lastID = -292080
Skip to main content Skip to top navigation Skip to site search
Top of page
  • My citations options
    Web Back (from Web)
    Chicago Back (from Chicago)
    MLA Back (from MLA)
Close action menu

You need to login to use this feature.

Please wait a moment…
Please wait while we update your results...
Please wait a moment...
Description: Access Water
Context Menu
Description: Book cover
PEAK FLOW TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES EVALUATED FOR THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY, OREGON
  • Browse
  • Compilations
    • Compilations list
  • Subscriptions
Tools

Related contents

Loading related content

Workflow

No linked records yet

X
  • Current: 2020-02-01 02:47:06 Administrator
  • 2020-02-01 02:47:05 Administrator
Description: Access Water
  • Browse
  • Compilations
  • Subscriptions
Log in
0
Accessibility Options

Base text size -

This is a sample piece of body text
Larger
Smaller
  • Shopping basket (0)
  • Accessibility options
  • Return to previous
Description: Book cover
PEAK FLOW TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES EVALUATED FOR THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY, OREGON

PEAK FLOW TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES EVALUATED FOR THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY, OREGON

PEAK FLOW TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES EVALUATED FOR THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY, OREGON

  • New
  • View
  • Details
  • Reader
  • Default
  • Share
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • New
  • View
  • Default view
  • Reader view
  • Data view
  • Details

This page cannot be printed from here

Please use the dedicated print option from the 'view' drop down menu located in the blue ribbon in the top, right section of the publication.

screenshot of print menu option

Description: Book cover
PEAK FLOW TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES EVALUATED FOR THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY, OREGON
Abstract
A comprehensive facilities plan was developed for the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) in 2004 and included an evaluation of the regional wastewater treatment facilities serving the Eugene-Springfield (E-S) metropolitan area. A previous study, the 2001 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan (WWFMP), modeled the collection system, determined what rainfall dependent infiltration and inflow (RDII) was cost effective to remove and identified an implementation plan for removing that RDII, and concluded that a “convey and treat” approach was the most cost effective solution for addressing the remaining peak flows in the system.One of the key focuses of the newly developed MWMC Facilities Plan was to determine a more detailed solution for implementing the “convey and treat” approach. Early-out efforts of the 2004 planning confirmed that efforts to remove/reduce RDII were being realized as assumed in the WWFMP and that the convey and treat approach was still valid. Alternatives were evaluated for increasing the peak flow treatment capacity at the Eugene-Springfield Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF) from 175 million gallons per day (mgd) to 277 mgd by 2025. This increase in peak flow capacity is necessary to comply with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality's (DEQ's) requirement that the wet season flow associated with the 5-year, 24-hour rainfall event be accommodated by MWMC's facilities without resulting in sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs).The alternatives evaluated use a combination of primary treatment and secondary treatment in conjunction with effluent blending to treat the peak flows. Operating the primary and secondary facilities in parallel during infrequent wet season peak flow events is cost effective while protective of effluent receiving water and is the preferred approach. Federal blending policy is still evolving; however, so the use of a high rate clarification process has been retained as the next best alternative for treating the peak wet weather flows.
A comprehensive facilities plan was developed for the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) in 2004 and included an evaluation of the regional wastewater treatment facilities serving the Eugene-Springfield (E-S) metropolitan area. A previous study, the 2001 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan (WWFMP), modeled the collection system, determined what rainfall dependent infiltration and...
Author(s)
M.G. NoesenDan LaffitteShawn ClarkRobert SprickTroy McAllisterGlen Daigger
SourceProceedings of the Water Environment Federation
SubjectSession 5A: Municipal Wastewater Treatment Processes: Wet Weather Management in Wastewater Treatment Facilities
Document typeConference Paper
PublisherWater Environment Federation
Print publication date Jan, 2005
ISSN1938-6478
SICI1938-6478(20050101)2005:16L.487;1-
DOI10.2175/193864705783867963
Volume / Issue2005 / 16
Content sourceWEFTEC
First / last page(s)487 - 505
Copyright2005
Word count314

Purchase price $11.50

Get access
Log in Purchase content Purchase subscription
You may already have access to this content if you have previously purchased this content or have a subscription.
Need to create an account?

You can purchase access to this content but you might want to consider a subscription for a wide variety of items at a substantial discount!

Purchase access to 'PEAK FLOW TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES EVALUATED FOR THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY, OREGON'

Add to cart
Purchase a subscription to gain access to 18,000+ Proceeding Papers, 25+ Fact Sheets, 20+ Technical Reports, 50+ magazine articles and select Technical Publications' chapters.
Loading items
There are no items to display at the moment.
Something went wrong trying to load these items.
Description: Book cover
PEAK FLOW TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES EVALUATED FOR THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY, OREGON
Pricing
Non-member price: $11.50
Member price:
-292080
Get access
-292080
Log in Purchase content Purchase subscription
You may already have access to this content if you have previously purchased this content or have a subscription.
Need to create an account?

You can purchase access to this content but you might want to consider a subscription for a wide variety of items at a substantial discount!

Purchase access to 'PEAK FLOW TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES EVALUATED FOR THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY, OREGON'

Add to cart
Purchase a subscription to gain access to 18,000+ Proceeding Papers, 25+ Fact Sheets, 20+ Technical Reports, 50+ magazine articles and select Technical Publications' chapters.

Details

Description: Book cover
PEAK FLOW TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES EVALUATED FOR THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY, OREGON
Abstract
A comprehensive facilities plan was developed for the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) in 2004 and included an evaluation of the regional wastewater treatment facilities serving the Eugene-Springfield (E-S) metropolitan area. A previous study, the 2001 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan (WWFMP), modeled the collection system, determined what rainfall dependent infiltration and inflow (RDII) was cost effective to remove and identified an implementation plan for removing that RDII, and concluded that a “convey and treat” approach was the most cost effective solution for addressing the remaining peak flows in the system.One of the key focuses of the newly developed MWMC Facilities Plan was to determine a more detailed solution for implementing the “convey and treat” approach. Early-out efforts of the 2004 planning confirmed that efforts to remove/reduce RDII were being realized as assumed in the WWFMP and that the convey and treat approach was still valid. Alternatives were evaluated for increasing the peak flow treatment capacity at the Eugene-Springfield Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF) from 175 million gallons per day (mgd) to 277 mgd by 2025. This increase in peak flow capacity is necessary to comply with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality's (DEQ's) requirement that the wet season flow associated with the 5-year, 24-hour rainfall event be accommodated by MWMC's facilities without resulting in sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs).The alternatives evaluated use a combination of primary treatment and secondary treatment in conjunction with effluent blending to treat the peak flows. Operating the primary and secondary facilities in parallel during infrequent wet season peak flow events is cost effective while protective of effluent receiving water and is the preferred approach. Federal blending policy is still evolving; however, so the use of a high rate clarification process has been retained as the next best alternative for treating the peak wet weather flows.
A comprehensive facilities plan was developed for the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) in 2004 and included an evaluation of the regional wastewater treatment facilities serving the Eugene-Springfield (E-S) metropolitan area. A previous study, the 2001 Wet Weather Flow Management Plan (WWFMP), modeled the collection system, determined what rainfall dependent infiltration and...
Author(s)
M.G. NoesenDan LaffitteShawn ClarkRobert SprickTroy McAllisterGlen Daigger
SourceProceedings of the Water Environment Federation
SubjectSession 5A: Municipal Wastewater Treatment Processes: Wet Weather Management in Wastewater Treatment Facilities
Document typeConference Paper
PublisherWater Environment Federation
Print publication date Jan, 2005
ISSN1938-6478
SICI1938-6478(20050101)2005:16L.487;1-
DOI10.2175/193864705783867963
Volume / Issue2005 / 16
Content sourceWEFTEC
First / last page(s)487 - 505
Copyright2005
Word count314

Actions, changes & tasks

Outstanding Actions

Add action for paragraph

Current Changes

Add signficant change

Current Tasks

Add risk task

Connect with us

Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Connect to us on LinkedIn
Subscribe on YouTube
Powered by Librios Ltd
Powered by Librios Ltd
Authors
Terms of Use
Policies
Help
Accessibility
Contact us
Copyright © 2024 by the Water Environment Federation
Loading items
There are no items to display at the moment.
Something went wrong trying to load these items.
Description: WWTF Digital Boot 180x150
WWTF Digital (180x150)
Created on Jul 02
Websitehttps:/­/­www.wef.org/­wwtf?utm_medium=WWTF&utm_source=AccessWater&utm_campaign=WWTF
180x150
M.G. Noesen# Dan Laffitte# Shawn Clark# Robert Sprick# Troy McAllister# Glen Daigger. PEAK FLOW TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES EVALUATED FOR THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY, OREGON. Alexandria, VA 22314-1994, USA: Water Environment Federation, 2018. Web. 6 Jun. 2025. <https://www.accesswater.org?id=-292080CITANCHOR>.
M.G. Noesen# Dan Laffitte# Shawn Clark# Robert Sprick# Troy McAllister# Glen Daigger. PEAK FLOW TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES EVALUATED FOR THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY, OREGON. Alexandria, VA 22314-1994, USA: Water Environment Federation, 2018. Accessed June 6, 2025. https://www.accesswater.org/?id=-292080CITANCHOR.
M.G. Noesen# Dan Laffitte# Shawn Clark# Robert Sprick# Troy McAllister# Glen Daigger
PEAK FLOW TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES EVALUATED FOR THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY, OREGON
Access Water
Water Environment Federation
December 22, 2018
June 6, 2025
https://www.accesswater.org/?id=-292080CITANCHOR