Leisure Lake Membership Association

“Fresh Water Act”

 

Options and Proposal for Improving and Updating the Small Public Water System 

 

The current system does not address hardness, except in the clubhouse, pool building, and two bathrooms. These locations have standalone water softeners, leaving the rest of the campground to experience the high levels of hardness. The iron is going to be one of the biggest complaints currently. When chlorine is introduced at the beginning of the water system, the chlorine will oxidize the iron and convert if from a dissolved or clear iron, into an oxidized or red water iron. This red water will show up throughout the campground. This oxidized iron is what will plug up the filters, both the filters that are maintained by LLMA as well as any individual filters. Manganese will also be oxidized by the chlorine. Currently the oxidized manganese will be showing up as blackish sediment and scaling throughout the water system. Manganese has also become one of the more pressing health concerns in recent years. Children under the age of 1 years old have high sensitivity to adverse health effects from manganese. 

 

The current design of the water system does not address the requirements of EPA nor the industry practice of having contact time for the chlorine before water is sent to distribution. Currently the chlorine is injected and immediately pumped to distribution. This results in shorter time than required/desired contact time and an uneven mixing of the chlorine. 

 

One of the aspects that LLMA will have to address with any changes to the public water system is the need to upgrade the water system to essential EPA compliance minimums. These minimums which would be triggered by any system changes would need to address proper contact time for the chlorine (minimum 30 minutes of contact time) and treatment of the manganese. 

 

In designing a system to address these issues, we have prepared the following recommendations: 

·         Run 2” lines to and back from the existing building over to the new building built by 

            others using direction drill and excavate where necessary.

·         Pump controls for the existing well pump will remain in the existing pump building but will be controlled by control wires through a 2” conduit which will be provided between both buildings.

·         Pump the water into the new building, inject with Chlorine, run through Greensand Plus Filters, and store in 1500-gallon polyethylene tank. The system would be designed as a pump and dump system operated by a float system controlling the level in the 1500-gallon tank.

·         Coming out of the 1500-gallon tank there will be two pumps offering duplex/alternating controls. We need these pumps to create the water pressure to both backwash the filters and supply system pressure to the distribution.

·         The two high service flow pumps will be Grundfos CR pumps which are industrial pumps used for many applications offering extreme long life and very low service requirements. I have larger public water systems which have used the CR pumps for over 10 years are still in excellent condition with no service having been required.

·         The high flow service pumps create the pressure at a constant pressure by using variable speed motors. There will be two VFD controllers operating these pumps allowing an alternating or if needed duplex operation. This would allow a backup operation if one high flow service pump were to fail.

·         Chlorination would be controlled by one feed pump (using the existing feed pump owned by LLMA) to inject chlorine before the Greensand Plus filters and another Chlorine feed pump operated by a meter after the Greensand Plus filters prior to the 1500-gallon tank. This would allow control of the chlorine to both provide the continuous oxidation of iron and manganese needed prior to the Greensand and also to control the levels of chlorine prior to the 1500-gallon tank for free chlorine levels required in distribution. The post filter chlorine levels would be controlled by the water meter which would send a signal to a Walchem controller which operates a new Stenner Chlorine feed Pump. 

 

Vendor proposes the following system improvements: Vendor will setup Feed Pump Operated by Well Pump System for Chlorine injection using existing Stenner Feed Pump. Provide, assemble, plumb, start-up (4) 24” Diameter Greensand Filters with Fleck 3150 valves. Plumbing includes individual shut off valves, sampling faucets, pressure gauges, flow controls on outlet of each filter. Provide 4 – Aquamatic valves and solenoids to provide pressurized backwash water to each Greensand Plus filter. Post filtering chlorine injection would be provided by utilizing the existing 2” meter to send a signal to a computerized Walchem controller which would operate a new Stenner Feed Pump and chlorine solution tank. Provide, setup, and install 1500 gallons Polyethylene tank measuring 87” diameter by 67” tall. Floats will be installed in the tank to operate the fill from the submersible controlled by a Hand off Auto box which would send signals to the existing submersible control box. 2 – 3HP Grundfos CR High Service Flow Pumps would re-pressurize the water in alternating or duplex controls. 2 – PID30 Pentek controllers would operate the High Flow Service pumps with transducers for variable frequency control operation of the CR pumps. 2 – 62 gallons Well-Rite pressure tanks would allow individual servicing without shutting down the water supply. Connect to existing distribution. 

 

In any project approved through EPA, there is always the potential that they may require additional specifications that what we have included in the above recommendations. The vendor works very hard to anticipate what EPA may require for our project, including what they may be agreed upon for system size. The vendor has based the system design upon what they refer to as EPA “Green Book” sizing, which is usually always larger than what is needed, along with somewhere in between from what they actually measured on the flow meter which was documented in 2018 season. The design of the system is also based upon the actual pump capabilities of the existing LLMA system. It is understood that there are no actual people records kept by LLMA for the 2018 season per day. The system that we have designed would meet and exceed 200 people per day. The design of the proposed system would treat a continuous 38gpm. It is estimated that during the 2018 season, that there was an average of 5000 gpd usage. Normally that would require a system capable of handling 34gpm according to EPA requirements. One week there was a leak in 2018. That flow would be rated upon a continuous steady amount of water leaking. It was approximately an 8 or 9 gpm leak. That added to the peak demand would need 43gpm. But if we average out the gpm of 17,000 gallons used in a day, that only equals 12gpm. Because we have the 1500-gallon storage tank and production capabilities of 38gpm, we could certainly handle peak flows of up to 100 gpm with the high flow service pumps. The vendor estimates the campground at 200 people max in a day, they would according to EPA Greenbook need 49gpm. They will plan to go to EPA and propose a 38gpm system design. The vendor plans to use the logged data provide from the 2018 season. 

 

One important point for LLMA to realize is that the vendor could go to EPA, get the treatment system proposed approved, and have EPA upgrade this system to a Class 1 facility. A Class 1 facility is a treatment facility that removes a contaminant. Since they are planning to remove iron, by default they will be removing manganese. Manganese in Ohio is considered a contaminant over 50ppb or 300ppb depending upon the interpretation. Either way, we’re going to be over that level. A class 1 system requires a licensed Class 1 operator to visit the system 3 days per week. The advantages are that we would not have to worry about anything with our water system because an operator would pretty much handle all the testing (except the daily chlorine reading that we are currently already doing), as well as the maintenance of the system.  The vendor does have 3 - Class 1 operators within the company. The vendor would recommend that with our approval they could approach EPA and try to get a determination ahead of time how they would view our system and if it is anticipated how they would rate the water system.

 

Please note that there are additional costs that LLMA will incur for this project. There will be a need for a building to house this equipment. We anticipate that a 20 or 25’ square building would contain everything that needs to go into this project. Based upon the final needs of the system, we will design a drawing to show where everything would fit within the building and the final building size needed. There will also need to be electrical work needed for this project. This includes but is not limited to the service, the breaker box, lighting, heating, and electrical between the breaker box and the pump controls as well as electrical outlets needed for the treatment equipment. You will need to have sewer hook-up or floor drains/catch basins.

 

EPA may also specify additional testing beyond what the vendor has already performed.

 

In conclusion – The water provided to Leisure Lake is from a well which has been tested to contain Hardness at 35 grains per gallon, Iron at 2.8 ppm, and Manganese at 440ppb.  The proposed treatment will remove the iron and manganese to levels that are below 0.3 ppm of iron and below 50 ppb of manganese.  Iron and Manganese are some of the most objectionable issues to deal with by each user.  When iron is oxidized by the chlorine with the current setup, you can’t just add a water softener to make the water great.  Removing the iron and Manganese will allow the water softeners to function at their best by not loading them up with oxidized iron and manganese.  With the proposed treatment system, water users will be able to hook up to the camp sites and experience stain free water that is clear. Campers may want to provide additional treatment by adding their own water softeners to remove the hardness to further improve the water quality for preventing hard water scale or add additional filter(s) for drinking water purposes.  On a scale of 1-10, ten (10) being the worse scenario we are at a heavy nine (9), after water upgrade, we will be at a level 3 on the scale.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chart below details the cost of the proposed “Fresh Water Act”

 

Qty

Description

Unit Price

Line Total

1.00

Water System Upgrade

 $                 65,000.00

 $              65,000.00

1.00

24 x 24 Block Building

                    15,000.00

                15,000.00

1.00

Electric and sewer/drains

                      9,000.00

                  9,000.00

1.00

EPA additional testing

                      1,500.00

                  1,500.00

1.00

Building permits

                      400.00

                  400.00

1.00

 10% for unforeseen contingencies for the nature of the project

9090.00

9090.00

 

 

 

 

 

Total

 $              99,990.00

 

 

·         The time frame to complete this project is estimated at 24 months (2 years). 

·         The yearly maintenance and EPA reporting from the vendor is estimated at $3,184.00.  This would replace what we are currently paying - $3250.10 for maintenance and EPA reporting.

·         To accomplish all of this, a total of $400.00 in assessments will be due for EACH LOT.  This will be payable in two (2) installments of $200.00 each, the first installment due December 1, 2019, and the second due May 1, 2020.