XCG File #1-1751-01-02 - Bay of Quinte Remedial Action Plan
Transcription
XCG File #1-1751-01-02 - Bay of Quinte Remedial Action Plan
XCG EXCELLENCE IN ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING SERVICES XCG File #1-1751-01-02 May 25, 2005 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM BAY OF QUINTE DRINKING WATER TASTE AND ODOUR SURVEY Prepared for: BAY OF QUINTE REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN RESTORATION COUNCIL 714 Murray Street, RR#1 Trenton, ON K8V 5P4 Attention: Mr. Barry Jones XCG Consultants Ltd. 33 Earl Street Kingston, ON Canada K7L2G4 Tel: (613) 542-5888 Fax: (613) 542-0844 E-mail: [email protected] 1M117S10l02F_o50525 Bay of Quinte Drinking Water Taste and Odour Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Bay of Quinte Remedial Action Plan Restoration Council has commissioned this study in an effort to determine whether taste and odour problems in Bay of Quinte drinking water still constitute an impaired beneficial use (mU). Note: the International Joint commission (IJC) website, uses the terminology BUI (Beneficial Use Impairment). Taste and Odour was identified as one of ten mus in the Bay of Quinte Remedial Action Plan (Bay of Quinte Coordinating Committee, 1993). The condition was then associated with high levels of nutrients and algae. A recent study (Quinte Conservation, 2003) failed to find a sufficient reduction in nutrient levels (total phosphorous) to reach the conclusion that taste and odour problems no longer constitute an mu. The report recommended a survey of end users to obtain their perception of municipal drinking water taste and odour. The purpose of the present study was, therefore, to survey customers of municipal drinking water supplies in the Bay of Quinte to determine whether this continues to be an mu. Initially, the municipalities of Qninte West (Bayside), Belleville and Deseronto were identified. Subsequently, Picton was added. The results of the survey and water treatment plant comparison are described in this report. A telephone survey was designed which included questions regarding the length of time the users had lived at their present location and whether they drank the water untreated. As well, XCG obtained water distribution maps and located the respondent as either near the water plant or at the extremity since water quality changes throughout the distribution system. A total of 30 complete responses were considered an adequate sample size for each surveyed municipality; however, in the case of Belleville, additional responses were obtained, for a total of 47. Therefore, for the four municipalities, a total of 137 survey responses were obtained. Of the total number of respondents across the four municipalities, 59 identified taste and odour as an issue. At 43% of the total respondents, this is a significant number. However, of the 59 several (7) nO longer have a problem and a significant number of the remaining 52 report chlorine as the source of the taste and odour. The highest incidence of taste and odour complaints was found in the municipalities of Belleville and Picton, with a lower incidence rate in Deseronto and Quinte West (Bayside). In Belleville, more than half (53%) of the respondents reported issues with taste and odour in their drinking water. However, it should be noted that the survey found most complaints related to chlorine, rather than the taste and odour associated with the presence of organics. As part of this stndy, visits Were made to four municipal water treatment plants in order to document installed equipment, processes and procedures and to note any taste and odour complaints received by plant staff. From the plant visits it is evident that there are equipment and treatment methods in place to deal with taste and odour issues. The Belleville and Bayside plants are now 'state of the art', making TMl17510102F_o50525 1 Bay of Quinte Drinking Water Taste and Odour Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM any comparison with earlier reports of taste and odour problems meaningless. The Deseronto plant however has changed little since the original construction in 1976. From an examination of the survey data, the study concluded that taste and odour impairment of drinking water in the Bay of Quinte is not a restored beneficial use. From an examination of water plant equipment and operations, there is no obvious evidence of an mu. The equipment in place in the plants visited is no more extensive or elaborate than that elsewhere in the Great Lakes. Similarly operations such as the addition of powder activated carbon (PAC) are not unusual. However, the processes in place have not resulted in the elimination of, or a reduction in taste and odour problems, therefore the issue of mu remains. The results of the survey suggest that the taste and odour problems at all plants were currently not a major concern to the respondents and not dissimilar to reports from other communities bordering the Great Lakes. Therefore, while the mu continues, further investment in process change may not be warranted from a costlbenefit or health perspective unless the presence of harmful substances becomes evident. II TMl175I0102F_050525 Bay of Quinte Drinking Water Taste and Odour Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... i Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................... iii Figures ............................................................................................................................................ iii Appendices ..................................................................................................................................... iii 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 1 2. BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................2 2.1 3. Assessment of the Bay of Quinte Taste and Odour Impaired Beneficial Use ........ 3 TASTE AND ODOUR SURVEY ...............................................................................................4 3.1 Task 1: Results of User Survey ................................................................................5 3.2 Task 2: Water Plant Visits ....................................................................................... 8 4. TASTE AND ODOUR ISSUES IN THE GREAT LAKES ........................................................... 14 5. CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................... 15 6. RECOMMENDATIONS ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 15 7. REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................... 16 FIGURES Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 1996 to 2001 Phosphorus Levels ............................................................................ 4 Chemical Usage ...................................................................................................... 4 Identification of Taste and Odour in Municipal Drinking Water ........................... 6 Improvement in Taste and Odour in Municipal Drinking Water ........................... 7 Numbers with Improved Water Quality with Additional Treatment.. .................... 8 ApPENDICES Appendix A Appendix Bl AppendixB2 AppendixB3 AppendixB4 TM117510102F_o50525 Telephone Survey Form Belleville Survey Results Picton Survey Results Deseronto Survey Results Quinte West (Bayside) Survey Results iii Bay of Quinte Drinking Water Taste and Odour Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 1. INTRODUCTION The Bay of Quinte Restoration Council has commissioned this study in an effort to detennine whether taste and odour problems in Bay of Quinte drinking water still constitute an impaired beneficial use (IBU). Note: the International Joint commission (Ile) website, uses the terminology BUI (Beneficial Use Impairment). Taste and Odour was identified as one of ten IBUs in the Bay of Quinte Remedial Action Plan (Bay of Quinte Coordinating Committee, 1993). The condition was tben associated with high levels of nutrients and algae. The 1993 report set the goal: To restore and maintain the trophic status of the Bay of Quinte so that phytoplankton densities are reduced, taste and odour problems in drinking water are improved and the trophic status of the bay is similar to the 1930s condition. l A recent study (Quinte Conservation, 2003) failed to find a sufficient reduction in phosphorous levels to reach the conclusion that taste and odour problems no longer constitute an IBU. The report recommended a survey of end users to obtain their perception of municipal drinking water taste and odour. The purpose of tbe present study is, tberefore, to survey customers of municipal drinking water supplies in the Bay of Quinte to determine whether this continues to be an IBU. In 1991, tbe International Joint Commission approved guidelines for delisting Areas of Concern. The intent of these guidelines was to serve as an initial reference point on which to base the development of appropriate restoration criteria (UC, 2004a). The guidelines for drinking water consumption were as follows: L. 1. when densities of disease-causing organisms or concentrations of hazardous or toxic chemicals or radioactive substances do not exceed human health objectives, standards or guidelines; 2. when taste and odour problems are absent; and 3. when treatment needed to make raw water suitable for drinking does not exceed the standard treatment used in comparable portions of the Great Lakes which are not degraded (i.e., settling, coagulation, disinfection). In order to be satisfied that any remaining taste and odour problem is not simply a process or equipment problem, the study includes visits to each of the Bay of Quinte water plants to document equipment and processes. Since 1991, local RAP groups have developed restoration targets for tbeir Areas of Concern. In the Bay of Quinte, the IBU Delisting Target related to restrictions on drinking water consumption is as follows (UC, 2004b): Maintain all treated drinking water supplies in compliance with Provincial Drinking Water Objectives and improve the palatability of TM117510102F_OS0525 1 Bay of Quinte Drinking Water Taste and Odour Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM drinking water drawn from the bay by reducing the biomass of taste and odour causing algae. 2. BACKGROUND Taste and odour problems can be caused by the presence of a number of compounds in the raw water: • organisms including phytoplankton which can produce methyl-iso-bomeal (MID), geosmin and tricholoro-anisole • phenols • benzene compounds • trihalomethanes (THM) • other (rarer) organic compounds • chlorine The level for human detection varies and is generally much lower than drinking water standards. For example, geosmin can be detected at 2.0 ppt, MID at 4 ppt, yet the safe limits are many times these levels. A common description of their presence is an earthy or musty flavour or odour. There is also evidence that zebra mussels contribute to taste and odour problems either by causing changes in the phytopolankton community or through faeces (L'ltalien et al, 1998). The presence of taste and odour in water supplies is increasing in many areas including the Great Lakes. The offending compounds are produced by organisms such as algae, bacteria, fungi, and protoza (Charlton et al, 2000). While high nutrient levels are known to contribute to algae blooms and to the production of these compounds, recent occurr~nces in the Great Lakes have been with low nutrient levels. While taste and odour appears to be linked to the organisms noted above there is inadequate knowledge regarding triggers or actual source. Because the source could be living species or sediments residing on the bottom or washed into the area of the intake it is difficult to predict occurrences or causes. Additionally, conditions such as temperature, water clarity, the presence of new species (eg. Zebra mussels) and shifts in species population make it difficult to attribute taste and odour to elevated nutrient levels. In the Bay of Quinte, the' major source of the problem in early years has been nutrient enrichment leading to excessive algae production. The literature documents this problem from the early 1900s to the 1980s when a combination of phosphorus reduction and improved water treatment resulted in an improvement in drinking water quality (MOE, 1986). It is recognized, however, that the trophic status of the Bay of Quinte is complex and depends on the inter-relationship among algae, algae-eaters (zooplankton and benthic organisms) and eaters of algae-eaters (fish). 2 1M117510102F_o50525 Bay of Quinte Drinking Water Taste and Odour Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM In choosing the 1930's as an acceptable trophic state, the Bay of Quinte RAP may have picked a target that is difficult to benchmark. There is evidence that the bay was in a highly trophic state by 1904 (MOE, 1986). Problems with algae clogging filters and causing odour were encountered at the Belleville water treatment plant throughout the 1930s. By 1958 renovations including the addition of microstrainers were necessary to deal with the algae. A considerable improvement in the trophic status of the bay beginning in 1977 was noted after the implementation of the ban on phosphorus detergent and improvements in sewage treatment. . 2.1 Assessment of the Bay of Quinte Taste and Odour Impaired Beneficial Use As discussed previously, the 2003 Quinte Conservation study concluded that nutrient levels have not been reduced to levels low enough to eliminate algae production constituting an on-going problem for raw water treatment of drinking water. The study reviewed the delisting targets and objectives used to measure whether the targets had been met: Objective #1: A reduction in algae levels from the base year levels (1989-1994) as anticipated by reduced phosphorous concentrations in the upper Bay of Quinte in the raw water intake at the Belleville water treatment plant. Objective #2: Fewer taste and odour complaints compared to the base year period in the Belleville, Deseronto and Bayside drinking water supplies. Objective #3: A reduction in chemical usage from the base year levels as anticipated by reduced phosphorous concentrations in the upper Bay of Quinte at the Belleville, Deseronto and Bayside water treatment plants. Objective #4: No Ontario Drinking Water Surveillance Program Maximum Exceedence Levels (ODWSP MAC) exceedences reported since 1993. No significant increase in trihalomethane (THM) levels in May of Quinte drinking water from the levels reported in the 1993 Bay of Quinte State 2 Report. Objective #5: No safe level exceedences of THM in Bay of Quinte drinking water at the noted DWSP sampling sites. Extensive analysis was performed on the historical data; as an example Figure 1 below is taken from the 2003 report. It indicates that phosphorous levels are not declining. In another section, chemical usage at water plants (Figure 2) is examined and again no decline is in evidence. Other factors may however explain the result. For example, more chlorine has been used since the Walkerton incident in order to maintain higher residuals. TM117510102F_050525 3 Bay of Quinte Drinking Water Taste and Odour Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Phosphorus Levels in Bay of Quinte Source: DWSP 0.06 I \ 0.051 0.041 con~:;~tion::1 ~~ . jP-S::Ll . / ~ 0.01 F\ " 1-1-------------------1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Year Figure 1 1996 to 2001 Phosphorus Levels - - - - - - - ' 1 4.5 00.0 4 ,., i§; 40.0 .§. II r "" r c: ,., I--Bell-Alum ~ .......... Deser ~ Chlorine ........... S611- Chlorine B 8c 20.0 rl--------- ---------------+11.' 1O.0t-1----------------------j 0.' 0.0 I 1988 f 0 1990 1992 1994 1996 199B 2000 2002 Year Figure 2 Chemical Usage r. . - ' The report could not find data to support progress on this objective (Objective #2: Fewer Taste and Odour Complaints), and for that reason the present study was recommended. 3. TASTE AND ODOUR SURVEY The Bay of Quinte RAP Request for Proposals included the following tasks: 4 TMl17510102F~050525 Bay of Quinte Drinking Water Taste and Odour Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 1. Design a survey to assess public perceptions of municipal drinking water taste and odour as those perceptions have or have not changed since circa 1990. Conduct the survey, evaluate the results and draft a report. The report is to also include complaints of taste and odour received by water treatment plant staff. 2. A brief comparison of water treatment plant processes/technologies used in the upper Bay of Quinte with those processes/technologies considered "standard" in the treatment industry. The objective is to determine if there are any special or additional measures being used by local treatment plants in the Bay to combat algae and associated taste and odour problems. Initially, the municipalities of Quinte West, Belleville and Deseronto were identified. Subsequently, Picton was added. The results of the survey and water treatment plant comparison are described in this report. f.. 3.1 Task 1: Results of User Survey A telephone survey was designed (see Appendix A) to be administered to water customers served by the water utilities in their respective communities The survey included questions regarding the length of time the user had lived at his/her present location and whether he/she drank the water untreated. As well, XCG obtained water distribution maps and located the respondent as either near the water plant or at the extremity since water quality changes throughout the distribution system. For example, chlorine is more likely detected near the plant, colour and sediment at the extremities of the system. A total of 30 complete responses were considered an adequate sample size for each surveyed municipality; however, in the case of Belleville, additional responses were obtained, for a total of 47. Therefore, for the four municipalities, a total of 137 survey responses were obtained. Complete survey results are included in Appendix B. Summary graphics were produced to illustrate the results. For each of the municipalities, the number of respondents who had ever identified taste and odour as an issue with their drinking water were determined. These are presented in Figure 3, both as a percentage of total respondents, and in absolute numbers. TMl17510102F_o50525 5 Bay of Quinte Drinking Water Taste and Odour Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM ~,--T~----'~---' 20 20 rONal ~ 10% 0% I (>'" ',,, Belleville Figure 3 'i,'1 Picton ;1 Deseronto 1";"1 Quinte West Identification of Taste and Odour in Municipal Drinking Water The highest incidence of taste and odour complaints was found in the municipalities of Belleville and Picton, with a lower incidence rate in Deseronto and Quinte West. In Belleville, more than half (53%) of the respondents reported issues with taste and odour in their drinking water. Of the total number of respondents across the four municipalities, 59 identified taste and odour as an issue. At 43% of the total respondents, this is a significant number. A significant number (61 % of all respondents) report chlorine as the nature of the taste and odour. In Picton and Quinte, most (more than 90%) of the complaints related to chlorine. In Deseronto, half the respondents identified chlorine as the source of the taste and odour problems. In Belleville, 36% of the complaints were related to chlorine. Generally, of those respondents who did not mention chlorine as the major issue, the complaint was of a "musty" or "swampy" taste and/or odour, likely the result of elevated algae levels. Therefore, taste and odour issues can be partly related to algae in Deseronto and Belleville, but not in Picton and Quinte, where the vast majority of complaints are related to chlorine. For the 59 respondents who did identify taste and odour in their water, the question was asked whether taste and odour continues to be a problem. The results are illustrated in Figure 4, again as both a percentage and absolute number of respondents. 6 TMl17510102F_o50525 Bay of Quinte Drinking Water Taste and Odour Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 100% - '~-'~"~~~"~~-'-r---r--------r-----"I-~---------'-'---------' 90% 80% 70% .. ..., ~ 'tJ t:: 0 Q. a: '0 ..,. 60% 50% I <i J------j 40% DYes I 0 No 30% 20% (" 10% 0% Belleville Figure 4 Picton Deseronto Quinte West Improvement in Taste and Odour in Municipal Drinking Water For each municipality, the results are quite consistent; a range of 80 to 90% of the respondents who identified taste and odonr in their drinking water in the past still consider it to be an issue. As a whole, 52 of the respondents (38% of those surveyed) are still experiencing taste and odonr problems. L t. Only seven respondents who had experienced taste and odour issues in the past reported an improvement in their water quality. As illustrated in Figure 5, of these, almost half (three respondents) had added treatment to their water system, such as filtering, that may have contributed to the improved taste and odonr. Only four of the respondents (two in Belleville, and one in each of Deseronto and Quinte West) reported improved water quality without additional treatment. These may be attributable to the general improvement in Bay of Quinte raw water qUality. ~117510102F_050525 7 Bay of Quinte Drinking Water Taste and Odour Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM 100% . ~"-'-'-'~-"-"-r-----l 90% 80% 2 70% J!l i ~ 60% 50% 1 I ".I '0 .... I DYes r 30% -l---------I i ,: 20% +--I':P";' 0% I F" ,'I Belleville Figure 5 I • Picton F"; , 1 Deseronto 1--1 F;;'; ';, 1 Quinte West I DNo ;1 Total Numbers with Improved Water Quality with Additional Treatment The water survey results lend some support to the conclusions reached by Quinte Conservation (2003), but generally only in Belleville and Deseronto. In these municipalities, the survey results suggest that there has not been a reduction in taste and odour causing algae. In Picton and Quinte, the taste and odour complaints are dominated by chlorine, so no conclusions can be reached about any possible reduction in taste and odour causing algae. Regardless of the nature of the complaint, with 30 to 50% of respondents reporting a problem with taste and odour in their drinking water, and only approximately 10% reporting any improvement, it is evident that drinking water is still impaired in the Bay of Quinte. Therefore taste and odour problems in Bay of Quinte drinking water still constitute an mu; further progress is required to delist the Bay based on the 1989-1994 base year target. 3.2 Task 2: Water Plant Visits As part of this study, visits were made to four municipal water treatment plants. The purpose of the visits was to: I. Document installed' equipment, processes and procedures to determine whether the plant operation is typical of a Great Lakes water source plant or whether specialized equipment is in place to deal with taste and odour problems. 2. Record any taste and odour problems received by plant staff. The results ofthe plant visits are summarized below. 8 TM117510102F_050525 Bay of Quinte Drinking Water Taste and Odour Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Bayside Owned and operated by the Municipality of Quinte West Contact: Mr. Steve McDonald, Manager of Plants Date of Visit: September 9, 2004 Plant Description: The Bayside water treatment plant is a fairly new facility (1995) with a capacity of 11,300 m 3/d. However, the current water demand is less than half of the plant capacity; the plant is usually in operation for about 8 hours per day. The intake is 370 m long. The original treatment plant design included manual screens and a travelling screen, a micros trainer for algae removal, ozone, coagulation, three-stage flocculation, sedimentation, filtration through anthracite/sand filters and granular activated carbon (GAC) contactors. Both ozone and GAC provide taste and odour control. Chlorine is used for disinfection (inactivation). The microstrainer has not been in use since the City of Quinte West took over operation of the plant. The ozone is also no longer used, and the owner is applying to have ozone removed from the Certificate of Approval. Chemicals Used: • Coagulant - Alum TMl17510102F_o50525 • Chlorine (sodium hypochlorite) - used for disinfection inactivation, not used for zebra mussel control • Fluoride - hydrofluosilicic acid 9 Bay of Quinte Drinking Water Taste and Odour Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Comments from Staff (Taste&Odour, Raw Water, Operations, Chemical Use): The travelling screen is currently out of service; the manual screens are cleaned only about twice per year, indicating that algae build-up on the screens is not a problem. The lack of use of the microstrainer is also an indication that the concentration of algae in the raw water is low. The filters are backwashed twice per week, usually based on time in service rather than headloss or turbidity breakthrough. The GAC has not been changed since the plant was commissioned (9 years), and is due to be changed next year. The current owners have not needed to use the ozone system. The operator reported that very few taste and odour complaints are received, and rarely is there a repeat complaint from the same consumer. 10 TM11751OI02F_o50525 Bay of Quinte Drinking Water Taste and Odour Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Belleville Owned and operated by the City of Belleville Contact: Mr. Bob McKeown, Water Treatment Plant Superintendent Date of Visit: November 5, 2004 Plant Description: The Belleville plant is only four years old and was constructed on the site of the old plant at Sidney Street. The plant has a capacity of 72 megalitres; current maximum day demand is 34 . Twin intakes take water from a depth of about 8 metres and deliver water through a screen and low lift pumps to coagulant contact tanks. Water then flows to dissolved air flotation (DAF) tanks that operate during the ice-free (Bay of Quinte) period. The next clarifying process is a series of tanks with laminar plates. This facility is used in place of the DAF process in winter months when suspended solids are low. Sand filters topped with granular activated charcoal (GAC) complete the treatment. Water is then chlorinated and sent into the delivery system. Post chlorination greatly reduces the formation of chlorinated organics such as trihalomethanes (THM). The plant is extremely well run, appears to produce an excellent product and should have few issues with taste and odour. Plant staff do perform threshold odour tests and the results are typically 1. Chemicals Used: • Coagulant - Alum • Chlorine (sodium hypochlorite) - used for disinfection and for zebra mussel control • Potassium permanganate-used infrequently for zebra mussel control (also beneficial for taste and odour) Fluoride - hydrofluosilicic acid Comments from Staff (T&O, Raw Water, Operations, Chemical Use): Few complaints received (5-6 per year), usually chlorine detected or distribution issues such as colour or sediment. Staff feel that most customer complaints are comparing city water with bottled water the main difference being the presence of chlorine in the city water. TM117510102F_o50525 11 Bay of Quinte Drinking Water Taste and Odour Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Deseronto Owned by Town of Deseronto and operated by Greater Napanee Utilities Contact: Mr. Max Christie, Manager Date of Visit: September 9,2004 Plant Description: The Deseronto Water Treatment Plant has a rated capacity of 2,900 m3/d; the current average flow is approximately 1,300 m 3/d. The treatment processes include coagulation, flocculation/clarification (Eimco Reactivator clarifier), and filtration through dual media anthracite and sand filters. Two granular activated carbon (GAC) contactors, in parallel, are used at all times for taste & odour control. Chlorine is used for disinfection (inactivation). Raw water turbidity is usually 2 to 3 NTU, with high of about 20 NTU. Chemicals Used: • Coagulant - Eaglebrook PASS-C (polyaluminum chloride), lIO-130 mg/L • • Coagulant aid - Nalco Optimer 7199, -1 mgIL Chlorine - used for zebra mussel control when required, and for primary and secondary disinfection Soda Ash was previously used for pH control, but not currently needed with PASS-C coagulant Comments from Staff (T&O, Raw Water, Operations, Chemical Use): It is not known when the GAC in the contactors was last changed. The current owners/operators have not changed the GAC since they took over the plant in January 2003. No taste and odour complaints have been received. Complaints are usually related to coloured water due to cast iron watermains. 12 TMl17510102F_o50525 Bay of Quinte Drinking Water Taste and Odour Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Picton Owned and operated by Prince Edward County Contact: Mr. Bryan Robson, Environmental Services Manager Date of Visit: September 9, 2004 Plant Description: The plant rated capacity is 10,400 m 3/d; the current average flow is approximately 4,300 m3/d with high flows up to 7,000 m 3/d. The intake is at a depth of approximately 3 m. Another (older) intake is available as a back-up. (: The treatment processes consists of coagulation, 3-stage hydraulic flocculation, sedimentation, filtration and disinfection. Powdered activated carbon (PAC) is used for taste & odour control. Fluoride is also added to the treated water. Chlorine is added at the mouth of the intake structure for zebra mussel control when the raw water temperature is above 12°C. Chemicals Used: • Coagulant - General Chemical Clarion A405T, 30 mg/L (proprietary coagulant) • PAC - maximum dose of approximately 6 mgIL (110 kg/5 days) • Chlorine - used for zebra mussel control, primary and secondary disinfection • Fluoride - hydrofluosilicic acid ,i Comments from Staff (T&O, Raw Water, Operations, Chemical Use): Two manual raw water screens are cleaned every day. In summer, they tend to be covered with a brown slime that looks to be combination of seaweed and silt. The wind direction has an impact on the amount of material on the screens. In winter the screens are cleaner. The PAC has been able to control taste and odour in 2004. In 2003, the algae levels were higher, and the PAC could not be added at a high enough ,dose to control the taste and odour. The PAC system is to be upgraded this fall to enable a higher dose to be used. The operators feel the taste and odour problems are increasing. Ten years ago, the plant did not have to deal with algae blooms, but they now occur every year. TM117510102F_o50525 13 Bay of Quinte Drinking Water Taste and Odour Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM From the plant visits it is evident that there is adequate equipment and treatment methods in place to deal with taste and odour issues. The Belleville and Bayside plants are now 'state of the art', making any comparison of earlier reports of taste and odour problems meaningless. However, neither of the taste and odour control systems at Bayside are being used; ozone is not used at all, and the GAC is so old that it is probably ineffective. The presence of the micros trainer indicates that algae must have been a problem, or perceived to be a problem, when the plant was designed. It is significant to note that neither Belleville nor Bayside utilize strainers now; they are not needed and these plants are located in the upper reach of the Bay where nutrient problems have been more severe. The Deseronto plant however has changed little since the original construction in 1976. The GAC contactors have been used continuously, although the improvement to taste and odour by the contactors has not been assessed The operators at the Picton WTP believe that the taste and odour problems are worsening. The PAC system is being upgraded to allow higher dosages of PAC to respond to tastes and odours. The plant intake is in very shallow water and while the nutrient levels may be lower in this part of the Bay of Quinte, weeds and sediments are problems when disturbed by wave action. The study results show that there is little observed difference in public perception in taste and odour between the most sophisticated modern plants (Belleville and Bayside) and the simplest and older plants (Deseronto). From the field visits it is clear that Belleville consistently delivers a first rate product which raises doubt as to how realistic public expectations are; is the municipal supply being compared aesthetically with bottled spring water? Given new standards for disinfection it would be difficult or impossible to eliminate complaints about chlorine and chlorine was the complaint for a majority of those surveyed. It is evident that all plant operators in the study area take complaints seriously and act to address them, however the primary concern is public safety and regulatory compliance. As well, the lack of solid science regarding the actual source of taste and odour compo)lnds and additional proven remedial measures makes it difficult to justify further effort. 4. TASTE AND ODOUR ISSUES IN THE GREAT LAKES The choice of taste and odour as a criterion for impairment is unfortunate since no simple definition is employed. A search of the literature confirms that standards are in place for maximum concentrations of substances, some of which can be detected by taste or odour at levels much below a~.cepted (health) limits. In many cases, equipment is installed as a preventative measure, not because of a documented problem. In considering the magnitude of this issue in the Bay of Quinte, it is necessary to look at the adjacent waters. Throughout the water authorities drawing water from Lake Ontario and Lake Erie, taste and odour problems are being encountered, often associated with zebra mussels. This calls into question what is normal or typical in terms of treatment. 14 TM117510102F_050525 Bay of Quinte Drinking Water Taste and Odour Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM An example is the Erie County Water Authority (ECWA), which experienced a marked increase in customer complaints beginning in 1993. It was determined that the cause was elevated levels of MIB and geosmin in both raw and drinking water (ECWA, 1997). Tests undertaken at ECWA labs linked the occurrence of these compounds to zebra mussels. The treatment method chosen was Powder Activated Charcoal (PAC) in combination with mixed media filter beds. By employing this measure on an as-needed basis, taste and odour problems have been remediated. In Ontario, PAC or GAC are used in many water plants; Port Rowan adds the compound in the summer months, the City of Toronto, the Region of Peel and the City of Hamilton added PAC or GAC to the treatment process in 2000. Other plants have employed potassium permanganate or ozone. ( (' 5. CONCLUSIONS 1. From an examination of the survey data, taste and odour in the drinking water in the Bay of Quinte remains an impaired beneficial use. There is no evidence that taste and odour problems identified in the base year time frame (1989-1994) have since been reduced. 2. Since a majority of the taste and odour problems are related to chlorine, it is difficult to make any definitive conclusions on the reduction of taste and odour causing algae. 3. From an examination of water plant equipment and operations, there is no obvious evidence of an lBU. The equipment in place in the plants visited is no more extensive or elaborate than that elsewhere in the Great Lakes. Similarly operations such as the addition of PAC are not unusual. (. 4. The results of the survey suggest that the taste and odour problems are considered by respondents to be a nuisance issue, not dissimilar to reports from other communities bordering the Great Lakes. It was beyond the scope of the survey to look into the question of whether the taste and odour present in the Bay of Quinte drinking water is indicative of the presence of compounds harmful to health. 6. RECOMMENDATIONS Revisit the definition of IBU Given the fact that taste and odour problems are common throughout the Great Lakes region and that the cause is not necessarily nutrient loading alone, the Restoration Council should revisit the'definition of lBU for this issue. While elevated nutrient levels may be a direct cause of other lBUs, it is unclear that the levels now present in the Bay of Quinte can be directly linked to the taste and odour complaints noted in the survey. Participate in/stay abreast of taste and odour research From the literature cited in this report it is clear that the taste and odour issue is common to many operations beyond the Bay of Quinte and that the causes are not clearly known. TM117510102F_o50525 15 Bay of Quinte Drinking Water Taste and Odour Study TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Ongoing research and proposals for further work suggest that the Bay of Quinte region could benefit from the results of this work and point the way for further improvements in plant equipment and operations. Encourage collaboration among Bay of Quinte Water Plant Operators Operators in the region deal with a wide variety of equipment and practices yet share the Bay of Quinte as a water source. Field visits indicate there is little opportunity for them to share experiences and track new developments applicable to their situation. A series of workshops would be a good vehicle for this purpose and could also help meet training requirements. 7. REFERENCES Bay of Quinte RAP Coordinating Committee, 1993. "The Bay of Quinte Remedial Action Plan Stage 2 Report - Time to Act" Charlton, M.N, S. L'Italien, T. Howell, P. Bertram, M. Zarull, R. Thoma, and D. Culver, 2000. "Eutrophication or Undesirable Algae: Preliminary Beneficial Use Impairment Assessment (Lake Erie). Technical Report 10, Lake Erie Lakewide Management Plan. Erie County Water Authority, 1997. "Lake Erie Lakewide Management Plan". Technical Report No.l1. International Joint Commission, 2004a, "Restoring Beneficial Uses in Areas of Concern ", as included in http://www.ijc.orglrellhoards/annex2Ibuis.htm#fishrest International Joint Commission, 2004b, "Restoring Beneficial Uses in Areas of Concern", as included in http://www.ijc.orgirellboards/annex2/aoc phplbui area.php?aocid=2017&nation= CA N L'Italien, S. and L. Thorstenberg, 1998, Lake Erie LaMP Lake Erie Preliminary Beneficial Use Assessment, Technical Report 11, Drinking Water Consumption Restrictions or Taste and Odour Problem Restrictions. Ministry of Environment, 1986. "Some Effects of Phosphorus Loading on Phytoplankton in the Bay of Quinte, Lake Ontario" Quinte Conservation, 2003. "Assessment of Impaired Beneficial Uses, IBU#9 Taste and Odour of Drinking Water" 16 TM1175I0102F_050525 QUESTIONNAIRE PREPARED BY XCG CONSULTANTS LTD., MAY 2004 FOR BAY OF QUINTE DRINKING WATER TASTE AND ODOUR PUBLIC SURVEY AND REPORT TELEPHONE SCRIPT: Hello, my name is . I'm helping conduct a survey of drinking water in the Bay of Quinte area. The study is funded by the Ministry of the Environment and is part of the Bay of Quinte Restoration Project. I'd like to ask you a couple of questions regarding the quality of water you receive from the municipal water supply. (: ** IF ASKED, GO TO PROJECT DESCRIPTION ** 1. Have you lived at your present residence for the past 10 years or more? 2. Do you drink and cook with tap water? 3. Have you perceived objectionable taste or odour in the past or now? (If NO, go to 'Thank You.') 4. If YES: Was this a problem in the past? (How many years ago?) _ _ . Is it still a problem? 5. How would you describe the problem? • Chlorine? • Musty? • See detailed taste and odour description. 6. Is there anything else you could tell us about your municipal water supply? THANK YOU. We appreciate your participating in our survey. If you would be interested in the result, a copy of the summary report will be available at Lower Trent Conservation later this fall. PROJECT INFORMATION Why are you asking about water supply problems? The taste and odour of drinking water had, in the past, been reported as unpleasant in several of the Bay of Quinte municipalities. This often occurred in the summer when algae was present. We are conducting the survey to see if water quality in the Bay of Quinte has improved and the problem has been eliminated. Is my water supply unsafe? Not at all. The tap water you drink is supplied by (example: The City of Belleville) and is filtered and treated. A regular testing program is carried out and the results are available to the public. Who is the Bay of Quinte Restoration Council? When the Bay of Quinte was identified as an area of concern in the 1990s (largely due to excessive weed and algae growth), a committee was established to oversee remediation. This work is essentially complete and this study of ours is one of the ones being conducted to see whether the earlier problems in the Bay of Quinte have been remedied. The Bay of Quinte Restoration Council is headquartered in the Lower Trent Conservation Authority. The results of our work will go to them (Barry Jones, Coordinator, 613394-3915). For further information see, "Background, Terms of Reference, Bay of Quinte Drinking Water Taste/Odour Survey" Belleville Taste & Odour Survey Results Name Address WS Number Near/Far 969-0110 N 968-6915 N N/A YIN Years TreatedlTap 5> N Taste or Odour NowlThen A-1 Limousine Service 38 Everett O'Hara, V 252 Foster Av Adams, C 26 Georgian Ct 968-5075 F N/A Boyle, J.P 144 Hastings Dr 962-8175 N N/A 2-4-1 Pizza 379 North Front 967-0214 F Y 10> Zakos,T 62 John 966-1871 N 225 William 966-3495 N Y 10> A N A F Tartan Lounge 187 Front 968-9116 N Y 50> N none ever A&T Beauty Supply 292 Front 962-7702 N Y 27> N N Campbell, Doug & Linda 220 College East 967-4487 F Cairns, Kim 3-215 Victoria 966-6010 N Y 40> N none ever Dixon, Langford 33 Fairway Ave 968-7873 N Buffet Garden 365 North Front 967-7888 F Y 1> N West Side Cafe 43 Dundas St West 966-0365 N S.L Rodgers Elgin St. 968-6777 N Y Ablett T 14 Taylor Crt 966-9594 F Y Abrahams D 191 Palmer Rd 967-6176 N Y Wilson, S , ... N Y treated N N don't drink N Y very strong C odour, irritating to skin, blue green colour. 5> N Y onloff sulfur type odour 3> N Y onloff sulfur type odour Abrams Edward J 29 Cascade BI 962-4446 F Y 16> treated 6> Abrams MA 5-C Prince of Whales Dr 976-8512 F Y 6> Treated Acheson S Cannifton 961-5091 F Y Acres K 165 George 968-8976 N Y 3> treated Adams Arthur 75 Victoria Av 963-4370 F Y 10> bottled water Y past experienced swampy algae smell in summer and or strong chlorine taste and odour, worsened annually prompting treatment to avoid chlorine taste and odour filtered via Brita Y past bad taste, now gone Y chlorine taste and odour currently experience no smells or odours . Belleville Taste & Odour Survey Results Name Address Number Near/Far WS YIN Years TreatecllTap Taste or Odour NowlThen now and past putrid smell offlon also chlorine at times Adams Chas 72 Maple Dr 966-6426 F Y 5> treated Adams Jos 44 Geddes 962-1401 F Y 10> bottled water Adams N R 13 Cedar 966-7866 N Y 17> treated bad taste in summer months always, now chemical smells onloff Adamson Earl 703-201 c Palmer Rd 968-3163 N Y 17> filtered tastes like sewer AddyG 50 Rollins Dr 968-2219 F Y 5> filter Agapas C 15 Fairview 968-3317 Y 10> N N Alexander A Ronald 61 Edgehill Rd 962-7940 F Y 10> bottled water N Alexander F P 15 Pine 968-8823 F Y 15> N N Alexander S 42 Victoria Av 962-1623 F Y 10> bottled water N Allan D Cannifton Rd N 962-2348 F Y 4 N N Allan FRoss 25 Woodland Acres 962-8219 F Y 36> bottled water putrid smell and taste from algae in past, now a strong chlorine odour and taste Baker William & Cindy 433 Foxboro-Stirling 969-1724 F Y 12> bottled water chlorine smell and taste 4> filtered putrid swampy smell in summer months years past, not this year bad taste Barkhouse D 21 Union 967-8156 F Y BarlowG&T 53 Prince of Whales Dr 962-8584 F Y 7> N None Barlow Robert & Molly 161 George 962-7608 N Y 11> N bad taste unless refrigerated Barlow Shane 208 Yeomans 968-7977 F Y <1 filtered Barnes Robert 328 Foster Av 967-1679 N Y 29> N putrid odour in past but not for several years Baron J R 24 Melrose Cr 962-0345 F Y <2 filtered smells of dead fish and algae BarratT J 28 Kensington Cr 968-7172 N Y 30> N N never 74 Prince of Whales Dr 969-4440 F Y 18> N N never 74-D Aikins Rd 967-8118 N Y 2> N N 302-255 George 968-8470 N Y 30> N Y periodically odourous in summer Barre Wayne Barrett C Barrett C Q bad taste musty odour and stagnant taste Belleville Taste & Odour Survey Results Name Number Address NearlFar WS YIN Years TreatedlTap Taste or Odour NowlThen Barriage D 33 Isabel 967·0774 V 7> N V chlorine Barriage Rod 20 Pringle Dr 968·3529 V 3> N N Barrie N 289 Albert 961·0977 V 3> V V,periodic brown discolouration, stagnant taste (b&a filtering), metallic taste N 20 Boswell 969·1798 V 3> V V, ranges from extreme chlorine taste and odour to brown discolouration and stagnant muddy odour Bartle S 39 Dunnet Bl 961·7492 V 5> V N Bartlett C 64 North Park Gdns 967·1364 V 66> N V always been odourous and foul tasting Bartlett K J 126 Hastings Dr 967·1380 Y 38> N N, never 358 Montrose Rd 962·6301 V 2> N N 334Dundas E 968·4198 V 8> N N 966·3437 V 40> Barter Clinton Barton K , Q Barton S Bashall SA - ------------- ~Donald - ---- - - - - - - - - - - ~ ....... --- N ------- N, but will not drink Picton Taste & Odour Survey Results Name Address Number Near/Far WS YIN Years TreatedlTap Noyes M 4 Ortona Cr 476-0289 F Y 3> N O'Brian Roy 8 Talbot 476-0266 F Y 4> Y Offord Donald Allison Bruce Anderson C Ostrander G Otterway Joe Keep, D Barrett Robert Mitchel, John Pannell W Bud Parker L E Barsley M Bath H L Beattie C&T Pascoe H Seeley DB Payne Derek Beaumont Donald Beggs J R Pettingill Y Belisle DOUQ Pliwischkies Herbert 53 York 33 Ontario St 28 LowSt 20 Ortona Cr 7 Bowery 54 York St 48 Paul St 20 LowSt Downes Av 172 Picton Main 51 Union St 47 Ontario St 22 Paul St 8 Talbot 52-B Mary St 43 Paul St 9 Queen St 19 LowSt 133 West Mary 42 Washburn 374 Picton Main 476-9964 476-2496 471-1096 476--8185 476-6710 476-3529 476-3698 476-5448 476-5514 476-3324 476-8191 476-6451 476-5544 476-4608 476-3348 476-6467 476-2390 476-4577 476-6655 476-7153 476-3161 N N N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 6> 44> 1> 7> 30> 30> 5> 10> 40> 10> 25> 50> 10> 10> 10> 40> 20> 30> 12> 15> 35> N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Mason, John 20 Spencer 476-3968 N Y 16> N Bell R&B BellWmA Brown Terry Poisson J 21 Picton Main 26 LowSt 25 Downes Av 349 Picton Main 476-8822 476-2467 476-5849 476-1622 N N N N Y Y Y Y 9> 39> 4> Summer Y N N N Porter Cameron 3 Catherine 476-5904 N Y 48> Y culligan _ , F N F N N N N N N N F N F N N N N F Taste or Odour NowlThen N constant swampy smell, periodically chan Qed by stronQ chlorine smell Chlorine N Chlorine N Chlorine Chlorine N N Chlorine N Chlorine N N N Chlorine Chlorine N N Chlorine N N strong Chlorine, (very close to treatment site) sulohur smell, staanant taste N N N Y chlorine and discolourartion and . svv§lTlflY odours In (last Picton Taste & Odour Survey Results Name Pringle Gerald Address 118 West Mary St. Number 476-2362 Near/Far F WS YIN Y Years 65> TreatedfTap N Taste or Odour NowfThen Y swampy T&O in summer and chlorine , Deseronto Taste & Odour Survey Results Name Address Number Near/Far WS YIN Years TreatedITap Y Y Y y y 20> 20> 1> N N N N N Y <1 N Taste or Odour Nowrrhen Allen B Andress E 143 Main 444 Dundas 396-6922 396-5738 Asmar Hector Jose Barker H L BarroisH Blakely John 91 Centre 138 Second St 143 First St 83 Green 396-6779 396-5985 396-5915 396-6044 258 Thomas St 396-5914 y 14> N 247 Thomas St 396-5114 396-3481 396-2909 y y y y y y <1 N N discolouration in past (old pipes) N N brown colour and swampy smell and odour N 23> 30> N N N chlorine 3> 4> N N chlorine N discolouration 2> N N N N fish odour at times in summer cloudy, bad taste Boettcher Jim Boisvert A Bonner Lyle , Boomhour B Boomhour M 77 Mill St 318 Maple St 257 Thomas St Bowen R BradshawW Thomas St 164 Centre St Brant Allen Brant B 193 St George 315 Edmund 396-2397 396-3597 Brant L B 119 College St Brant S 396-6038 396-6387 396-1838 7> 1> 1> 2> 48> 230 Thomas St 396-2931 396-2573 Y Y y y Bremmer David 177 Thomas St 396-3843 Brinklow Matt Brown Peter Browning E 420 Thomas 356 Main 52 Pearl 444 Thomas St 396-2405 Burridge Gary Carr V&D 149 Main Carter Joe Cassidy Lance 193 Brant 61 Bryant ChapmanT Cherneski N & T 169MiIISt 391 Thomas N N N N 2> N y 18> N N Y discolouration, bad taste & odorous in past -- now good 396-3210 396-3022 396-3802 Y Y Y Y 8> 4> 35> N N N chlorine 5> N N 396-6291 396-2969 Y Y <1 30> N N N N Y smells like garbage 396-6556 Y Y 3> 10> N N Y 5> N 396-3005 396-9945 N N N Rust Deseronto Taste & Odour Survey Results Name Address Chumbley Morris F Churchill P 221 Cross St 84 Centre St Clark Brian 50-B Brant Number 396-5124 396-2874 396-9909 ---------- ---- Near/Far ---- WS YIN Years TreatedlTap Y Y Y 6> 9> 30> N N N Taste or Odour NowlThen chlorine N swampy/chlorine Quinte West Taste & Odour Survey Results Name Papakiriazis Gregory PeeverJ M Petchiny G Philbin M&C Phillips A Post Gwilym Press R J Radocasy James J Rathburn Douglas Reed D Richter M Riddle Steve Ritter Richard Robinson Kevin W Rockey R Rollins J Russell Duane Ryan Frederickson J Ryan M C Sagriff L Sarty Brian W Scharf Hugh Short B J Rutledge K Sills Grant Skinner Ken Staalduinen Gary Sob bart R J Stewart Micheal Story E Number NearlFar WS YIN Years TreatedITap Colonial Rd Moira W 252 Catalina Dr 339 Montrose Rd A-152 Moira W 228 MoiraW 968-4429 969-7169 966-2526 967-8278 966-2049 962-1128 F F F F F F Y Y Y Y Y Y 25> 3> 16> 5> 4> 30> N Y Y N Y Y 19LeeAv 962-8224 N Y 40> N 19 Moira W 101 Catalina Dr 439 Montrose Rd 234 Catalina Dr 505 Montrose 18 Moira W 190 Montrose Rd 4854 OldHwy2 6 Sandyhook Rd 50 Country Clb Dr 32 Old Stone Rd 18 Lee Av 119 Aikins Rd 19 Country Clb Dr 1628 OldHwy2 53 Colonia IRd 44 Burns Av 39 Country Clb Dr 85 Catalina Dr 112 Country Clb Dr 297 Colonia IRd 40 Catalina Dr 20 Sandyhook Rd 967-8346 966-3523 968-2841 966-4613 966-4929 966-6761 967-3872 967-2615 966-2589 962-4337 962-7506 966-0027 962-4502 967-6677 967-1920 968-7345 962-8438 966-7367 962-9801 968-9176 962-5663 962-6862 968-5115 F F F F F F F N N F F N Very N F N F N F F F F F N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 12> 24> 7> 18> 10> <1 5> 2> 20> 30> 6> 5> 5> 2> 2> 10> 30> 26> 10> 10> 16> 34> 30> N N N N N Y N N N N Y N N N N N N Y N N N N N Address , Taste or Odour NowlThen Chlorine Chlorine N N N Chlorine Y 39 ago, smelled badly, none since then None other than rust periodic chlorine N Y chlorine smell& odour in am N N N N Chlorine in am N N N N N N Chlorine Chlorine N N N N Chlorine N