --r^^^^i -^rr ^-r nrrrr^rthe receipt and sufftciency of which is hereby acknowledged, have rernised, released, sold and eUITCLAIMED, and
by these presents do remise, release, sell and QUITCLAIM unto the grantee(s), their heirs, successors and assigns
forever, all the ri8ht, title, interest, claim and demand which the grantor(s) have in and to the real property, rogetSerwith improvements, ifany, situate, lying and being in the sairl County ofCarfiekl and State ol Colorado, described asfollows:
See Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof.
EREOF, the
,t",|tL+K,
Schneider AKA
this deed on the date set forth above
also known by street and number as: 1308 county Roarl 129, Glenrvoorl springs, co gl60t
assessor's schedule or parcel number: R040212, 2lgS-024-00-046
TO HAVE AND To HoLD the salne, together with all and singular the appurtenances and privileges thereuntobelonging, or in anlvise thereunto appcrtaining, and all the .stat., iiglrt, title, interest and claim wlmtsoever of tlegrantor(s), either in larv or equity, to the only proper use, benefit and behoofofthe grantee(s) their heirs and assignsforelcr.
STATE OF COLORADO,
county or Ltnr'h i'lrt ) "
The foregoing instrumen( rvas acknowledged before rne this
Kimberly S. Schneider AKA Kimberly S. Mechling.
// aav or 6L/urw7 Jd,)/bv
rlf in Dcnvcr, iBcn "City ed.
No. 933. Rcv. 4-94 QUTTCI{IU DEED
Jff VEion Fom SDOOOCO Re. O9/17l97
Name and Address ofPerson Creailhg Newly Creared Legat Descrrprion ($ -3EJ5-t06 5. C,R .S )
(-*+"1 (g.vrr'., B'5or^ n,6r.,€o
Karr xrf,c;ov C . 5r,-,,.-rg, oE<
t3s8 u (z-r t)9
G5. cn fltwDrt"
ilil.
10,
,)
fr;rffi
(n-'. ,6 n .'eIGI'.(;nr rw-"-ol
Witness my hand and official seal
My commission expies. / )' /1'>J> )-
Notary Public
I
Iilil[]illllt il lll]lil] lflil iltilltillllilt397330 O2tl3/2OO2 lOr3EA B1329 F339 ll TLSDORF2 ol 2 R 10.00 O O.OO GflRFIELD COUI|TY C0
Exhibit A
Parcel A:
A strip or parcel of land 200 fcct rvide lying South of the road and off the West side of the NW%SE%, Scction 2, Torvnship 6
South, Range 89 West of thc 6th P.M. and morc particularly described as follorys:
Beginning at the Southwest corner of said NW%SE%;
Thence running Easterly 200 fcct along South line of said NW%SE%;
Thence Northerly on a line parallel to Wcst line of said NW%SE% to the County Road;
Thence Wcsterly along the County Road lo the West tine of said NW%SE%;
Thence Southerly along said West line to the place of beginning;
Excepting from the above describcd Parccl A the property conveyed to thc Department of llighways, State of Colorado, by
Edward E. Henderson, Jr, and Iris V. Henderson in Deed recorded October 22,1964 in Book 361 at Page 409 as Reception
227358 arl,d described as follorvs, to-wit:
A tract or parcel of land No. I 13 of Colorado Deparlment of Highrvays Project No. I 70-2(2)t2l Section 2, in the NW% of the
SE% of Section 2, Township 6 South, Rangc 89 West of the 6th P.M., said tract or parcel being more particularly described
as follows:
Beginning at a point on the West line of the NW% of thc SE% of Section 2 from n,hich point the E% corner of Section 2,
Township 6 South, Range E9 West, bears N. 78o08' 8,, a distance of 2{93.9 l'eet;
Thcnce N. 00o50'30" E. along thc Wcst line of the NW% of thc SE% of Section 2, a distancc of 6{.4 feet to the South right of
way line of S.H. 4 (Decembcr 1963);
Thence along the South right of way line of S.H. 4(December 1963) N. 81o29' E. a distance ot 208.7 feel to the East property
line;
Thence S. W. along the East property tine a distancc of 120.4 fect;
Thcnce N. 83'03' W. a distance of 207.1 fcct, more or less to the point of beginning.
Parcel B:
Also, the SW%SE% of Section 2, Township 6 South, Range 89 Wcst of the 6th Principal Meri(ian.
County of Garfield, State of Colorado
Engineering Report
Rock Gardens Wastewater
February 2003
Zancanella and
APPENDIGES
APPENDIX A
Manufacturer / Equipment lnformation
21
I
E
T
I
r
l
T
tl
:
T
,iI
I,
T
i
I
It
f
T
I
I
It
tr
LAKESIDE
W'ater Purification Since 1928
\ T\ rY',\Cr$ ^Y
tiryv\A;MAvlAlAA;\AAA*i:;:i"):: :11^^'
"VY;vi
'\ \ A A'
irizTrj. Griri n "*. o s;i$t, ii {rirbi r o:o-srz-s6ao o FRx: 630{'37-s&7 o E-mail: sales @lakeside<quipmenLcom
E.A. AEROTOR
THE SM/L4LL TREATMEI{T PLAI{T SOLUTIOI{
Presented to:
Project:
Attention:
Zacanella & Associates
HLary F Project, Colorado
Thomas Zacanella, P.E.
a
Fi
'-t r 'rxiJ.t i
f-'':1
:t
li.r
7',':-';!
LAKEst D E EQU t P M ENT c qF?9RATi o N
uATER PU RtFrcAnory flN9Fi3;8,, *.^.rr^'r'\ .glll r BARTLETT'IL6o1o31022 E. DevoN AVE. r P.O. BOX
DESIGN SUMMARY SHEET
H LazY F Proiect, Colorado
lnfluent Parameterc
"""""""0'025 mgd (Average)
EBE;::::::::::: ::: :::::::::::: : ::::::::: : : zso ms/t
TSS............ """""""'250mg/l
TKN........... """""""'29 mg/l
Discharge Limits
BODs.......'. 10 mgit
TSS............ """""""'10 mg/l
NH3- N """""""""""1 mg/l
CLR Design
process...... """"E{ended Aeration
RequiredoxvsenRates""""""""""":"""""""""""'too l3',:il t3+[
cLR votume .. . .3O??8 dal' (per reactor)
l,6ll cu-ft (Per reactor)
Organic Loading""" """""""12'9lb BOD/1000 cu-ft
Detention Time, CLR """"""29 hours
CLR EquiPment
Rotor Aerators................ il"# Il;[ Y3;l#,f;itors
with 4-ft or brades
55 rPm
VelocityControlBaffles.........one(1)S.ftpivotingbaffleassemblyEffluentWeir"""""' """"""""""""""""'One(1)2-ftweirqate
naS airrift.. ...::"""""""""""'on" irisospm capacitv
3-in PiPe @
RAS&scumairliftblowerperreactor......ono(1)2hprotaryblower45 CFM @ 4'0 Psi
Ctarifier Design
Process?;itheralfeed'centertake-off
Diameter
Side-water Depth""""" """""12-ft
Area .......'.. """"'113 sq-ft
Hydraulic Loading """""""""' """"""""'221 gal/day/sq-ft
Detention Time"""""' """""'9'8 hours
!
I
!
f ,27n002
ili
,il
Sludge Holding Tank
Length """"""""15-ftwidth......... i?:*
Sidewater Depth""""" "r""r" I I rr
Vorume. . " f;?!'.:i
Design Storage 20 davs
Recommended Operating Parameters
SRT.""""" """"'8 to 25 davs
RAS flow rates """"" " """""":':""""""'+o to 1oo% of Raw lnfluent Flow
Predicted Performance
BODs""""' """"'<10 mg/l
TSS.... ...'....."':""""""""""'<10 mg/l
NHrN'...'... """"""""""""""<1 mgil
r
(
a
ar
onoo- cE c.g .e.9 'e= == =! EE E- -c - E6 oo c 9o Oo o o
bo uooo 'A !9
=LLL'E -a 2 =E tu<s E r!b EE .E t.o- ooo OO g O
6' 6'rE' e oE EE' .= !
oo(rxo'& ubo q EEi (!=d tr (\,
i:\:LLLg 9! E :(! (E(E
LL-6LG (EG'cc (lE EEEE Ec c c\\-E .E.EAB .B.='d .- o o t L ulEees€gg €
>L(JELa EgE.="gg@@ e
9--<trto{r\@o<s<O " rr!(Yl^:tlrt.o.:@(\lHE d*\C:adrio oG' H
@o
=
rr [ ,,"gllllllilll ilrl.ic-c-r ',*'3llo-F
f €EBE aEE EEE€,
".-o I g ga] o::;;aU
EEEEESEi:.sFee
nFoz
(oorool
d(\l
01 ddqqq
orNt\
E
E
idb
O\ho-\rHE te.E 69 =-ga R gg 9AE_c2\vgE.exsgtEr&
A616.uLE g f= +EZUr@eEU @el@ E E
(Joooj=N; E; E X?
= E E E f4 ! €6.ZE9.o2,5 3 3 6 € 6
lr)qj+(\t|lroorodooo6 N('r(nNOO- ciciq$io-
dN
C'E: 6te1 'E-_'6. -oo gi
o qtr
6 Jo)
E ? $E OB(E o - tro 0)=E E > (E; =-I i HE; -&FE E ?i8g afbo=c5 . v€3 9=Y 5 S .eiE 27H EeE o,=-
-<=Mc = C -s 'r--o ?a.E ? $s
E g=E=egEagE E f,:
lrl t!
Fl!k rrl
=8lrJF trl(tt F
=E
)L
oEIF5
=o)
o
E: r0 6r
3E E.(l)coLoor
€ o=
E=Eq- r,r -o-i
EF-*e5EE;
q.9.9 -E p.=(E<-=ir L N - a-6rigE
EE:3 B-G-c (6 trZE-Ea):< - E O-
F o.= G =E$Eqep I a€ I
^q5trb,!V-F^Pco 9O FEt.9b HgrtE€
EE; } s6E E;! EE: E;E
!i(t-aii;; &eB3=56I*UrE E
i s€; E
S 3g E E
a
I
lr.l
lrlg,
fo
lrJ
G,
G,lrlL
tJ)
E,
1t!oxoo
E,
o
FU'
I
l!o
I
UJoid
O- l!
I
I
I
I
t
I
l
it
,t
,t
t
il
t
It
It
H
E,
ov
66oo)
(E(lo .a(E
v6L!E ;o
^b 6-.:l <. 78 .uEiSsl>>E bH: E XJ.sxtO Oal-(\rN-
ii4.- ou G.L
-&4 ..
-.1mH6ts9EE3
.-L_i-L--.,-i-.- .-t i-:-_J-: _ *:l-:
@U
n5
3Rm>
I
=t
-63
zt@a2a!44@oEPhz0
-o
@U
mo
6trm6
6
-lli.r,
EsIIE
r:ilg
HellP
FiIIE
e;ils-
}, :.
EEH EEgsi= =:ftE<X EnHb:= 3mE
o='Q 6-€39- =o=Eir e*+
';: EggAa sdfip 3:
r,-f;E -Poz Iix3
Es
i,
c^)(n
Io
l9
l=
fTt
rTt;oo-{On
-oa-
zl-{l
U
IO)(n!sN)
Ia
XPFq<'
z6
-<o<to\-
o
@
oma
@{
@Q6=
a6m
@
{F
)@aa<\-
EEHuk>oDnmffi!
f,- j '*_ r r*T't _:i J ;:: -lI
oCz
-lm(:l
n6sfrSz.mC)n
<i---l o6)E.oC-1] rn
--1 Arn<
6)7trrn
am
r-2rn
ilI
lolnIOlu'tlu)l-
lrnC)
--1oz.
o-n
rn
;D2
C)
CDrn
,oz6)
oo
rnn
C)C-o
-oIz.--1
arn
--1
<-)E
TN€
@rn
n
=6-)
--t
P
-o
im
@=rn+*fi=nz.C)ToCa
=C)
@-tm>>-o,om
=7f,as
Eor
rn:o
C)o
-D
,orn(-/)?oz.
am
fi-
zlo
-1on
a--n
--1
(,/t@mm
--r >n
P6r_>.^EH;\2C)
tf-\Tn
=P>=a+TG)A=C
---t
all
a-.D
---trn
-nn
rn
a-D
f-
:J-*
.I:lr
m nmCfComn
z.o--t
a-o
=z.
@inr--l
6)c
Do
o
OD
6-)Tm
Cnm
=rn
arnrn
orn--1
F
<nmrn
c)m-t
-
C)
-a mf,rn6B
CET
amrn
Om
-l
-
Irr-rnn
-IJr
-o@I- rn
-{Emz
C)
oCz.--l
z.6)
<)ao rTl<rnrn7) <''u
'E I-O,D
aA {2rn .r
G' .IJti
rn
9o
C'/)rnr
,TI5r ;iil,
-or
-{m
=
-trnn
rn
rnr-aCnrn
6-)nt
@C
U-)-zc)
1'C
t-
Tot-rna
t;lm
lrIT
lffi
lolalaIrnl<
ti
rll
no--lon
a
--tC@
aT
-n
--l
o€rnn
:E
I_'f]
<J)-[l
a--olr>c)-r>rnct-lx
<>aorn<mrn7)all>t-a>AAMI
$-.,.--<>
mr
arnr
cln
=rn
CN:rrn
rn
C]v
m
Im
rn
ils
ile
oC---t.D
C--l
-C@
@
TN
n
=G)oCI.U
CI
-C
CI]
il:
C.E.D
rnD
-
-Tr
(,-I]
ar
-or
--lm
a.rf,
C/)T
-Dr
im
-nn
rn
@Grrn>>(-),o ,\66
L/, cD
H=
c)o
mn
-Ur
--lrn
G>
U),{mi
cEIrn
nzc)
@-1c>-a")
- n'l
=>)6,r
<)C):x
oc-
--1-g
C
-l
-c@
am
r---ur
-trn
O=
=@<OfTl >,;o9oHoD
lnlol{lo D
oI!
rn
+6fn(,.coa,.toD{
-nm
IcrE.. rn'<n
Eo--toio
(D 9)6orn>n
=rn
=J
z.
a-
-n
---t
c)
a>irni
I(I
O)
oi
:U)
,.
i.i
:j
?,
"1
I iu [il ,',i
l- i I I l,.l [i!'tis t'''11 ir{ t'rll'rl ['x';'1r itrn:ill [l i _3 '".f r'J .iat !'.T]
Ur>--1 =2.868fr3Tnc=..rnoc)
--.tIm
fT'.E
---14@z\-o.
hml;--t---l
>TiY(-)o \
fi1o2n
l:?oPe 3?F
a <r.2-ogd?z
-------\=
-/--\.,/\
/--,
-
=6)m
a.-1
=a.--l.
,
-n!o<rn rnn7)
r-u
<rzu) rnr
arnc)
--toz.a
-n>
HA;o*9a>€Y! -ou) c)
=
I
I
=a-ornC)i
z.
aC.E
-ooEi
tr
rC
=
AD-lOz.r.ra
-1 !r7
trlrn
R6
Ega=
CJ)
(, <)---t oz.<.rnn
<./t--l -or- :>'2.mr
=trrE
z __:.-oz.
aC.D
-Don
--l
--l
.-u
rn
C)-
rnz.O
oCz.
-lz.C)
=Zz.
TNt-
<ro<,-lc \Z.:6'x
<t't -
x
rEnr' i-n
fra
rcc)z.D
1l
=Cr,>Ht- c>
? __:.- c)z.
<nC-o-oon---t
t! -tz-lo- l--{fr44 I Etscorn rn^ffi;9 ru
tJ-O U)fTl' -OZ. -t)OQ<, ?-n
=s cec) -I) r- -l7? E2--{ F- m1a ,Oo 6a
-o- 9o- .o TT.HE- 2agg o;- o Z=
=ffi "ifi(J (nz._ az3
p
E
{
=a6
t
r
x
rn
U,
o
rn
*
a
:
s
rn
bo
s
C)o
s
(]
IAulA
O)(o
/ h::----
\\--/
I
I
:, 'l
,/l
["tt
i"lE+r llrlTl-
-lo.lA
O
I
- FLOW
2X)
s\'r.
Ap\6\tc
(n
n
-lOn
{;
tr-
z\
-.n)" \c-
'r;o,
,b,
-c-,-o
n1rn c)>-o
C)--{ Oo-nn
€
r-r
ul clo(_C+ (J)o --lq&(Jr
o[l
Z.c)r-m
\
ls
(,
rn
C)
--loz.
FREEBOARD
),t,(<q
AAFl
E'FE
FoFtoF
ET'
kl>rl
r<rll
{
J
oo
m
Do
oa
c)o
oa
cf
I(n(,
AN)O)
IU)
NJ
C)noC-{
I
--l
-U
@E-<o-f-o>7,xrn c)(ro
Bfi
I
)
(
\
\
rl
!i
li
!
I
leTO
--1OT
a-Ifr
aT
=rr
cD
I(,
LAKESI D E EQUI PM ENT CO RPO RATI O N
WATER PURIFICATION SINCE 1928
1022 E. oEVON AVE. r P.O. BOX 8448 r BARTLETT, lL 60103
E. A. AEROTOR
PARTIAL REFERENCE LIST
LOCATION EQUIPMENT CONTACT s.o.
NUMBER
Port Gibson, MS
Grand GulfNuclear St.
0.05 mgd
Model 15i40MM
(1) - 8'Magna Rotors
15-ft dia. Spiraflo
Dennis Staer
60U437-6431 96-172
Newburg, PA
Blue Mountain Service
Plaza
0.05 mgd
Model l2l35MM
(2) - 8'Magna Rotors
(2) l2-ft dia. Spiraflo
Larry Hammaker
800/365-i2 I 5
ext.1 30 1
96-2t0
Gallman, MS
Copiah County WWTP
0.15 mgd
Model 22l55MM
(2) - 12'Magna Rotor
22-ft dia. Spiraflo
Billy Dorsey
601/856-2058 92-332
Gosport,IN
0.06 mgd
Model l6l52MM
(2) - 13'Magna Rotors
16-ft dia. Spiraflo
John Trotter
8t2/824-93rr 93-347
Bow, KY
Dale Hallow State Park
0.08 mgd
Model20l44\fivl
(2) - 14'Magna Rotors
20-ft dia. Spiraflo
David Thrasher
5021433-7431 95-t66
Fort Morgan, CO
Morgan Heights WWTP' 0.12 mgd
Model 20l45MM
(2) - 8'Magna Rotors
20-ft dia. Spiraflo
Bill Baker
9701842-567t 98-1 59
,l
t:
A. Ae
ffi
-}{ed AeritionlCornplete NIix P
Plants E Indttstrial Applr,
LAKESIDI
lyakr Pilnli(iltkilt Siile 1923
Bulletin #1
/,//, il I' ll
Irl
l.t
*-r'
i
\\
\
\\
{
Lakeside's E. A. Aerotor Plant
The E. A. Aerotor Plant is a simple, efficient, economical method to treat municipal and industrial wastes. Unlike
typical small package plants, the E. A. Aerotor Plant incorporates all the components of a large scale extended aeration/
complete mix process utilizing Lakeside's Closed Loop Reactor Process. The CLR Process functions as the reactor
basin for extended aeration and Lakeside's Spiraflo Clarifier functions as the final settling tank.
The E. A. Aerotor Plant's compact structure makes it particularly suitable for small communities, housing
developments, trailer parks, schools, and industrial applications. The E. A. Aerotor Plant is available for sites with
an average flow between .01 and 0.5 mgd.
Plant Operation
Closed Loop Reactor Operation_
Wastewater flows through a bar screen
and into the reactor basin upstream from
the rotor. The rotor distributes the
incoming and returned sludge flows and
mixes them with active microorganisms.
The rotors also supply oxygen and
provide propulsion to keep the contents
of the reactor basin uniformlv mixed and
in motion.
The mixrure of wastewater and active
microorganismscirculateswithinthe RoToRASSEMBLY
reactor basin for about 24 hours. The ROTOR BAFFLE
flow then passes over a handwheel
operated weir into the Spiraflo Clarifier.
ROTOR COVER
(0PnoM[)REACTOR BASIN
Spiraflo Clarifier Operation
ln the Spiraflo Clarifier, the solids
separate from the liquid to form sludge and scum. The
remaining clear liquid passes over the clarifier effiuent
weir and is discharged either to the effluent stream or
E. A. Aerotor Plant Layout
to further treatrnent processes. The
floating scum and the settled sludge are
returned to the reactor basin R.T.RASSEMBLY
by an air lift pump from the
scum box and the clanfier
respectively.
Excess sludge formed by the
process is stabie. It is re-
moved from the svstem and
transported to a sludge
holding tank. The excess
sludge can be applied to sludge beds and scuMArRLrFr
sludge lagoons or it can be hauled away
for land disposal.
ADJUSTABLE WEIR
;_
t
SLUDGE HOPPER SLUDGE DRAWOFF LINE
i
I
I
l
I
I
I
I
****r..l I
AIR UFr I
rt
)
I
Design Benefits
Design of Plant
The E. A. Aerotor Plant is custom designed to provide
optimum performance at the lowest possible cost. Both
the Closed Loop Reactor and the Spiraflo Clarifier are
,rrdividually sized to meet the specific requirements of
each application. To save space and reduce installation
costs, the Closed Loop Reactor and the Spiraflo Clarifier
are designed to share a common wall.
For speciai applicadons, the Closed Loop Reactor tank
can be designed with two concentric channels. The dual
channeis provide stand-by capacity, allow efficient
treatment for large seasonal fl ow variations, and promote
bioiogical nutrient removal with varying oxygen input.
Each E.A. Aerotor Plant's aeration channel can indepen-
dently discharge to the clarifier and is controlled by its
own adjustable weir.
Concrete tank constmction is ideal for in-ground E. A.
Aerotor Plant installations. Maintenance costs are lower
with concrete tanks because periodic sand blasting or
repainting is not required. However, the plant can be
constructed with either concrete, fabricated steel. or a
combination ofthe two depending on site conditions and
materiai costs.
Design of Equipment
To simplify installation, maintenance, and repairs,
Lakeside supplies all equipment and materiais r.vithin the
exterior wall (excluding concrete base, electncal lines,
lighting and buried piping). Lakeside uses standard parts
whenever available to make repairs even easier. Plant
equipment is designed to operate effectively outdoors
and withstand harsh weather conditions.
Design of Controls
The E. A. Aerotor Plant's self-contained unit is designed
to produce high quality effluent xithout extensive
operating costs or operator attention. To reduce labor and
maintenance costs, all operation and controi equipment
is easily reached from the access bridge.
Controls for both the Closed Loop Reactor and the
Spiraflo Clarifier are easy to use. The operator can
control the amount of dissolved oxygen in the reactor
basin by adjusting the reactor weir. Also, by simply
adjusting the air flow to the air lift pump, the operator can
control the sludge renrrn rate to the reactor basin.
)
1
l
l
I
l
J
I
l
J
J
l
1
Pinconning, MI
Holdingford, MN
Dual Channel E. A. Aerotor Plant
Copynght ,O Lakesrde Equrpment Corporation 2000
Gul,fport, ,ltS
)-
l
Process Benefits
The E. A. Aerotor process combines the features of the Closed
the following benefits:
. treats a broad range oforganic and hydraulic loads
. removes as much as960/o of the BOD and SS
. provides as much as 99%:o nitrification
. produces only small amounts of excess stable sludge
. operates for extended periods without sludge wasting
. provides odor-iree operation
Loop Reactor and the Spiraflo Clarifier to provide
Major Equipment Benefits
Spiratlo Clarifier
The Spiraflo Clarifier functions as the Plant's tlnai
seftling tank. This peripheral-feed clarifier with center
take-off minimizes flow short circuiting and maximizes
use of the clarifier's volume. The Spiraflo's unique
penpheral-feed flow pattern offers the best hydraulics
for complete separation of clear effluent from solids.
Lakeside's Full Surface Skimmer can be installed to
remove scum that may accumulate in the main settling
area of some Spiraflo CIarifiers.
Rotor Aerators
The Rotor Aerators are highly efficient. slow speed.
mechanical surface aerators that supply the oxygen and
produce the propulsion necessary tbr effective treatment
of BOD and SS. These horizontal biaded rotors pump
and mix over a broad range of oxy-qenation capacities and
organic loadings.
Lakeside Rotor Aerator Covers can be instailed to protect
the Rotor Aerators during winter operation. to increase
Rotor Aerator service litb. and to reduce noise leveis.
=*A,sf'sIDE
Y r. :r r, --:---ar,--:- Lakeside Equipment Corporation
Flushing, Ohio
P erip heral-Jbed design prevents s hort ciraiting
Bladed rotors supplv orygen and provide propulsion
1022 E. Devon . P.O. Box 8448 . Bartlett. IL 60103 . 630/837-5640 . FAX: 6301837-564'l . E-mail: sales@lakeside-equipment.com
7f,
fi
t
h
il
I
q
I
J
3
3
3
3
l
l
l
J
l
l
/
il
#LAKESIDE
Bulletin # 1412
November 1g9g
CLR Process
Closed Loop Reactor Process
Responsive Technology. . . Meeting and Exceeding Industry
Standards for More Than 35 Years
@ Copyright Lakeside Equipmenr Corporation 1999
Lakeside Biological Treatment Processes
Lakeside has more than 35 years of oxidation ditch experience
leading to the development of the present day Closed Loop Reactor
(CLR) Process. Derived from the original design by Dr. APasveer
of The Research Instirute of Public Health (TNO) in the Netherlands,
Lakeside has more than 1,500 installations demonstrating its
expertise in oxidation ditch technology.
Lakeside's CLR Process provides a
variety of treatment options for
wastewater:
. Several operational modes
. Nitrogen and phosphorus
removal capabilities
. An adaptable configuration
The CLR Process is not only simple
to operate, but it provides
maximum flexibility with
consistent high quality effluent.
Lakeside's staff delivers full service from initial concept
through the construction stages and subsequent
operation of the plant. Lakeside will help plants reliably
meet and exceed effluent standards by providing
equipment that requires minimal operator attention and
maintenance.
.i , .,.a{.1* isr . f +,,. .a
' .3.|;
Closed Loop Reactor Configuration
The Closed Loop Reactor (CLR) Process describes a
process, nof the reactor's shape. As shown, the basin
shape can be any one of several including the conventional
racetrack, folded U-shape, or concentric multichannel
designs. The selection of basin size, control and flow
consideration is the key to the CLR Process.
l
I
I
I
t
I
I
II
I
I
2
Closed Loop Reactor Process
The CLH Process is known for its stable operation, minimizing the time
and effort operators need for control or adjustment.
Conventional Secondary Treatment
The CLR Process is a modified form of the
extended aeration, complete mix process. The
design is based on a single sludge system in a
closed loop reactor.
The CLR Process consists of one or more
reactors with a single feed point for raw
wastewater and return sludge. The basic CLR
design uses a simple oval configuration, which
provides a straight line flow pattern for
wastewater between the headworks and
the final clarifiers.
At the core of the CLR Process is the
horizontal, bladed Magna Rotor, which sustains
high concentrations of microorganisms in the
channel to maintain process control. The
system offers simple control of oxygen input
through adjustment of rotor immersion by raising
or lowering a weir.
The CLR Process is known for its stable operation,
which minimizes the time and effot operators need
to control or adjust the system. Even in cold
weather conditions when microorganism
activify is decreased, the process
operates efficiently without
special aftention.
A key component to
successful operation
of the CLR Process is
the final clarifier.
Lakeside's Spirafl o Clarifi er
uses a peripheral-feed tlow
technology proven to be
superior for effective
solids separation.
CLR Process Modifications
To provide maximum flexibility with two or more reactors, the system can be designed to operate in
parallel, series or peak flow mode. Operational control is provided by a splitter box arrangement for both
the raw wastewater and return activated sludge (RAS). Siide gates are typically manually operated. For
more sophisticated process control the slide gates can be electrically activated as flow and load conditions
change.
Parallel, series and peak flow operations offer
operators maximum flexibility.
Parallel Operation
Raw wastewater and return activated sludge are
introduced at a single point in a standard racetrack
CLR basin. Dissolved oxygen content in the mixed
liquor is maintained evenly throughout. Oxygen is
controlled by rotor speed and immersion with the
use of an adjustable weir in each reactor. Simple
operation can provide high levels of BOD, and TSS
removal with effluent NH3-N levels of 1 mg[ or iess.
Series Operation
In series operation, raw wastewater and return
activated sludge enter Reactor No. 1, flow to
Reactor No. 2 and continue over the effluent weir.
To maintain anoxic conditions for denitrification in
Reactor No. 1, rotor speed and immersion are
controlled to match oxygen demand. Oxygen levels
in Reactor No. 2 are maintained in aerobic
conditions through control of individual rotor speeds
and immersion.
Peak Flow Hydraulic Capacity
During peak flow conditions, solids from the
reactor basin travel rapidly to the final clarifiers. If
this rate exceeds the returned solids rate, clarifier
solids washout will occur. To prevent solids
washout, Lakeside's peak flow operation introduces
raw wastewater into Reactor No. 2 and return
activated sludge into ReactorNo. 1. Retum activated
sludge from Reactor No. 1 is then fed to Reactor No.
2 at the sarne rate it is pumped from the clarifier
which maintains the solids balance. During peak flow
conditions, the return activated siudge is maintained
in a highly aerated condition ready to return to
normal operation when the peak flow conditions
subside.
Parallel
ff?tfr'lfiiEffiEffi
. - E!4ELi ditl{gw;+ r"l{
-
Return-Actirit.dsfi
-
mlre-{tf'ffffi
t
I
4
,Fil
BNR Total Nitrogen Removal
The CLR Process provides the proper environment for
both nitrifying and denitrifuing organisms. High MLSS
concentration, prolonged hydraulic detention time and
long sludge age (20 or more days) are all conducive to
nitrification. CLR plants consistently produce effluent
NH3-N levels of 1 mg/l or less and can provide total
nitrogen levels as low as 5 mg/I. The denitrification
process recovers 50 percent of the total alkalinitv lost
during the nitrification process and lowers overall
energy costs by reducing oxygen requirements.
The Closed Loop Reactor Process provides the
elements for Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR)
using nonproprietary designs.
Single-Stage Design
Although nitrification and denitrificarion are two
separate processes, both can occur simultaneously in a
single-channel CLR design. Denitrification develops
throughout the reactor in microzones within the sludge
floc particles or through alternate cycles of aerobic and
anoxic zones within the reactor.
MLE Design
In addition to the standard CLR Process operated in
series, a corlmon design modification is known as the
modified Ludzack-Ettinger (MLE) Process. The MLE
Process variation is created by adding a first-stage,
mixed-only anoxic reactor prior to the second-stage
aerobic CLR Process.
Alternating Cycle Design
In the cyclic operational mode, raw wastewater and
return activated sludge are introduced into ReactorNo.
1 which operates under anoxic conditions as shown in
Stage 1. Mixed liquor then flows into Reactor No. 2
where it is processed under aerobic conditions. After a
preset time period, the feed and flow are reversed to
feed Reactor No. 2, which is now operated under
anoxic conditions (shown in stage 2). Mixed liquorthen
flows into Reactor No.1 which now operates under
aerobic conditions. This operational mode adds more
process flexibility when designing a new piant orwhen
upgrading an existing plant.
FT
t-fl
I
I
With single-stage process design, nitrification and
denitrification can occur concurrently.
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
T
t
P
t
Single-Stage Design
MLE Design
BNR Phosphorus Removal
All aerobic biological processes remove some
phosphorus. Conventional secondary
biological treatment systems use soluble
phosphorus from the wastewater to synthesize
new bacterial cells. The phosphorus is removed
from the system with the.waste sludge. Typical
phosphorus removal from cell synthesis ranges
from 10 to 30 percent.
Enhanced BNR Phosphorus Removal
Enhanced biological phosphorus removal
occurs in the CLR Process with the addition of
anaerobic and anoxic stages ahead of the
aeration basin. The anaerobic stage promotes
the growth of phosphorus removing bacteria.
By introducing raw influent and returned activated
sludge (RAS) into the anaerobic tank, phosphorus
removing bacteria release stored phosphorus for
energy production and use the energy to take up
easily degradable BOD5. When these bacteria pass
into the aeration tank, they oxidize the stored BOD,
for energy to take up excess phosphorus and
synthesize new cells. The stored excess phosphorus
in the bacterial cells is removed with the waste sludge
which results in a net phosphorus
removal from the wastewater.
High Removal Efficiency
A typical flow diagram for a
biological nutrient removal
modification of the CLR Process
includes an anaerobic stage, anoxic
stage and aerobic stage. The BNR
process provides bioiogical nitrogen
as well as phosphorus removal. By
recycling mixed liquor from the aerobic to the
anoxic stage, biologicai nitrogen rernoval occurs and
reduces nitrate levels in both the returned activated
sludge and plant effluent. With typical average
influent phosphorus and BOD, levels of 6-7 mg/l and
200-240 mg/l respectively, the BNR modification can
produce an effluent phosphorus level of I mg/l
without chemical addition.
Enhanced BNR phosphorus removal occurs in a Closed Loop
Reactor with the addition of anaerobic and anoxic stages ahead of
the aeration basin
t
(
BNR Modlficatlon of CLR Process
6
L
IF
Fil
L
*
flt
il
ilt
fl
F
flI
Chemical Phosphorous Removal
Chemical Feed Backup
Chemical treatment for phosphorous removal
provides the flexibility for increased reliability in
meeting effluent requirements. To account for
biological upsets that prevent continuous
phosphorous removal, backup chemical treatment
systems should be installed in each BNR plant.
Treatment plants faced with stringent effluent
phosphorous limitations of 0.5 mg/l or less also
use chemical teatment for polishing.
Small Plant Process
With more complex processes like BNR systems,
smaller facilities may choose a simpler process.
Chemical treatment systems for primary removal
of phosphorous offer an easy-to-operate, reliable
means to consistently meet effluent limitations.
Process Components
Magna Rotor and Mixer Combination
Additional process flexibility and enhanced
denitrification capabiiities can be provided through
the addition of slow speed propeller mixers in the
Closed Loop Reactor. Mixers complement Lakeside
Magna Rotors by maintaining liquid velociry when
the rotors are not operating.
Mixers can also reduce power costs in unusuaily
low flow start-up conditions where oxygen
requirements are well below mixing needs. In
denitrification applications, mixer and rotor
operation can be cycled to provide improved
conditions for denitrification.
CLR
Process Components
Magna Rotor
A vital component of the CLR Process is the
horizontal, bladed rotor aerator. The Lakeside
Rotor provides oxygen to the biological mass,
mixes microorganisms uniformly and adds
mixing velocity to the channel to prevent solids
from settling.
Constructed of rugged materials, the rotor offers
reliable operation and high effrciency.
Mixing Requirements
The Magna Rotor with 3-inch wide blades is the
most efficient mixer for Closed Loop Reactor
processes. Velocity control baffles are mounted
downstream of each rotor to prevent excess liquid
velocity generated by the rotating blades. The
baffles direct the flow downward into the basin to
create a rolling motion. This turbulent mixing
ensures the uniform distribution of oxygen
throughout the entire tank contents at all depths.
Structural lntegrity
The Magna Rotor's design allows
a single rotor to span openings up
to 31 feet in width. This design
can save significant costs by
eliminating additional equipment
required to join multiple rotor
assemblies.
The Lakeside blades are die formed
to produce greater stiftress and
rigidity. They are available in rype
304 stainless steel, galvanized steel
or painted carbon steel offering
a range of corrosion resistance
and cost options.
The horizontal Magna Rotor is the most efficient mixer for
Closed Loop Reactor processes
Velocity control baffles
direct the flow
downward creating a
rolling motion to ensure
uniiorm distribution of
oxygen throughout
the tank.
(
(
8
r
F
fl
Fil.
[,
ilp
EIla
E
El
Ht
t*
Fl
tt**
&t
h
B
Oxygen Transfer Abi I ity
The Magna Rotor provides an oxygen transfer range
greater than any other mechanical surface aerator.
The Rotor's wide range of oxygen transfer allows
the plant operator maximum flexibility to provide
oxygen input (horsepower) to match the demand of
the system without the need to reverse direction of
rotation.
Oxygen Transfer Efficiency
As with all aeration devices, transfer efficiency
varies with transfer rate. With the proper
combination of speed and immersion, optimum
performance can be maintained to match virtually any
set of loading conditions. Optimum performance
assures the lowest operating power cost throufhout
the life of the equipment.
-.1
324
2.65'
1.96
LakB8ido Magna Roto,
I A6rato. Ols
I VertlelTirrbino
'R.qul6 lming dletld ot dl* rcbtion
The chart above illustrates the oxygen delivery range
available with the Lakeside Magna Rotor as
compared to its competitors when operating at a
single speed. The rotor can offer an oxygen
delivery range in excess of 61o-1 when both speed
and immersion are changed.
The chafts below and at left provide values for oxygen
transfer, horsepower and efficiency using the entire
operating range of speeds and immersions. At normal
operating ranges the Lakeside bladed rotor provides
efficiencies of 3.0 to 3.5 lb O2/bhp per hour
=i6
=
o:
oo
o
o
o
6G
2,
1.
Oxygen Transfer Efficiency
42 ft. Magna Rotoi
Power Requirements
42 ft. Magna Rotor
Oxidation Capacity
42 ft. Magna Rotor
Process Components
Magna Rotor
Type D Mounting
The mounting arrangement of Lakeside aeration
equipment provides a clean work area free from splash
and offers operating personnel easy access to all
moving components. Splash walls and effective
sealing around the rotating shafts limit intrusion or
leakage of mixed liquor into the work area. A
removable stub shaft design allows replacement in
the field while permitting the rotor assembly to
remain in position.
Shaft MountedNariable Speed Drive
Each Lakeside rotor is independently supported on
both ends by base mounted, pillow block bearings.
This allows the use of rugged, compact,The drive mounting design provides a "clean" work area
splash.
shaft-mounted speed reducers. The
use of a V-belt drive coupled with
shaft-mounted reducers provides
maximum flexibility for speed
changes. For projects requiring
frequent and wide variations in
oxygen input, variable speed drives
or two-speed motors can be
provided.
Rotor Covers
Lakeside Rotor Covers provide an attractive
addition to many CLR plants. Rotor Covers are
especially useful for plants with special needs such
as: location in an extremely cold area where
containing rotor spray will reduce icingproblems and
heat loss, problems with windblown spray caused by
frequent high winds or a plant close to a residential
area.
Lakeside rotor covers are constmcted of light'weight
but sturdy fiberglass panels. Each panei is hinged for
easy access.
The Type E Rotor Cover is significantly larger than
other types of covers. Because this larger cover
extends beyond the baffle, it provides increased
effectiveness in trapping spray and mist.
(
I
Rotor covers provide a useful and attractive addition to any plant.
10
1
t
C
I
I
F
F
II*l
h
flr
E
F
E@E
El
El
El
rg
Et
EIt
ir
fil
nfltr
F
Adjustable Weirs
The easy-to-adjustweirs control liquid depth within
the CLR channel. By adjusting the weir level and
therefore the rotor blade immersion, the operator
can control the oxygen input into the channel to
match acfual oxygen demands. Excess oxygen
wastes power. Lakeside's weir, properly designed
with sufficient length, minimizes fluctuations in
head over the weir.
Controls for the motorized weir can be linked to
the total plant control system for continuous
positive control of dissolved oxygen.Through adjustment of the weir the operator can control oxygen input
to match actual oxygen demand.
Spiraflo Clarifiers
Key to successful operation of the CLR
Process is the performance of the
secondary clarifier that follows the CLR
basin. The Lakeside Spiraflo Clarifier
incorporates proven concepts in circulation,
sedimentation and separation technology
necessary to maintain high quality effluent
standards.
The Spiraflo Clarifier employs a peripheral-
feed flow pattern to make use of the total
tank volume for more effective solids
settling. Wastewater enters the Spiraflo at
the outer diameter of the tank. The flow
distributes eveniy into the center section
near the floor level and then rises towards
centrally located effluent weirs.
This spiraling flow pattern around and
under the skirt eliminates short circuiting and
ensures maximum use of the entire tank
volume.
The Spiraflo Clarifier
uses proven concepts
and technology to
maintain high quality
effluent standards.
It
Complete Plant Control
Lakeside offers full-service system integration for
complete plant control in addition to offering D.O.
and process control systems for the CLR plants. The
Lakeside project system manager will work with a
group of speci+lists using the latest technology to
provide a reliable, cost-effective control solution to
meet your project's specific needs. For the complete
plant design we can assist the design consultant with
system process and instrumentation diagrams, and
SCADA and PLC specifications and block diagrams.
The Pr C control system for the CLR process is
readily adapted to any project. It can be expanded to
include chart recorders, alarm annunciators, control
switches and graphic displays for any level of
sophistication. Each control system solution
combines current technology with Lakeside's
thirty-five years of CLR process experience. It
continuously monitors and adjusts the operation of
the biological reactors to enhance process
performance and reduce power costs and equipment
operating hours. CLR control panels are SCADA
ready for simple connection to existing or future
systems.
Typical Screen.
A plant SCADA system monitors and controls the
various plant processes while storing relevant data.
This real-time data along with manually-entered
laboratory data is used to generate state-required
reports on plant performance in water quality and
accountability. Trending of ail process variables is
also available. The SCADA system tracks run times
and starts and stops of all connected equipment for
use with preventive maintenance and trouble
shooting programs. This system can also provide
complete alarm monitoring for local viewing and/or
alarm notification to remote location. Customized
graphic display screens provide a user friendly en-
vironment for the operator. Also, with modem capa-
bilities, Lakeside's technology and process experts
are available to help plant personnel with process
optimization.
The monitoring, control and additional intbrmation
avaiiable with the SCADA system enable the
operator to reduce time and paper work while
maintaining peak plant perforrnance.
#l:,#SESIDE: ionsincctezE Lakeside@oration
Overall Plant Screen.
10228. Devon . P.O. Box 8448 . Bartlett, IL 60103 .6301837-5640. FAX: 6301837-5647 . E-mail: sales@lakeside-equipment.com
tl
'--i-,- i. ,. .r. 1
t-
II
I
r
r.'
'
IT
#LAI(ESIDE
W,
lliuart\u.ificttion,liact tg2S
Lakeside Equipment Corporation
November 27,2002
Zancanella & As s oc i ates
1005 Cooper Avenue
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81602
ATTENTION:
SUBJECT:
Thomas Zancanella, P .8.
Rock Gardens Project, Colorado
Closed Loop Reactor (CLR) Process - E.A. Aerotor
Dear Mr. Zancanella:
I would like to thank you for your request for a preliminary design for a treatment system for the HLary F project in
Colorado. For this application Lakeside is recommending one (1) E.A. Aerotor Plant Model lzl35l\/frv1 The E.A. Aerotor
Model 12135 is designed to accommodate an average daily flow of 0.025 mgd.
E.A. AEROTOR
Our E.A. Aerotor (EAA) plant incorporates a circular reactor equipped with our 42-inch diameter hoizontalbrush Magna
Rotors. The reactor is wrapped around a Spiraflo penpheral feed final clanfier. The reactor liquid level is controlled by an
effluent weir, which permits control of the rotor blade immersion and subsequent oxygen delivery.
'Ihe E.A. Aerotor can provide effective secondary biological treatment with BOD5 and TSS reductions of 92 to 98o/o.
Effluent BOD5 and TSS concentrations of less than 10 mgll are the norm for CLR systems. The hydraulic detention time
provided in the reactor, along with the excellent mixing capabilities of the Magna Rotors makes it possible to carry MLSS
concentrations from 1,500 to 5,000 mg/l. Food to microorganism ratio is low, ranging from 0.03 to 0.I lbs. BOD5/dayilb
VSS. This provides a large microbial mass in the reactor so that variations in loading and shock loads are readily absorbed
by the system' Nitrification of ammonia and organic nitrogen is virnrally complete with normal operation. Effluent
ammonia levels of 1 mg/l or less are common. With high solids concentrations in the reactor, the process provides a sludge
age of more than 30 days. Such a long sludge retention time ailows for complete nitrification of ammonia.
When operated properly, virtually complete nitnfication of ammonia and organic nitrogen can be accomplished throughout
the year regardless of the air and wastewater temperature. The E.A. Aerotor can also be configured to allow for
denitnfication when total nitrogen or nitrate removal is required. Denitnfication can also be used to recover alkalinity lost
during nitrification and for energy conservation, which results in cost savings for the treatment facility.
OXYGEN REQUIREMENTS
To supply the oxygen requirements for the E.A. Aerotor plant we have selected one (1) 8-ft long Magna Rotor per unir,
with 4-ft of 304 stainless steel blades andT .5 hp drive.
Rock Gardens ect, Colorado December 20,2002
Loadings were determined using 250 mgll BOD, 250 mgll TSS, and 29 mgllTKN at rhe average day flow of 0.025 mgd.
The design Actual Oxygen Transfer Requirement (AOTR) for the average day is 106 lb of oxygen per day. AOTR is then
converted to Standard Oxygen Transfer Requirement (SOTR) of 229 lb of oxygen per day using an alpha value of 0.90,
beta value of 0.95, a theta value of 1.024, operating dissolved oxygen concentrationof 2 mgll,and an altitude of 7,000 ft
above sea level. At the average day 0.025 mgd design conditions, the Magna Rotors would operate at approximately 8.4
inches immersion at 55 rpm.
VELOCITY CONTROL BAFFLES
The Lakeside Magna Rotor is the most efficient mtxer there is for a closed loop reactor. Therefore, bulk liquid velocities
can reach over 3 fVsec in some cases. Velocity control baffles are used to convert excess bulk liquid velocity to more
turbulent mixing by increasing the vorticity component of the Reynolds Number (Re). The velocity control baffles are
adjustable from 15 to 60 degrees from horizontal.
ROTOR COVERS
To eliminate spray in the rotor area, we include for each rotor our Type "E" fiberglass rotor cover descnbed in Bulletin
141 1. L: addition to minimiang mrsting and spray from the rotor, this insures a clean working environment for the
operator, which increases the likelihood that proper servicing of the rotor will take place, even on a windy day. The cover
also reduces heat loss dunng winter operation. Our rotor covers are built in hinged sections that can be lifted as shown for
ease of inspection. ln addition, the rotor covers extend downstream of the flow control baffle.
EFFLUENT WEIR ASSEMBLY
Each Rotor is designed to operate with an approximate 1.5-inch allowance for diurnal aeration basin variations without
overloading the motor. The suggested Magna Rotor drives are sized to handle this situation. To provide adjustment of
Magna Rotor immersion we are recomrnending the use of az-ft weir gate assembly.
FINAL CLAR!FICATION
We have sized the final clarifier to have a hydraulic loading rate of 221gallons per square foot per day at the daily average
flow of 0.025 mgd with a hydraulic detention time of 9.8 hours at the flow of 0.025 mgd. The Spiraflo Clarifier will have a
12-ft diameter with a l1-ft side water depth.
The Lakeside Spiraflo Clarifier has a hydraulic efficiency of 2 to 4 times that of a centff feed clanfier. This hydraulic
superiority has been the key to the operating success of the over 1,500 Lakeside CLR plants worldwide.
When compared to conventional center feed clarifiers, the Lakeside Spiraflo Clanfier installation costs are typically lower.
This is primarily due to the fact that the Lakeside Spiraflo Clanfier, although slightlymore costlybased on equipment only,
can be easily installed in a circuiar tank and does not require cantilevered concrete or steel weir toughs as typically utilized
wrth a center feed design. Our pricing for the Lakeside Spiraflo Clarifier also includes the weir troughs, weirs, and baffles,
which typically must be added to the pnce of a center, feed cianfier.
SLUDGE HOLDING TANK
Based on the 0.025 mgd average flow design criteria for this application, the required sludge storage capacity of 20 days is
approximately 18,500 gallons. The sludge holding tank can be constructed as part of the common wail structure of the E.A.
Aerotor Plant. The holding tank would have an approximate dimension of 15-ft width x 15-ft length x 1 1.0-ft sidewater
depth. Lakeside can provrde pricing for the holding tank aeration if desired.
Rock Gardens Pro.ject, Colorado -3 -December 20,2002
BUDGET PRICING
Model 1 2/3 5 E.A. Aerotor Plant for concrete tankage (by others) - Items, which are included in the E.A. Aerotor package,
are as follows:
I . One ( I ) 1 2-ft Spiraflo Clarifier with bridge, effluent weirs and weir troughs
2. One (1) 8-ft Magna Rotor with 4-ft of 304 stainless steel blades and 7.5 hp drive assembly
3. One (1) velocity control baffle
4. One (1) hinged fiberglass rotor cover
5. One (1) rotor access bridge with ladder
6. One (1) 2-ft Weir Gate
7. Two (2) airlift assemblies (one 3-in RAS and one 3-in scum)
8. One (1) blower package
9. One (1) manual bar screen
10. One (1) NEMA 4X Electrical Control Panel
11. Shop Painting of all ferrous parts
12. Start-up service and training
13. FOB our factory with full freight allowed to the project site
Total Budget Price For E.A Aerotor Package: $95,000
Approximate Shipping Weight: 10,000Ib
SUMMARY
In summary, the Lakeside E.A. Aerotor can offer your client a complete package of enhanced treatment performance with a
compact energy efficient design wrth easy operation and low O&M cost.
DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS
As this project moves forward, Lakeside can provide additional information concerning the design of the E.A Aerotor. We
can furnish drawings on floppy disk or via e-mail in a DXF format which is suitable for translation into CAD systems.
Specifications can also be fumished on floppy disk or via e-mail translated to any standard word processing software.
I hope this information fills your needs and if further information or assistance is needed, do not hesitate to contact this
office.
Sincerely,
Lakeside Equipment Corporation
-1-'t-7-/<-(_/
Jim McKee
cc: Steve Hansen-Goble Sampson Associates
@a
9P
EH
5
Ef
oo5<a\
53rEF.-gi
4<.S.-
Io
H
@{<ir
E+g*
B
F
EH
B*-
E
<
*=
AE
F
Ff,
s
HE
Ef,
rslE
iEIE
EBIF
IHIF
EE
qd
H*
EO
9!:
HE
It
@N{r'
FO
Egl|lo
FI
C,l(Jl
t-c)I
o
P
rn
Hao-tov
-E
trz.
vo6iR
6)
nc,rfi
=.a
T'7o
tnC,
()o
EEEElE
,HE'EH