Pica, Leisha

Leisha Pica was a speaker at the WEFTEC 2024 conference in New Orleans, LA October 5-9, 2024.

Titles from this speaker

Got Options? Louisville's Biosolids Adaptive Planning Case Study

Abstract

Project Description This paper presents an overview of the adaptive planning process to address detrimental and unforeseen changing conditions for managing biosolids. This presenta results and provide a case-study of biosolids technologies, consolidation vs. decentralization of processes, regulatory compliance criteria, resilience and reliability issues, and a cost-benefit analysis of long-term biosolids management strategies. Managing biosolids from multiple treatment plants is a complicated and multi-faceted process requiring forward looking results that are adaptable to handle changing conditions. The process implemented, lessons learned, and results of the Biosolids Study will guide the next steps for implementation of a Regional Biosolids Management Program. Abstract Background The Louisville & Jefferson County Metropolitan Sewer District (MSD) has faced several utility management challenges over the past ten years that have limited their ability to advance new projects. These challenges included regulatory mandates, asset failures, climate impacts, and unplanned regionalization of utility service. MSD's Morris Forman Water Quality Treatment Center (MFWQTC) is the largest in terms of treatment capacity and oldest WQTC in Kentucky. During the early 2000s, MSD added a thermal drying process and began producing Class A biosolids pellets for beneficial use that were marketed and distributed as 'Louisville Green' fertilizer. MSD operates four smaller WQTCs. It quickly became apparent the new planning considerations are difficult to consider linearly. Their impact may change over time; can be minimized with advanced planning; and can be integrated with local priorities. MSD aligned with an integrated adaptive planning roadmap (Figure 1). Although MSD had already evaluated and considered many scenarios for future biosolids improvements with a Critical Repair and Reinvestment Plan (CRRP), the breadth and magnitude of changed circumstances resulted with an urgent desire to reconsider scenarios for future investment. This paper explains how MSD's various planning documents were integrated into a comprehensive Biosolids Study. The study evaluated a series of 'what-if' scenarios for potential future outcomes. Short-listed alternatives were compared and scored using a cost-benefit approach. Objectives The objectives of the Biosolids Study were threefold: (1) construct facilities to enable systemwide cake to be processed through THP-digestion-drying at the MFWQTC by 2027; (2) add capacity to eliminate landfill disposal by 2030 and enable downtime for major refurbishment of dryers by 2032; and (3) add thermal conversation technology to comply with future potential PFAS or microplastic regulations. Methodology Information from previous engineering documents was consolidated. WQTC process models were developed and population projections were applied to predict future flows and loads at each WQTC including potential changes in industrial activity, scoring criteria and weightings were developed, and a shortlist of alternatives was created. Considering the ongoing design-build project of a THP facility at MFWQTC, the project team evaluated technology scenarios, location scenarios, timing/phasing scenarios for seven WQTCs. Example scenarios included: 1) decentralized vs. centralize dewatering; 2) sludge screens; 3) digestion-drying; 4) add drying at the regional WQTCs; and 5) Lystek technology at the regional WQTCs. MSD did not begin a new Master Plan effort with this Biosolids Study. Rather, they built upon the information collected from a variety of events. As conditions related to biosolids changed, MSD determined if a scenario already existed in the CRRP, process model, or other documents. Scenarios were refreshed or developed based upon the living process shown in Figure 2. The project team confirmed the adaptive planning criteria aligned with current system needs and changed conditions (Table 1). Whole-plant process models for each WQTC were calibrated and utilized for development of solids projections and impacts on treatment for each of the alternatives. The facilities included in the Study are presented in to Figure 3. Results and Conclusions A comparison of the non-monetary criteria for all five alternatives is presented in Figure 4. Interestingly, the scenarios tended to vary by future demand; future flexibility; regulatory adaptability, and technology maturity. Capital and O&M costs were developed and reviewed with MSD stakeholders in subsequent workshops for the shortlisted alternatives. Total project life cycle cost were developed and a Benefit Cost Analysis was performed as shown in Figure 5. The estimated capital costs for the alternatives to implement the Third Dryer at the MFWQTC or implement the LystekÂ® process at three regional WQTCs are less than half of the estimated capital costs for the Drying at the DRG. MSD Stakeholders agreed the Third Dryer at the MFWQTC and the LystekÂ® process at three regional WQTCs were viable alternatives and planned to be incorporated into MSD's biosolids strategy for the 20-year planning horizon. Presentation will include: base case and four alternative scenarios; capital, operations and maintenance costs; and overall scoring of scenarios based upon cost and non-monetary factors; MSD's adaptive planning lessons learned; and lastly MSD's next steps for implementing a three phase scope of work outlined in the Study.

This paper was presented at WEFTEC 2025, held September 27-October 1, 2025 in Chicago, Illinois.

Presentation time

14:00:00

14:15:00

Session time

13:30:00

15:00:00

SessionBiosolids Planning from WRF to the WRRF

Session locationMcCormick Place, Chicago, Illinois, USA

TopicBiosolids & Residuals

Author(s)

Romero, Adrian, Burch, Robin, Thewes, Daniel, Pica, Leisha, Williams, Todd

Author(s)A. Romero1, R. Burch2, D. Thewes3, L. Pica3, T. Williams

Author affiliation(s)Black & Veatch1, Louisville & Jefferson County MSD2, Jacobs3

SourceProceedings of the Water Environment Federation

Document typeConference Paper

PublisherWater Environment Federation

Print publication date Sep 2025

DOI10.2175/193864718825160158

Volume / Issue

Content sourceWEFTEC

Word count9

Show Me The Value! Virginia Beach's Flood Model Visualization Tool

Abstract

Abstract Background The City of Virginia Beach (City) is faced with the challenge of providing flood control and storm water drainage services while complying with storm water regulations, surface water quality requirements, and climate stressors that are increasing the intensity and frequency of large storms and sea level rise. These conditions have led to increased occurrences of moderate to severe roadway, structural, and residential flooding. Accelerators for City action include Hurricane Matthew, sea level rise, and a voter referendum. In 2016 Hurricane Matthew dropped 12 inches of rain in a 12-hour period. The aftermath of the storm was devastating to many residents and businesses (refer to Figure 1). The storm served as a wake-up call for the City Council and residents. The City embarked upon a long-term Flood Protection Program (FPP) to mitigate flooding by implementing measures to help safeguard Virginia Beach homes, structures, and roadways. In 2020, the City published a climate impact assessment referred to as the Sea Level Wise Report that documented and forecasted the growing impacts of climate challenges including increased frequency and intensity of tropical storms and hurricanes as well as increasing sea levels along coastal stretches. The City's storm water and flood protection infrastructure was not designed for the conditions being experienced today. Some of the City's storm water pump stations are used daily to combat tides and groundwater. In a few cases, these assets are operating more frequently than initially designed. The City experiences flood impacts from intense rainfall as well as Sunny Day flooding. Intense rainfall is defined as pluvial flooding driven by microbursts, thunderstorms, the rainfall component of named storms, etc. Sunny Day flooding is flooding driven by tide and surge conditions occurring without storms. In 2021, the residents of Virginia Beach made it clear during the General Election on November 2, 2021, that flood protection is a top priority. Over 70% of voters agreed to authorize $567.5 million in debt to finance the design and construction of various flood mitigation projects aimed at improving the level of flood protection in the area. As the FPP Program Manager, Jacobs is actively assisting the City with developing critical strategies and procedures necessary to successfully deliver Phase 1 of the FPP and formulate/prioritize future phases. Given the public interest in this project, Jacobs and the city collaborated to create a Flood Model Visualization and Exposure Tool. The tool is a user-friendly geographic information system (GIS) dashboard application developed in ESRI ArcGIS Experience Builder (developer edition). It utilizes the flood model and exposure data hosted by Virginia Beach ArcGIS Enterprise GIS platform. The purpose of the tool is to provide an easy to use interface for the public to select and view the City's flood model results. The public can view model results and other information pertaining to the City's Flood Protection Program (FPP) projects. Residents can see how different weather events could affect their neighbors. They can also view the improved level of flood protection provided from the City's $1 billion FPP. Objectives The objective of the visualization tool is to enhance the City's flood map-based tool by adding an intuitive dashboard that is user-friendly and ready for public use. The tool will achieve this objective by including the following features: 1) buttons to define climate scenarios that are then displayed on the map; 2) summary metrics on exposure, vulnerability, or financial impacts related to the selected scenario; 3) location of projects and their flood mitigation benefits; and 4) access to a photorealistic 3D visuals for select city locations. Methodology The tool uses existing data and platforms currently used by the City to the greatest extent possible as shown in Figure 2. The tool was developed to be easily updated when new information or versions of software and data including: updates for ESRI tools; flood models; vulnerability assessment results; and FPP project information. The framework and structure for the user-friendly dashboard is shown in Figure 3. A guidance document walks the user through how to use the tool. Risk assessment metrics are displayed on the dashboard including total flood area, depth, and duration; commercial districts flooded; socially vulnerable areas flooded; and critical facilities exposed (Figure 4). Users input flood exposure type, type of flooding, rainfall event return period, sea level rise, and FPP project or City location. After selecting scenarios, the tool displays flooding extents on a map. Results and Conclusions The results of the tool include a visual display of flood extents (Figure 4),a side-by-side comparison of before and after flooding (Figure 5), and photorealistic 360-degree street views at select locations (Figures 6 and 7). Jacobs demonstrated the tool to the City Council and they were excited to have such a robust method for showing the true value of the disruption to occur throughout various locations across the City over the next eight years. Without the tool it would be more challenging to message the benefit of the FPP given its success depends upon weather any given day. Jacobs and the City will next solicit feedback from the general public who visit the website and tool.

As part of Virginia Beach's $1 billion Flood Protection Program, the City launched a tool with the goal to cultivate knowledge and awareness about flood exposure risk from rain and tides. The tool demonstrates potential scenario-based flood impacts to buildings, utilities, roadways, environment, and water resources before and after program implementation. Users can visualize the value, ROI, and reduced flooding levels from the program. Feedback confirms the public appreciates the tool.

SpeakerPica, Leisha

Presentation time

08:30:00

09:00:00

Session time

08:30:00

09:30:00

SessionResilient Communities Tackling Climate Challenges

Session number313

Session locationRoom 335

TopicClimate Change Adaptation and Metrics, Intermediate Level, Sustainability and Climate Change, Utility Management and Leadership

Author(s)