CASE STUDY OF THE NOOSA YOGHURT MEMBRANE

BIOREACTOR WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM

of future increases in production, Noosa sought a
Daniel P. Bertoldo 1*
system that would be easily expandable to handle
Shannon R. Grant1 future increases in wastewater generation. This
1
ADI Systems, 370 Wilsey Road, Fredericton, would allow Noosa to spread out capital expenditures
NB, Canada E3B 6E9 for wastewater treatment over several years.
Alan Overton2 Furthermore, the treatment system would need to
Rob Graves2 be adaptable to handle potential changes in imposed
2
Noosa Yoghurt, 4120 N Co Rd 25E, Bellvue, direct discharge limits resulting from an increase in
CO, USA 80512 permitted discharge flow.
*
Email: daniel.bertoldo@evoqua.com In addition to these considerations, the selected
treatment system would need to address the many
challenges associated with treating wastewater
INTRODUCTION generated from industrial dairy plants. Dairy
plants typically generate wastewater with high
In 2008, Koel Thomae and Rob Graves co-founded
concentrations of BOD, TSS, and FOG, which can
the Noosa Yoghurt brand, which paired over 100
disrupt the stability of a treatment process. In-plant
years of family-operated dairy farming experience
cleanings of vessels and processing equipment are
in Bellvue, Colorado, USA with a unique Australian
typically conducted several times per day, resulting in
yogurt recipe. In less than ten years, Noosa has
significant changes in hourly flow to the pretreatment
substantially expanded its product line in terms
plant. Cleaning and disinfection chemicals used
of flavors and tub sizes, and annual sales have
during cleaning operations, which are subsequently
grown to over $100 million. Increased demand for
discharged to the pretreatment plant, can contain
Noosa products resulted in progressive increases
high concentrations of compounds which, if present
in wastewater generation. The plant had previously
in sufficient quantities, can be toxic to the biomass
mixed wastewater with cow manure and land-applied
used to treat the wastewater. Furthermore, high
as fertilizer; however, this method of wastewater
concentrations of calcium in the wastewater can
disposal became unsustainable and Noosa sought
cause scaling of the surfaces of treatment tanks,
a feasible method for treating its high-strength
piping, and equipment.
wastewater.
After an extensive technology search, Noosa elected
In 2014, Noosa used a series of criteria to help select
to install an aerobic MBR system, with the system
the appropriate treatment technology, which would
designed and installed in phases. The treatment plant
discharge final effluent to the local Poudre River. Of
installed in Phase 1 would treat a design wastewater
primary importance, Noosa wanted a robust, resilient
flow of 300 m3/d, and the system installed in Phase
treatment system that would consistently generate
2 would be designed for biological nutrient removal
a final effluent to meet the direct discharge limits for
(BNR) and treat a design wastewater flow of 600
biological oxygen demand (BOD), total suspended
m3/d.
solids (TSS), fat, oil, and grease (FOG), total nitrogen
(TN), and total phosphorus (TP). In anticipation
 MBR TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION & PROCESS ADVANTAGES
Over the past 40 years, MBR technology has evolved
to become a globally-accepted method for treating
municipal and industrial wastewater. A number
of drivers have resulted in the growth in global
MBR installations, including legislation for tighter
discharge limits, - water scarcity, reduced membrane
costs, increased membrane vendor competition,
improvements in MBR technology energy efficiency,
and increased research and development into
membrane materials and membrane fouling.
Aerobic MBR technology is a modification of the
conventional activated sludge (CAS) system.
Both technologies utilize a mixed population of
microorganisms to aerobically digest organics and
nitrify ammonia; however, MBR technology utilizes
a physical membrane barrier to achieve solids/
liquid separation and biomass retention as opposed
to gravity clarification employed by CAS systems.
This fundamental difference results in a number of
advantages for MBR technologies.
In order to promote well-settling solids in the
secondary clarifier, the mixed liquor suspended
solids (MLSS) concentration for CAS systems is
typically maintained within a range of 2,000-5,000
mg/l through adequate control of the system solids
retention time (SRT). When operating well, gravity
clarification of mixed liquor in a secondary clarifier
can result in a final effluent with TSS concentrations
less than 30 mg/l.
However, gravity clarification is susceptible to a
number of issues that can increase the final effluent
solids concentrations. Hydraulic and organic
loading, air supply to the aeration basin, SRT control,
FOG loading, filamentous organism growth, and
denitrification within the clarifier are all factors that
can result in elevated TSS concentrations in the
supernatant layer of the secondary clarifier and higher
effluent TSS concentrations. Biomass washout can
result in reduced biological performance and potential
violations on TSS discharge limits. Correcting these
potential issues often results in increased operator
attention in order to analyze and correct the root
cause of the poor settleability and chemical (polymer
www.evoqua.com
and coagulant) addition, which increase the operating
expenses for the WWTP.
By replacing the secondary clarifier with a physical
membrane barrier, the requirement for gravity
clarification is eliminated, which subsequently
eradicates the potential problems associated with
biological solids settleability. This has a number
of beneficial side-effects in terms of plant design.
The use of membranes results in a more compact
WWTP when compared to a CAS system. This is a
result of the membranes requiring a smaller footprint
compared to a secondary clarifier, as well as the
reduction in size for the aeration basin. The conditions
for solids settling, which limit the operating MLSS
concentration for a CAS system, do not apply for an
MBR system, which allows MBR systems to operate
at much higher MLSS concentrations (typically in the
range of 8,000-15,000 mg/l). The higher biomass
concentration allows for a reduction in aeration
basin size without sacrificing the target food-to-
microorganism (F:M) ratio.
The physical membrane barrier provided by MBR
technology results in a more reliable method for
biomass retention compared to gravity settling. As a
result, MBR technology is better equipped to handling
fluctuations in influent wastewater characteristics,
which would otherwise disrupt biomass settleability.
Thus, the plant can have greater confidence that final
effluent will consistently meet the TSS discharge
requirements. While this applies to municipal
treatment plants, this fact is of greater importance
for industrial plants where the on-site WWTP is often
unmanned for many hours per day and the influent
wastewater characteristics have a greater degree of
hourly and daily variability.
Treatment plants that incorporate membrane
technology have a distinct advantage when trying
to meet tight limits on nutrients (nitrogen and
phosphorus). MBR technologies typically operate
at longer SRT (> 20 days) when compared to CAS
systems, and eliminate the potential for biomass
washout. These factors help to grow and retain
the population of microorganisms responsible for
2
 nitrification, which have low growth rates. Thus, MBR systems are well-equipped to consistently and completely
nitrify organic nitrogen and ammonia in the raw wastewater (RWW).
Additionally, the margin of error for CAS systems to meet TN and TP limits becomes increasingly lower as discharge
limits become more stringent. On a dry weight basis, biological solids have a nitrogen content of 8-12% and
phosphorus content of 0.8-5%, depending on whether the WWTP is attempting to achieve luxury phosphorus
uptake. For activated sludge systems that employ gravity clarification, the nitrogen and phosphorus bound in the
effluent solids can be sufficiently high such that even for well-operating clarifiers, meeting very low TN and TP limits
can be a significant challenge. However, MBR systems can be relied on to generate a final effluent with negligible
(< 2 mg/l) TSS concentrations. Thus, for MBR effluent, only soluble nitrogen and phosphorus will contribute to the
effluent TN and TP concentrations.
Furthermore, for activated sludge systems that require the addition of chemical (aluminum, iron, or calcium) to form
a chemical precipitate with phosphorus in order to meet very low TP limits, the chemical phosphorus precipitate
is also subject to washout in the secondary clarifier. The pore size of membranes used in MBR technologies is
sufficiently low such that the chemical phosphorus precipitate does not penetrate the membrane and is retained
within the activated sludge. Thus, with adequate chemical addition, effluent TP concentrations can be driven
to extremely low concentrations such that even very strict discharge limits (< 0.1 mg/l) can be met using MBR
technology.
Finally, most commercially-available membrane technologies can be incorporated into existing activated sludge
systems to increase treatment plant capacity and/or improve system performance. Prior to the inception and
acceptance of MBR technology, most activated sludge systems installed for municipal and industrial applications
have been some form of suspended-growth (e.g., CAS, sequencing batch reactor [SBR], etc.) or attached-growth
(e.g., packed bed, moving bed biofilm reactor [MBBR], etc.) system. Thus, for many WWTPs, much of the
infrastructure and equipment required for an MBR system (i.e., aeration basin, aeration equipment, dewatering
equipment, etc.) are already in place and can be reused as part of the MBR system. The approach of converting an
existing activated sludge system to an MBR system can help reduce capital costs and minimize the footprint required
to expand the capacity and improve the performance of an existing WWTP.

www.evoqua.com 3
 NOOSA YOGHURT WWTP: PHASE 1

SYSTEM DESIGN
The Noosa Yoghurt WWTP was designed and installed in phases, with the anticipation that the treatment plant
would need to be expanded in the future to accommodate an increase in production and potential changes in
discharge limits.
Since system expandability was one of the primary factors that influenced the decision to install MBR technology,
Noosa sought a membrane technology that could be easily expanded to accommodate future increases in design
flow. Noosa selected ADI Systems to provide process design services and to supply a prefabricated modular
membrane tank with ancillary equipment. The membrane cassettes and liquid and air piping internal to the
membrane tank were preinstalled in the prefabricated tank prior to shipping from ADI Systems’ fabrication shop
in Canada direct to site. When received on site, the prefabricated tank was crane-lifted onto a concrete pad and
all permeate, air, and mixed liquor feed piping were piped to the tank’s preinstalled flange connections. This
modular membrane tank resulted in a “plug-and-play” approach, which significantly simplified on-site construction
associated with the membrane tank. Side and top views of the modular membrane tank are shown in Figures 3 and
4, respectively.

Figure 3 – Side view of modular membrane tank installed Figure 4 – Top view of modular membrane tank installed
at Noosa Yoghurt WWTP at Noosa Yoghurt WWTP

Figure 5 – Process flow diagram for Phase 1 of

Noosa Yoghurt WWTP

www.evoqua.com 4
 Wastewater from both the Noosa Yoghurt plant and
Morning Fresh Dairy is discharged to an influent
lift station, where three influent pumps (lead/lag/
standby arrangement) are used to pump wastewater
to the equalization (EQ) tank. Influent wastewater
is pre-screened using a slope screen prior to being
discharged into the EQ tank. This pre-screening serves
to protect the membranes and air diffusers in the MBR
system. The contents of the EQ tank are mixed and
aerated using a side stream of air from the aeration
blowers. The EQ tank is sized to provide sufficient HRT
for preacidification and flow attenuation prior to the
biological treatment system.
Forward feed pumps (one duty, one standby) are used
to transfer the equalized wastewater from the EQ
tank to the aeration basin. In the aeration basin, air
is supplied for mixing and to provide oxygen for BOD
removal and nitrification. Aeration and mixing are
provided by the jet aeration system consisting of three
aeration blowers (two duty, one standby), two jet
recirculation pumps (one duty, one standby), and the
FRP manifold piping with jet nozzles. The jet aeration
system simultaneously introduces large volumes of
air (via the air blowers) and mixed liquor (via the jet
recirculation pump) through a series of jet nozzles.
The rapid mixing of air and mixed liquor and
distribution at a high velocity accomplishes three
goals. First, the high degree of turbulence creates a
significant amount of mixing across and throughout
the aeration basin. Second, the hydrodynamic
conditions result in high alpha factors, which results
in high oxygen transfer efficiency. Finally, the design
of the jet aeration system reduces the potential for
scaling when compared to fine-bubble or disc diffuser
systems, which subsequently reduces long-term
maintenance for the aeration system.
www.evoqua.com
Alum is added into the discharge side of the jet
recirculation pumps via the chemical metering
pump. Sufficient alum is added in order to chemically
precipitate phosphorus so that the effluent TP
discharge limit of 5.4 mg/l can be consistently met.
Mixed liquor flows by gravity from the aeration
basin to the modular membrane tank. As seen in
Figure 4, the modular tank is separated into three
compartments: two membrane tanks and one return
activated sludge (RAS) sump separating the two
membrane tanks. The mixed liquor flow from the
aeration basin is evenly distributed between the
two membrane tanks. The membrane tanks house
the membrane cassettes, which provide the final
solids-liquid separation. Air for BOD removal, mixing,
and membrane scouring is provided by the integral
coarse-bubble diffused aeration system and scour
blowers (two duty, one standby). The air scour serves
to continuously clean the membranes, which in turn
reduces the rate of membrane fouling.
Suction filtration is achieved through the use of the
permeate pumps (two duty). The liquid permeate is
extracted through the membranes, while the biological
solids, which are too large to pass through the
membrane pores, are retained in the MBR system.
Mixed liquor from the membrane tanks overflows into
the RAS sump and is recycled to the aeration basin
via the RAS pumps (one duty, one standby). Waste
activated sludge (WAS) is wasted off the RAS line
using an automatic flow control valve and flow meter.
The design characteristics of the raw dairy plant
wastewater (MBR influent), discharge limits, and
projected MBR effluent characteristics for Phase 1 are
listed in Table 1.
5
 TABLE 1. NOOSA YOGHURT WWTP DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS
AND DISCHARGE LIMITS FOR PHASE 1
RWW
PARAMETER DISCHARGE LIMITS MBR EFFLUENT
(MBR INFLUENT)

Flow (m3/d) 300 --- 300

Flow (gpd) 80,000 --- 80,000

COD (mg/l) 11,500 --- ---

BOD (mg/l) 4,000 --- < 10

BOD (kg/d) 1,200 < 4.0 < 4.0

TSS (mg/l) 1,500 --- <2

TSS (kg/d) 450 < 4.9 < 4.9

FOG (mg/l) 80 < 10 < 10

TKN (mg/l) 268 --- ---

NH3-N (mg/l) --- < 50 <5

TN (mg/l) --- < 47.6 < 47.6

TP (mg/l) 40 < 5.4 < 5.4

Ca (mg/l) 75 --- ---

Mg (mg/l) 30 --- ---

Turbidity (NTU) --- --- <1

pH 4-6 6.5-9.0 6.5-9.0

OPERATING RESULTS
The Noosa Yoghurt WWTP was commissioned in
September 2016, and has since consistently met the
biological treatment objectives.
Noosa personnel monitor the COD concentrations
of composite MBR influent and effluent streams
to evaluate the organics removal efficiency of
the MBR system. As shown in Figure 6, the MBR
system consistently achieves a high COD removal
efficiency. Since start-up, the Noosa plant RWW
COD concentrations have ranged from 1,800 mg/l
to 16,600 mg/l with an average of 6,400 mg/l. MBR
permeate COD concentrations have consistently
been less than 100 mg/l, with an average of 40
mg/l. These results correspond to an average COD
removal efficiency of 99.3%. Furthermore, BOD
measurements conducted by an external laboratory
verify that the MBR system consistently generates
a final effluent with BOD concentrations less than
5 mg/l, corresponding to an average BOD removal
efficiency of 99.9%.

www.evoqua.com 6
 The trend of COD removals demonstrates two key aspects of MBR technology. First, the MBR system is able to handle
a wide range of organic loading conditions while consistently generating a final effluent that meets the treatment
objectives for effluent BOD. Second, the MBR system is capable of achieving this high degree of organics removals
without primary pretreatment of the raw dairy plant wastewater. The raw solids and FOG are sent directly to the MBR
system, which has sufficient HRT, SRT, and membrane capacity to digest the complex organics without impacting
biological stability or membrane performance. This demonstrates how MBR technology can be utilized to treat raw
dairy plant wastewater without the need for primary pretreatment in a DAF clarifier.

Figure 7 displays trends in aeration basin

Figure 6 – Noosa Yoghurt WWTP influent and effluent COD concentrations
Figure 6 – Noosa Yoghurt MBR system aeration basin MLSS and final
effluent TSS concentrations
MLSS concentration and final effluent TSS
concentrations. The aeration basin MLSS
concentration has ranged from 4,000 mg/l
to 13,000 mg/l, which demonstrates the
ability of the MBR system to operate at MLSS
concentrations much higher than traditional
CAS systems. The aeration basin MLSS
concentration has varied within a wide range as
Noosa have sought to optimize the system SRT
and evaluate methods for WAS dewatering in
the eight months since start-up.
As expected, MBR permeate TSS
concentrations have been consistently less
than 2 mg/l. These results have been verified
based on laboratory TSS testing, visual
observations of the permeate sight glasses on
the suction sides of the permeate pumps (see
Figure 7), as well as readings from the turbidity
meter installed on the effluent line common to
both membrane tanks. MBR permeate turbidity
has been consistently less than 0.5 NTU during
normal operation, and effluent turbidity has
only been found to exceed 1 NTU in the few
hours directly after a membrane cleaning
event.
Regarding membrane cleaning events, in
the eight months since start-up, only two
membrane recovery cleanings have been
conducted. This low cleaning frequency
occurred despite the Noosa Yogurt wastewater
flows frequently exceeding the design hydraulic
capacity of the MBR system during Phase 1,
as outlined in the subsequent sections of this
paper.

www.evoqua.com 7
 NOOSA YOGHURT WWTP: PHASE 2
SYSTEM DESIGN
Prior to the start-up of WWTP components installed
for Phase 1, Noosa Yoghurt signed a contract with a
major American retailer, which would increase plant
production and wastewater generation. Thus, the
WWTP would need to be expanded much sooner
than originally projected. The expanded WWTP
would not only need to be designed to double the
hydraulic and organic loading capacity, but also
generate a final effluent to meet the following revised
limits for direct discharge to the Poudre River:
•B
 OD limit slightly relaxed from
4.0 kg/d to 30 mg/l
•T
 SS limit slightly relaxed from
4.9 kg/d to 30 mg/l
• FOG limit maintained at 10 mg/l
•N
 H3-N limit reduced from 50 mg/l
to 15.66 mg/l
• TN limit reduced from 47.6 mg/l to 14.84 mg/l
• TP limit reduced from 5.4 mg/l to 1.72 mg/l
•S
 pring/summer monthly average and daily
maximum effluent temperatures maintained to
less than 18.3°C and 23.9°C, respectively
• F all/winter monthly average and daily maximum
effluent temperatures maintained to less than
9.0°C and 13.0°C, respectively
www.evoqua.com
The solution to increase the treatment plant capacity
while meeting the revised discharge limits was to
install a second modular membrane tank to operate in
parallel with the first modular membrane tank and to
expand the MBR system in order to achieve BNR.
As part of the Phase 2 expansion, the following
components were added to the MBR system:
•S
 econd EQ tank installed to operate in parallel
with the existing EQ tank
•A
 naerobic basin with submersible mixer installed
to promote luxury phosphorus uptake in order to
reduce alum requirements
•P
 re-anoxic basin with two floating mixers
installed to promote denitrification
•S
 econd aeration basin with jet aeration system
to double the capacity for BOD removal and
nitrification
•P
 ost-anoxic basin with two floating mixers
installed to promote denitrification
•S
 econd modular membrane tank with ancillary
equipment to double the hydraulic capacity of
the MBR system
The process flow diagram for the MBR system
installed in Phase 2 is shown in Figure 8.
Figure 8 – Process flow diagram for
Phase 2 of Noosa Yoghurt WWTP
8
 For the WWTP installed for Phase 2, process
wastewater from the Noosa Yoghurt and Morning
Fresh Dairy plants is pre-screened and discharged to
the two EQ tanks, which are hydraulically connected.
Forward feed pumps (one duty, one standby) transfer
the equalized wastewater from the EQ tanks to the
anaerobic basin. Wastewater is temperature-adjusted
using the heat exchanger on the discharge of the
forward feed pumps. Mixed liquor is recycled from
the pre-anoxic basin to the anaerobic basin, and the
conditions in the anaerobic basin (mixed, unaerated,
low DO and nitrate concentrations) promote enhanced
biological phosphorus removal in the MBR system.
Mixed liquor flows by gravity from the anaerobic
basin to the pre-anoxic basin. Recycled mixed liquor
from the aeration basins (via the nitrate recycle
pumps) and the RAS sumps (via the duty RAS pumps)
is discharged to the pre-anoxic basin. The mixed,
unaerated conditions in the pre-anoxic basin promote
denitrification.
Mixed liquor is pumped from the pre-anoxic basin to
the two aeration basins using the solids feed pumps
(one dedicated to each aeration basin). In the aeration
basins, aeration and mixing for BOD removal and
nitrification are provided by the jet aeration systems
consisting of five aeration blowers (four duty, one
standby) and three jet recirculation pumps (two duty,
one standby). If enhanced biological phosphorus
removal cannot meet the effluent TP limit, alum can
be added into the jet recirculation lines in order to
chemically precipitate phosphorus so that the TP
discharge limit of 1.72 mg/l can be consistently met.
www.evoqua.com
Mixed liquor will flow by gravity from the aeration
basins to the post-anoxic basin. If necessary, carbon
source can be supplied to the post-anoxic basin, as
required, in order to achieve further denitrification to
meet the effluent TN discharge limit of 14.84 mg/l.
Mixed liquor flows by gravity (at a controlled rate)
from the post-anoxic basin to the two modular
(prefabricated) tanks, which each consist of two
membrane tanks and one RAS sump. Air for
BOD removal, mixing, and membrane scouring is
provided by the five air scour blowers (four duty, one
standby). The air scour serves to continuously clean
the membranes, which in turn reduces the rate of
membrane fouling.
Suction filtration is achieved through the use of the
permeate pumps (four duty). The liquid permeate is
extracted through the membranes, while the biological
solids that are too large to pass through the membrane
pores are retained in the MBR system. MBR effluent is
discharged to the effluent cistern for re-aeration prior
to discharge or reuse.
Mixed liquor from the membrane tanks continuously
overflows into the RAS sumps where the RAS pumps
(two duty, two standby) continuously recycle mixed
liquor to the pre-anoxic basin. WAS generated in the
MBR system, primarily composed of biological solids
and chemical precipitate, is wasted off the recycle line
using flow meters and automatic flow control valves.
The design characteristics of the raw dairy plant
wastewater (MBR influent), discharge limits, and
projected MBR effluent characteristics for Phase 2 are
listed in Table 2.
9
 TABLE 2. NOOSA YOGHURT WWTP DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS AND
DISCHARGE LIMITS FOR PHASE 2
RWW
PARAMETER DISCHARGE LIMITS MBR EFFLUENT
(MBR INFLUENT)

Flow (m3/d) 600 --- 600

Flow (gpd) 160,000 --- 160,000

COD (mg/l) 11,500 --- ---

BOD (mg/l) 4,000 < 30 < 10

TSS (mg/l) 1,500 < 30 <2

FOG (mg/l) 80 < 10 < 10

TKN (mg/l) 268 --- ---

NH3-N (mg/l) --- < 15.66 <5

TN (mg/l) --- < 14.84 < 14.84

TP (mg/l) 40 < 1.72 < 1.72

Ca (mg/l) 75 --- ---

Mg (mg/l) 30 --- ---

Turbidity (NTU) --- --- <1

pH 4-6 6.0-9.0 6.0-9.0

Spring/summer temperature (°C) --- < 18.3 < 18.3

Fall/winter temperature (°C) --- < 9.0 < 9.0

www.evoqua.com 10
 OPERATING RESULTS
The Phase 2 expansion components were While the MBR system has achieved a high degree
commissioned in April 2017. As seen in Figures 6 and of nitrogen removal, at the time of writing chemical
7, the MBR system continued to maintain high COD phosphorus removal had not been incorporated into
and TSS removal efficiencies after the start-up of the the treatment plant. This is primarily due to the fact
expansion components. that the majority of MBR permeate being generated
Of primary concern for the expanded MBR system is being reused either as cow drinking water or barn
was the ability to achieve BNR. Trends for MBR washdown water. Since treated permeate is being
system influent TKN, effluent NH3-N, and effluent reused as opposed to directly discharged to the river,
NO3-N concentrations are shown in Figure 9. Prior chemical phosphorus removal has not been required.
to the installation of the expansion components, If/when permeate will be directly discharged to the
the MBR system consistently achieved complete river, the MBR system will be equipped to generate
nitrification, as demonstrated by the trend of effluent effluent that meets the TP discharge limit.
NH3-N concentrations (average MBR permeate
NH3-N concentration of 0.8 mg/l since start-up).
A combination of lower-than-design influent TKN
concentrations and low operating DO concentrations
in the aeration basin (resulting in simultaneous
nitrification/denitrification) frequently resulted in
effluent NO3-N concentrations of less than 10 mg/l
while the Phase 1 components were in operation
(September 2016 to April 2017). However, during
this period, there were instances where the MBR
effluent NO3-N concentrations exceeded 25 mg/l for
several consecutive weeks. After April 2017, when the
anaerobic and pre-anoxic basins became operational, Figure 9 – Noosa Yoghurt MBR system influent TKN, effluent NH3-N,
and effluent NO3-N concentrations
the MBR system continued to achieve complete
nitrification and the effluent NO3-N concentrations
were consistently measured to be less than 3 mg/l.

www.evoqua.com 11
 CONCLUSIONS
The following points summarize the design and operation of the Noosa Yoghurt MBR:
•R
 aw dairy plant wastewater, including raw organics, TSS, and FOG, has been treated in the MBR system,
eliminating the requirement for primary pretreatment (e.g., DAF system).
•P
 refabricated membrane tank simplifies on-site construction and allows the treatment plant to expand with
increasing production.
•M
 BR technology is a robust, reliable system that maintains biological stability and consistently generates a
high-quality final effluent.
> Average MBR effluent COD concentration of 40 mg/l
> Average MBR effluent BOD concentration of < 5 mg/l
> Average MBR effluent TSS concentration of < 2 mg/l
•M
 embrane technology aids in maintaining consistent nitrification.
> Average MBR effluent NH3-N concentration of 0.8 mg/l
• I ncorporating BNR into the MBR process results in MBR effluent TN concentrations of < 4 mg/l.
•M
 BR system has low maintenance requirements.
> Minimal operator attention required to run the MBR system
> Low rate of membrane fouling, resulting in only two membrane recovery cleanings during the first eight
months of operation
•M
 BR technology is capable of treating raw dairy plant wastewater and generating a final effluent suitable for
greywater reuse applications in a single treatment stage.

REFERENCES
Judd, S. (2014) Industrial MBRs. Judd and Judd Ltd. UK.
Rittmann, B.E. and McCarty, P.L. (2001) Environmental
Biotechnology: Principles and Applications. McGraw-
Hill. New York.
Wachinski, A.M. (2013) Membrane Processes for Water
Reuse. McGraw-Hill. New York.
WEF Manual of Practice No. 36: Membrane Bioreactors.
(2011) McGraw-Hill. New York.

+1 (800) 561-2831 (toll-free) +1 (506) 452-7307 (toll) www.evoqua.com

ADI, BVF and ADI-BVF are trademarks of Evoqua, its affiliates and subsidiaries in some countries.

All information presented herein is believed reliable and in accordance with accepted engineering practices. Evoqua makes no
warranties as to the completeness of this information. Users are responsible for evaluating individual product suitability for specific
applications. Evoqua assumes no liability whatsoever for any special, indirect or consequential damages arising from the sale, resale
or misuse of its products.

Cover photograph was taken inside a tertiary clarifier at Sturbridge, MA and depicts magnetite ballasted technology at work.

© 2019 Evoqua Water Technologies LLC Subject to change without notice ADI-NoosaYoghurt-WP-0319

www.evoqua.com 12