Vol 1 - Feasibility Study Technical Part IPA1

his project is funded by
the European Union
Feasibility Study
for upgrading the WWTP in Vranishta and
extension of the collector system for Ohrid Lake
A project implemented
by Particip GmbH
The European Unions Operational Programme Regional Development 2007-2011

under IPA
Preparation of necessary documentation for

upgrading the WWTP in Vranishta and extension
of the collector system for Ohrid Lake
Feasibility Study
Part 1 Technical part
Draft Final Report
June 2015
IPA/OPRD2007-2011/3.1/LOT6/08
This project is funded by the European Union
A project implemented by
Particip GmbH
This project is funded by

the European Union
Feasibility Study
A project implemented
by Particip GmbH
The contents of this report are the sole responsibility of Particip and its consortium
partners and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union.

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Consultants Office:
ETI Consulting
43, rue dAboukir,
75002 Paris
France
Phone: + 33-1-42 22 93 30
Fax: +33-1-73 72 95 81
radmila@eti-consulting.net
stevan@eti-consulting.net
www.eti-consulting.net
Document title
Preparation of necessary documentation for upgrading

the WWTP in Vranishta and extension of the collector
system for Ohrid Lake
Document short title

Status
Date
Programme name
Reference number
Client
End recipients
Feasibility Study part 1

Draft Final Report
June 2015
FWC Beneficiaries 2013 Lot 6: Environment
IPA/OPRD2007-2011/3.1/LOT6/10
Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning
Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning and
Municipalities of Struga, Ohrid and Vevcani
11-38829/1
Contract number
Drafted by:
D. Jaki
M. Soa
K. Josipovi
E. Spirovska
M. Bakula
Checked by
R.Stanisavljevi
Date/initials check
Approved by
Joerg Boehringer
Date/initials
approval
.
.
This report: the Feasibility Study consists of two parts:

Part 1:
Feasibility Study Technical (this Volume)
Part 2:
Cost Benefit Analysis

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Table of Contents
1
SUMMARY OF THE FEASIBILITY STUDY ................................................................. 5
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
Scope of the Project ....................................................................................................... 5

Implementation of the Project by EU Funds .................................................................... 5
Current state .................................................................................................................. 5
Project objectives ........................................................................................................... 7
Technical solution and final concept of the project .......................................................... 8
Procurement plan and implementation of the project ................................................... 12
Environment impact ..................................................................................................... 14
Summary of cost/benefit analysis ................................................................................. 14
Financing plan .............................................................................................................. 14
SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONTEXT .............................................................................. 15
2.1
2.2
Republic of Macedonia ................................................................................................. 15

Territorial and Environmental aspects........................................................................... 15
2.2.1
2.2.2
2.2.3
2.2.4
2.2.5
2.3
Project area ...........................................................................................................................................15

Administrative division ..........................................................................................................................18
Relief and land use ................................................................................................................................20
Climate ..................................................................................................................................................22
Surface waters.......................................................................................................................................25
Current population and population development.......................................................... 30

2.3.1
2.3.2
2.4
Population development in Macedonia ................................................................................................30

Predictions for Population development in the Project Area ...............................................................33
Current tourism and tourism development ................................................................... 35

2.4.1
2.4.2
2.5
Tourism on Ohrid Lake ..........................................................................................................................35

Predictions for tourist development in the Project area ......................................................................36
Environmental Aspects and Impact ............................................................................... 37

2.5.1
2.5.2
2.5.3
Environmental Impact Assessment process ..........................................................................................37

Protection zones....................................................................................................................................38
Main environmental impacts ................................................................................................................40
EXISTING WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND TREATMENT SYSTEM,

DEMAND PROJECTIONS...................................................................................... 43
3.1
Wastewater collection system ...................................................................................... 43

3.1.1
3.1.2
3.1.3
3.1.4
Primary collectors..................................................................................................................................44
Sewerage collection in Struga ...............................................................................................................47
Sewerage collection in Ohrid ................................................................................................................49
Problems of the existing sewerage system ...........................................................................................50

the European Union
3.2
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Wastewater treatment plant Vranishta......................................................................... 53

3.2.1
3.2.2
3.2.3
3.2.4
3.2.5
3.3
Original load and effluent requirements...............................................................................................54

Description of old wastewater treatment line ......................................................................................54
Sludge treatment line............................................................................................................................56
Outline mechanical design description .................................................................................................56
Operation of the WWTP ........................................................................................................................59
Input data for WWTP Vranishta .................................................................................... 78

3.3.1
3.3.2
Water quantities ...................................................................................................................................78

Water quality.........................................................................................................................................80
LONG TERM INVESTMENT NEEDS IN THE SECTOR ............................................... 91
4.1
Regulatory framework for Water Management............................................................. 91

4.1.1
4.1.2
4.1.3
4.1.4
4.2
General objectives.................................................................................................................................91
Legal framework of the European Union ..............................................................................................91
Legal framework of the Republic of Macedonia ...................................................................................95
National strategic framework ...............................................................................................................99
Long Term Investment Programme ..............................................................................100

4.2.1
4.2.2
Investment programme waste water collection and treatment........................................................ 100

Prioritization of the Long Term Investment Plan for waste water collection and
treatment ........................................................................................................................................... 101
ANALYSIS OF OPTIONS FOR SHORT TERM INVESTMENT PROGRAMME ............. 102
5.1
5.2
Collector Radozhda Kalishta (extension of West Collector).........................................102

Waste water treatment technology .............................................................................108
5.2.1
5.2.2
5.2.3
5.2.4
5.2.5
5.2.6
5.2.7
5.2.8
5.2.9
Basis for calculations, design elements and facilities......................................................................... 108

Analysis of variant technologies for upgrade of WWTP Vranishta..................................................... 108
Option 1 - Extension to ULLAS WWTP with simultaneous sludge stabilization ................................. 112
Option 2 Extension to N-DN WWTP with separate aerobic sludge stabilization............................. 114
Option 3 Extension to N-DN WWTP with separate anaerobic sludge stabilization......................... 116
Treated (effluent) water quality......................................................................................................... 120
Sludge Management .......................................................................................................................... 122
Overview of investment and O&M costs ........................................................................................... 126
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................................... 129
PROCUREMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ................................................. 131
6.1
Procurement Plan........................................................................................................131
6.1.1
6.1.2
Contract types .................................................................................................................................... 131

Contracts for works, services and goods............................................................................................ 131
6.2
Implementation Plan...................................................................................................134
LIST OF ANNEXES ............................................................................................. 135

the European Union
Feasibility Study
SUMMARY OF THE FEASIBILITY STUDY
1.1
Scope of the Project
Particip GmbH
According to the ToR, scope of the project is:

upgrading the WWTP in Vranishta,
extension of the collector system for Ohrid Lake.
1.2
Implementation of the Project by EU Funds
The Contracting Authority for this project is:

Central Financing and Contracting Department (CFCD), Ministry of Finance
The Beneficiary is:
Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning (MoEPP)
The End recipients are:
Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning and the
Municipalities of Ohrid, Struga and Vevchani.
MoEPP is a body within the Operating Structure (OS) responsible for initiating and
implementing operations under the Regional Development Component part Environment,
that retains the direct responsibility for the implementation of the operations under the
OPRD, namely in terms of establishing contracting arrangements and making financial
transactions associated thereto.
1.3
Current state
Basic concept for implementation of the Regional collection and treatment system for
Protection of Ohrid Lake is prepared in 1979 year in order to ensure full protection of the
Ohrid Lake and its sensitive eco system.
Further realization and constructions of the wastewater system on Ohrid Lake was
developed in compliance with financial possibilities. Regional sewage system is designed to

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
collect, transfer and treat all wastewater in the Lake region. WWTP is constructed near
settlement Vranishta whit outflow into the river Crni Drim, away from the Ohrid Lake.
The existing Regional collection and treatment system includes the following technical units:
2 separated secondary sewerage networks in Ohrid and Struga,
13 pumping stations on secondary sewer networks,
primary collectors,
12 pumping stations of the primary collectors,
wastewater treatment plant for mechanical and biological treatment.
The current system for collection and treatment of wastewater and protection of Ohrid Lake
don't cover all waste water along the coast. Unfortunately, from Gradishte (popular autocamp) to St. Naum (near the Macedonian - Albanian border) on the side of Municipality of
Ohrid, the wastewater is discharged into the lake. In this area are located two settlements:
Trpejca and Ljubanishta, and some tourist facilities as auto camps in Gradishte, St. Naum and
Ljubanishta, hotels and restaurants. The number of the permanent population is about 600,
but in summer the situation is alarming because the number of visitors is about 12,000,
which means 20 times more than in rest of the year. The most dramatic situation is in
Trpejca, one of the most popular and most visited places on the coast. Moreover, as close to
Trpejca offshore sources are used for the Ohrid Lake water supply to the citizens of the city.
For this area a Feasibility study and CBA was performed which indicated that these two
settlements would need to have separate system for waste water treatment due to the large
distance from the first possible connection point to the collector which brings waste water
into the sewage system of the municipality of Ohrid.
Almost identical situation is from Kalishta to Radozhda on the side of Municipality of Struga,
where that wastewater is also not covered by the existing system. Namely, the settlement
Radozhda is on the western coast of the Ohrid Lake and is adjacent to the Macedonian Albanian border. Permanently there live about 850 inhabitants and its a typical fishing
village. In the summer due to the tourism facilities, auto-camps (Treska and Livadishte) and
restaurants, a massive attendance and the number of users in the system is almost double
increased. Currently the most of the households and tourist facilities discharge wastewater
directly in the lake, while only a smaller part of them have septic tanks that also impact on
water pollution in the Ohrid Lake through drainage of the soil and vicinity of the shore.

the European Union
1.4
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Project objectives
Global objective
The global objective of the project is to improve municipal wastewater infrastructure in
compliance with the UWWT Directive (91/271/EEC) through preparation of relevant
documents for the investment project.
Specific objective(s)
The specific objective of this assignment was preparation of necessary documentation for:
1. Upgrading the WWTP in Vranishta,
2. Extension of the collector system for Ohrid Lake.
This assignment comprises preparation of:
Feasibility Study,
Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA),
Design documentation,
Volume 3, Volume 4 and Volume 5 of the tender dossier (TD) for the works contract.
Task 1 Review and verification of the available information of the water cycle (water
supply, collection and treatment of waste water) and of available documentation regarding
to the upgrading of the WWTP in Vranishta and extension of the collector system for Ohrid
Lake
Task 2 Preparation of Feasibility Study for upgrading of the WWTP in Vranishta and
Task 3 Development of a Cost Benefit Analysis for upgrading of the WWTP in Vranishta and
Task 4 Development of Procurement Strategy
Task 5 Preparation of design documentation for upgrading of the WWTP in Vranishta and
Task 6 Preparation of Volume 3, Volume 4 and Volume 5 of the tender dossier for works
contract upgrading of the WWTP in Vranishta and extension of the collector system for
Ohrid Lake

the European Union
1.5
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Technical solution and final concept of the project
The Waste water system for Ohrid lake protection consisting of East and West collector and
Wastewater Treatment Plant at Vranishta (near Struga) was constructed from 1984 to 1986.
The system was designed for household wastewater which is conveyed by the East and West
collectors around the Ohrid Lake. Wastewater is collected by separate as well combined
sewer system in the catchment area. Totally, there are 15 operational pumping/lifting
stations in the service area on main collector that deliver wastewater into the sewage plant
and are operated/maintained by MJP "PROAQUA" Struga. Additional part of collector from
Radozhda to Kalishta with 3 pumping station at Treska, Radozhda and Livadishta will be
added with this project. Main design has been prepared by the Consultants local partner
and covers some 5 km pressure sewer with diameters between 160mm and 250mm. Also
some 120 m of gravity sewer with diameter of 90 mm has been designed. The pressure
sewer is needed due to configuration of ground.
This project is approved by Macedonian law and ready for tendering.
The wastewater from municipalities Ohrid and Stuga is treated in WWTP Vranishta.

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
The original design capacities of the first phase of the WWTP Vranishta are as follows:Maximum capacity:
120,000 PE
Maximum daily flow:
705 l/s
The maximum population equivalent of 120,000 PE was envisaged for summer season with
tourism. In the winter period, the population equivalent ranges now from 60,000 to 70,000
PE. In FS the future calculated peak load in 2045 year amounts 125,000 PE in month August,
at the peak of tourist season. In the future the winter load of WWTP remains lower than in
summer and can rise up to some 88,000 PE in 2045.
For the technological analysis of all options the Consultant has considered optimal usage of
the existing WWTP with all its facilities. Next three technological options were considered
where the existing plant could be reused as much as possible:
Extension to ULLAS WWTP with simultaneous sludge stabilization
Extension to N-DN WWTP with separate aerobic sludge stabilization
Extension to N-DN WWTP with separate anaerobic sludge stabilization
After all the first option came out as the best for upgrade of WWTP in Vranishta. To create
sludge stabilisation in water line, as 1st option proposed, design BOD-biological load- Bts
should be about 0,05 kg BOD/kgMLSSday, with sludge retention time (SRT) of about 25
days. These process circumstances have to be satisfied at winter design conditions at
temperature of 10C. (for the calculation of the reactors volume) when the load of the plant
is only about 70% of maximum load (Qmax=125,000 PE). On the other hand in the summer,
when the load is highest, much shorter SRT is needed for simultaneous sludge stabilization
e.g. some 10 days at 25oC. During the summer WWTP can easily work with higher Bts than
for extended aeration.
Using this seasonal load distribution in his design the Consultant creates significant savings in
needed biomass and biological reactors volume for upgraded WWTP at Vranishta.
This seasonal load difference is an advantage and is taken in consideration for defining
WWTP design capacity. If the WWTP would be designed with Bts of 0.05 kg/kgday with
maximum load as it is for classical ULLAS extended aeration system, the WWTP would stay
under loaded for the longest period of the year when only 80,000-87,000 people are to be
served with WWTP. By this approach this the plant would work optimally the whole year.
Additionally, due the length of collectors and the distance from which the wastewater has to
be pumped to the WWTP, daily organic and hydraulic load is evenly spread over the day, so
the morning pick load from Struga will be already treated when the wastewater pick form
Ohrid and east collector will arrive some 4-5 hours later. Design parameters are given in the
table here under.

the European Union
Feasibility Study
August
full load - 20oC
Design parameters
Load [kgBOD/d]
Particip GmbH
Winter
peak conditions - 12oC
6,250
5,000
0.065
0.05
24,800
24,800
SRT sludge retention time [days]
18
22.5
SRT sludge stabilisation [days]
13
18
MLSS [kg]
Bts [kgBOD/kgMLSSd]
MLSS [kg]
3
Biological reactor volume [m ]
Volume of the WWTP is designed as extended aeration on winter load conditions. In this
way, by choosing higher peak Bts, for summer, peak conditions, some 6,500 m3 smaller plant
could be built than for classic extended aeration. Extra reactor volume will be realized in
2 aeration tanks (AT) with the same shape as existing tanks except for the depth of 6.0 m
chosen to reduce needed area for extension. Additional benefit of deeper tank will be
possibility of application of more efficient fine bubble aeration in new AT. The depth of 6.0
m enhances total oxygen transfer efficiency of the fine bubble aeration. In the old AT fine
bubble aeration would not be as efficient as the water depth is only 3.0 m.
Therefore the existing aeration system with surface aeration will be kept in old tanks. As well
as in old AT, the mixers will be also installed in new tanks to enhance aeration and
denitrification process.
Nitrification denitrification will be arranged as simultaneous with a possibility of intermittent
aeration what should additionally reduce electricity consumption for aeration.
The phosphorus removal stringent norm of 1 mgP/l will realized combining normal sludge
phosphorus uptake, enhanced biological phosphorus removal (EBPR) and chemical
precipitation by adding metal salts chemicals.
To accommodate new situation an additional final sedimentation tank (FST) with diameter
D = 40 m will be needed and both old tanks will go under reconstruction and equipment
renewal.
The effluent results of this wastewater treatment system will be within requested limits and
the operation is reliable and relatively simple to control. Sludge will be stabilised in water
line and after thickening, this aerobically digested sludge will be dewatered with existing
belt-presses, after conditioning with polymer which is added to improve separation of sludge
water. Digested surplus sludge should be regularly tested on heavy metal content before its
application in agriculture. The region itself is well known on his mines rich with metals like
iron-Fe, chromium - Cr and nickel-Ni (2.5 km from the lake). In the vicinity of the lake it is
very reasonable to expect natural higher content of these metals in the soil as well as in the
10

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
sludge. Therefore also the soil predicted for sludge application should be regularly controlled
on heavy metals before the decision will b made. If this content is higher than allowed in EU
Sewage sludge directive (86/278/EEC) than it should be disposed on local landfill at price of
20 EUR/t or some other locally available final treatment. The centrate form sludge
dewatering is collected and brought back to the beginning of water line.
11

the European Union
1.6
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Procurement plan and implementation of the project
The following procurement packages are proposed:
Package 1 as a FIDIC Red Book work contract for:

o Construction of Radozhda-Kalishta collector
Package 2 as a FIDIC Yellow Book design and build contract for:

o Reconstruction and upgrading of WWTP Vranishta
Package 3 as PRAG Service type of contract for:

o Supervision of the works

o Technical assistance

o Publicity and visibility
Based on the proposed procurement packages, the following table present indicative
procurement plan (services, works - design & build or measured works) with values of
contracts envisaged and start and completion dates.
Table 1-1: Indicative Procurement Plan
Contract
Package
Work Component
Estimated
value
(EUR)
Contingency
Estimated
contract
value (EUR)
Type of Contract
563,683
10%
620,,051
FIDIC RED BOOK
6,412,569
10%
7,053,826
FIDIC YELLOW BOOK
Construction of RadozhdaKalishta collector
Reconstruction and upgrading

of WWTP Vranishta
Supervision of the works
488,338
10%
537,171
PRAG Service
Contract
Technical assistance
139,525
10%
153,478
PRAG Service
Contract
Publicity and visibility
24,417
10%
26,859
PRAG Service
Contract
7,628,532
10%
8,391,385
GRAND TOTAL
12

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
In the following table, main activities for tenders are presented.

Table 1-2:
Bar graph of main activities

2015
2016
2017
II.1
WORKS
(reconstruction
and
upgrading of the WWTP)
Preparation of tender documents
Tender process
Contracting
Preparation
of
project
documentation / permits
Works,
Handover, defect notification
WORKS
(primary
collector
Radozhda-Kalishta)
II.2
Tender process
II.3
Contracting
II.4
Works
II.5
Handover
III
III.1
III.2
III.3
III.4
SERVICES (supervision)
Tender process
Contracting
Duration of supervision
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
SERVICES (technical assistance)
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
I
I.1
I.2
I.3
I.4
I.5
I.6
II
IV
IV.1
IV.2
Tender process
IV.3
Contracting
IV.4
Duration of technical assistance
V
V.1
V.2
V.3
V.4
SERVICES (publicity and visibility)

Tender process
Contracting
Duration of publicity services
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
13

the European Union
1.7
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Environment impact
The existing waste water treatment facilities have only secondary level of treatment. In parts
of the area, people discharge their untreated wastewater in Lake Ohrid.
The reconstructed and upgraded WWTP will treat wastewaters to tertiary level of treatment:
BOD5-25 mg/l, COD-125 mg/l, TSS-35 mg/l, TN-10 mg/l, and TP-1 mg/l effluent standard,
prior to discharge into the River Crni Drim defined as sensitive waters.
Since this project includes reconstruction and upgrading of the WWTP Vranishta with design
capacity of 125,000 PE, an EIA screening process needs to be done by the Macedonian and
European legislation.
Preparation of an Environmental Protection Elaborate is obligation of the Municipality of
Struga. Elaborate is now under preparation and after finalization it will be submitted to the
authorized body (MoEPP) for evaluation. Based on the Elaborate, MoEPP will give official
decision if it is for the reconstruction and upgrading of the WWTP Vranishta necessary to go
in EIA scoping process or not. Environmental Protection Elaborate will be submitted to
MoEPP at the beginning of July 2015.
Main purpose of this project is to improve protection of the Lake Ohrid from the negative
impact of untreated sanitary wastewater. By extension of the sewerage system, all west
shore of the Macedonian part of the lake will be covered with sewerage system. Wastewater
will be treated on WWTP Vranishta and discharged into the River Crni Drim outside the
Ohrid lake.
1.8
Summary of cost/benefit analysis
See Feasibility Study Report part 2.
1.9
Financing plan
See Feasibility Study Report part 2.
14

the European Union
Feasibility Study
SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONTEXT
2.1
Republic of Macedonia
Particip GmbH
The Republic of Macedonia is a country located in south-eastern Europe. Macedonia has

border with Kosovo and Serbia on the north, Bulgaria on the east, Greece on the south and
Albania on the west. The country is part of the wider Region of Macedonia and makes up
most of Vardar Macedonia. The country is a major transportation corridor from Western and
Central Europe to Southern Europe and the Aegean Sea. Macedonia is a landlocked country
but has three major natural lakes: Lake Ohrid, Lake Prespa and Lake Dojran. It has a water
area of 857 km2, while its land area is 24,856 km2.
Skopje is the capital of the Republic of Macedonia, and is the political, economic, cultural
and transport centre located in the northwestern part of the Macedonia. Skopje has 506,926
inhabitants, on the last official census in 2002, or about a quarter of the entire republic
inhabitants, while other cities larger than 40,000 inhabitants are Bitola, Kumanovo, Prilep,
Tetovo, Ohrid, Veles and Stip.
Macedonian economy is based mainly on the services and agriculture, to a lesser extent in
industry. In the industrial sector in particular are represented machine industry (cars and
farm machinery), then chemical industry, production of electrical equipment, glass and
other. Macedonia is rich in natural resources such as forests and water, so there are more
than 50 lakes and sixteen mountains peaks over 2,000 m above sea level.
2.2
Territorial and Environmental aspects

2.2.1 Project area
Project area was is located in agglomeration Ohrid. Basic concept for implementation of the
Regional collection and treatment system for Protection of Ohrid Lake is prepared in 1979
year in order to ensure full protection of the Ohrid Lake and its sensitive eco system and
since than numerous documentation was prepared. Based on previously adopted Feasibility
Studies agglomeration Ohrid includes settlement in the Municipalities Ohrid, Struga and
Vevchani as shown on Figure 2.1.
Existing collection and treatment system covers settlements Ohrid and Struga. Long-term
plan is connection of Municipality of Vechani and villages around Struga to the WWTP
Vranishta like it is shown on Figure 2.1.
15

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Municipalities of Ohrid, Struga and Vevchani are municipalities in the south-western part of
Macedonia. They are all located nearby Ohrid Lake that is declared as a monument of nature
and is at list of world natural heritage under UNESCO protection.
Municipality of Ohrid covers an area of 390 km2 with a population of 55,749 citizens.
Municipality of Struga covers an area of 483 km2 with a population of 63,376 citizens and
Municipality of Vevchani covers an area of 35 km2 with a population of 2,433 citizens.
Figure 2.1.
Agglomeration after short term and long term investments
16

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
According to the ToR, scope of the project is:

upgrading of the WWTP Vranishta,
construction of primary collector Radozhda-Kalishta.
Figure 2.2.
Project area
17

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
2.2.2 Administrative division

Macedonia is divided into eight (8) planning Regions (Figure 2.3). Project is located in the
Southwest Region. The territory of the Southwest Region covers an area of 3,340 km and
includes following municipalities: Vevchani, Vraneshtica, Debar, Debarca, Drugovo, Zajas,
Oslomej, Ohrid, Kichevo, Makedonski Brod, Plasnica, Struga and Centar Zhupa.
Figure 2.3.
Position of Southwest Region and division on the municipalities
Municipalities of Ohrid, Struga, Kichevo, Debar and Makedonski Brod are urban
municipalities, while Drugovo, Vevchani, Vraneshtica, Debarca, Zajas, Oslomej, Plasnica and
Center Zupa are rural municipalities.
According to the last Census 2002, number of inhabitants in Macedonia is 2,022,547, out of
which 222,064 inhabitants lived in the Southwest Region. Population density in the frame of
the Southwest Region is characterized with great differentiation among the municipalities
and the settlements. In three biggest municipalities Struga, Ohrid and Kicevo live 67% of the
total population in the Region. Average population density in the Macedonia is 66.3
inhabitants per km, whereas in the Southwest Region is 96.1 inhabitants per km.
18

the European Union
Table 2-1:
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Total Population in the Southwest Region by municipalities according to the last

Census (2002)
Municipality
Population (Census 2002)
Total Macedonia
2,022,547
Ohrid
55,749
Struga
63,376
Kichevo
30,138
Debar
19,542
Makedonski Brod
7,141
Vevchani
2,433
Vraneshtica
1,322
Debartsa
5,507
Drugovo
3,249
Zajas
11,605
Oslomej
10,402
Plasnica
4,545
Centar Zhupa
6,519
Total Southwest Region
221,528
Source: Census of Population, households and dwellings in the Republic of Macedonia, 2002 (Republic of
Macedonia State Statistical Office)
The Southwest Region has one of the highest unemployment in the Macedonia. Last three
(3) years unemployment in Region is decreasing, but comparing to the country level and
other Regions, Southwest Region still has very high unemployment.
19

the European Union
Table 2-2:
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Activity rates of the working population in Macedonia and Southwest Region
Southwest Region
2011
Total population
2,058,539
221,517
Working age population (persons)
1,656,215
179,157
Activity rate
56.8
56.7
Employment rate
38.9
32.4
Unemployment rate
31.4
42.8
2012
Total population
2,061,044
220,840
1,669,965
181,650
Activity rate
56.5
56.2
Employment rate
39.0
32.4
Unemployment rate
31.0
42.3
2013
Total population
2,064,032
220,325
1,672,460
182,000
Activity rate
57.2
56.2
Employment rate
40.6
35.6
Unemployment rate
29.0
36.7
Source: Regions of the Republic of Macedonia, 2014 (Republic of Macedonia State Statistical Office)
Southwest Region is rich in natural, artificial and glacial lakes, and is the most forested one in
the Macedonia. One of the advantages of the Region is the fact that it borders on one side
with Albania, therefore international exchange may be carried out through this Region. The
following border crossing points play a role in the function of international economic
exchange Blato, Kjafasan and Sveti Naum these border crossing points, in addition to
exchange of goods, also allow fluctuation of the tourists and labour force therefore enabling
more dynamic development of the Region.
2.2.3 Relief and land use

Relief of the Southwest Region is mountainous and it is intertwined with many basins. Many
high mountains are prevalent with a height over 2,000 m above sea level. The early
mountain range Jablanica with peaks Crn Kamen (2,257 m) and Radik (2,083 m) lies on the
western part of the Region, toward the border to Albania. The largest basin in the Region is
the Ohrid-Struga basin located between the mountains Jablanica with peak is Crn Kamen
(2,257 m) and Galichica with the peak Istok (1,663 m), which is filled in one part with the
Ohrid Lake and consists of the Ohrid and Struga Fields. North of this basin is Debrca, which is
separated by the Botun passage. The mountainous pass, Preseka (1,082 m) separates the
20

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Kichevo basin which is connected to the Porechie basin area. The Region is very typical with
the extraordinary presence of caves due to the chemical composition of the mountains
which are mainly carbonate rocks. The Region is rich in natural, artificial and glacial lakes,
and is one of the most forested in the Republic of Macedonia.
The total area of Lake Ohrid Watershed (LOW) amounts 3,921 km of which 1,402 km
belong to the Lake Ohrid basin and 2,519 km to the Prespa basin. Lake Ohrid has 87.5 km of
shoreline and covers an area of 358.2 km2. The watershed of Lake Ohrid includes steep
mountains, as well as both Macro and Micro Prespa Lakes. A little less than half of the water
in Lake Ohrid comes from its tributaries. On the Macedonian side, the Sateska and Koselska
Rivers are the largest contributors, on the Albanian side, river flow is substantially less and
the largest contributors are Pogradec and Verdova Rivers.
Figure 3 Ohrid Lake and Perspa Lake basins
21

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
According to the Macedonian Institute for Statistics, the land area in forest, pasture and
agricultural uses in the six municipalities in the watershed are approximately as follows:
Cultivated agriculture land 49,999 ha
Pasture 84,537 ha
Forests 183,105 ha
Water (lakes only) 41,000 ha
In Macedonia, only about 12% of the GDP comes from agriculture. About 60% of the arable
land is used to grow wheat and corn, and about 25% is used for orchards and vineyards. The
remainder is used for vegetables, tobacco, and other crops. The pasture land represents the
area under mashes, swamps and fishponds.
The forests in Macedonia area is in good condition, because cutting is regulated and the land
must be left in good condition for regeneration. The volume of timber harvest has varied
significantly from year to year through the last decade, from as much 100,000 m 3 to as little
as 30,000 m3. Because of the reforestation requirements, erosion in Macedonian forests is
not as great as in the Albanian portion of the watersheed, but there are still bare areas that
require attention, especially in the Sateska River watersheed.
Southwest planning Region is characteristic by the diverse abundance of plant and animal
species. The forests are mainly composed of deciduous trees, distributed according to
stands, that is the stand of oak forests, often with contents of chestnut trees and beech
trees which is the most prevalent. Conifer forests are represented with 7.74% on the total
forest surface area. This structure is relatively unfavourable, but it does constitute a
significant potential for the wood processing industry.
2.2.4 Climate
The landscape characteristics, the vicinity of the Adriatic Sea and the cyclonic and
anticyclone centres in Europe, as well as the lake aquatorium are all factors that directly
contribute to the climate of this Region. The Region is characteristic by its varying climate
conditions. In this Region we can distinguish continental climatic complexes with typical
mountainous climatic characteristics and complexes with changing Mediterranean moderate
characteristic. The Mediterranean influence is especially prevalent in the Ohrid and Struga,
and certain influence can also be notice along the valley of the Black Drim River. The
continental climatic characteristics are present in the Porchie and Kichevo Region and the
Debrca Basin, while mountainous climate with type characteristics is prevalent in hills above
1,000 m.
22
Feasibility Study

the European Union
Particip GmbH
The air temperatures at measuring stations in the Region are presented in Table 2-3. The
table shows that the Ohrid Region has the mildest temperatures, while the lowest
temperatures are in Lazaropole, as a representative of the mountainous climate.
Table 2-3:
Average temperatures (C)
Measure st.
station
Debar
station,
Ohrid
Kicevo
M. Brod
Lazaropole
I
0.7
1.7
-0.1
0.4
-2.3
II
3.0
3.1
2.4
2.7
-1.3
III
6.3
5.6
5.8
5.7
1.2
IV
11.0
9.8
10.3
10.1
5.3
V
15.8
14.4
14.9
14.8
10.2
VI
19.6
18.4
18.6
18.1
13.7
VII
22.2
20.8
20.6
20.2
15.9
VIII
22.0
20.7
20.3
20.0
15.7
IX
18.0
16.9
16.4
16.2
12.1
X
12.6
11.8
11.2
11.1
7.6
XI
7.5
7.7
6.7
6.8
3.7
XII
2.7
3.8
2.1
2.1
-0.1
months
Figure 2.4: Average monthly temperatures in Ohrid (1990-2009)
Southwest planning Region belongs to the group of areas with highest quantities of rainfall
in Macedonia. The Table 2-4 shows that the lowest amount of rainfall is in Ohrid Region,
especially during summer months. In contrast the largest amount of rainfall was recorded in
the mountainous areas. It has an exceptional significance for the grassy and forest cover, but
also for winter recreation and sports activities.
Table 2-4:
Measure st.
I
station
Debar
87.6
station,
Ohrid
76.4
Kicevo
71.6
M. Brod
72.9
Lazaropole
103.7
Average monthly and annual rainfalls (mm)

II
83.2
72.6
73.2
71.6
103.3
III
73.8
59.8
73.2
65.4
93.1
IV
73.2
50.3
55.7
54.1
84.4
V
73.8
63.7
68.1
74.5
90.9
VI
41.6
36.4
46.1
48.8
57.6
VII
34.7
23.2
36.2
28.8
41.9
VIII
37.4
21.1
37.2
34.6
45.1
IX
60.7
47.4
48.7
48.2
73.3
X
79.7
71.6
76.1
70.7
104.2
XI
117.9
98.4
107.1
88.5
40.4
XII
107.6
78.9
65.6
77.2
124.2
Year
872.2
708.3
786.7
735.1
1,059.0
23
Year
11.8
11.2
10.8
10.7
6.8

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
months
Figure 2.5:
Average monthly rainfalls in Ohrid
The Ohrid Region has many hours of sunshine as shown in Table 2-5.
Table 2-5:
Measure st.
Debar
Ohrid
Kicevo
Lazaropole
I
85
80
88
101
Average number of sunshine hours

II
90
101
108
104
III
124
160
131
138
IV
154
174
185
158
V
213
240
190
198
VI
250
279
276
229
VII
313
308
300
292
VIII
288
288
288
280
IX
233
217
219
222
X
181
171
160
175
XI
109
118
100
109
XII
99
99
84
92
Year
2,129
2,233
2,064
2,098
The Region is characterized by large windiness which increases the quality of life in this area,
but also creates an opportunity to exploit this as a source of renewable energy,
Opportunities for the development of wind created pressure difference between the
mountain and valley areas. The most of winds blow from the north and west, while the
Ohrid valley often emerges local winds the day period duration, resulting from temperature
differences between land and water in the lake at different times of the day.
24

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
2.2.5 Surface waters

Municipalities Ohrid and Struga are located on the shores of Lake Ohrid. Macedonian part of
lake and surrounding area are declared as UNESCO world heritage since 1980. Lake Ohrid
has 87.5 km of shoreline (56.02 km on Macedonian side) and covers an area of 358.2 km 2, of
which 229.9 m2 is on the Macedonian side.
25

the European Union
Figure 2.6:
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Natural and Cultural Heritage of the Ohrid region - UNESCO inscribed property
A little less than half of the water in Lake Ohrid comes from its tributaries. The Sateska and
Koselska Rivers are the largest contributors on the Macedonian side and on the Albanian
side Pogradec and Verdova Rivers. River flow on the Albanian side is substantially less than
on Macedonian side. The remaining inflow comes from the springs that flow into the
southern part of the lake at St. Naum, Drilon and Tushemisht. These springs are fed by water
26

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
flowing out of the porous karst mountains to the east, Galicica and Mali i Thate. Over
thousands of years, holes and channels have formed within the mountain rock. These
channels carry water that originates in the Prespa watershed to Lake Ohrid, because Lake
Prespa sits about 150 m above Lake Ohrid, its waters run downhill to Lake Ohrid through
the channels in the karst. Macro and Micro Prespa Lakes are filled mostly by the rivers
flowing into them. About every 11 years, all the water in Lake Prespa is replaced by new
water in contrast it takes about 70 years for all the water in Lake Ohrid to be replaced. Ohrid
is the deepest lake on Balkan with a maximum depth of 288 m and a mean depth of 155 m.
Water flow out from Lake Ohrid near Struga, and form the Black Drim River. This river
eventually runs all the way to Skadar Lake (Skhodra) and the Adriatic Sea. It has a regulated
riverbed and coasts along the length of the City of Struga and this is considered a special
attraction.
The River Sateska which used to be an influent of the Black Drim River, has been redirected
to flow into Lake Ohrid. This issue is a topic of discussion among experts and scientist in
regards to the pollution of Lake Ohrid. There are proposals the old riverbed to be restored.
However, this can threaten the hydrological stability of Lake Ohrid and if the erosional
matter is not restored it can be a factor of accelerated atrophy of Lake Globochica.
The volume of Lake Ohrid is 50,7 billion m3, which means that it is the large aquatorial
objects and water potential, as well as a reservoir of warmth. The water temperature is
relatively high the average annual temperature is 13.6C, the average monthly temperatures
during the winter period of the year is from 6.3C to 7C. The lake does not freeze which is a
favourable circumstance for the use of the water. During the four month summer period in
the year the average monthly water temperatures are above 18C, which designates the
duration of the season for swimming activities. The transparency of the water is among the
greatest values in the world with 21.5 m visibility.
27

the European Union
Figure 2.7.
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Map of the Ohrid Basin showing major hydrological and geological features
Source: Hauffe T., Albrecht C., Schreiber K., Birkhofer K., Trajanovski S. & Wilke T. (2011), "Spatially explicit
analysis of gastropod biodiversity in ancient Lake Ohrid", Biogeosciences 8: 175188.
Sources of surface water pollution around Ohrid Lake are: agricultural activities, industries,
tourism, sediment load and solid waste. Another important pressure on Lake Ohrid is heavy
28

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
metal pollution as a result of former mining activities in the lake watershed. Several FeNi
and Cr mines are located close to the lake (2.5 km), whereas four other coal mines can be
found within a distance of 10 km from the lake shore.
Agricultural activities: The farmland in the basin is likely a significant source of pollution to
the Prespa Lakes and Lake Ohrid as fertilizers, soil particles, and pesticides wash into rivers
and streams and eventually to the lakes. Many of the farmland in the watershed is irrigated,
which increases the load to the lake.
In both Albania and Macedonian, fertilizer use is high, averaging 160-200 kg/ha/y in the
1990s. A variety of pesticides are also used, including copper sulphate, lindane,
organophosphates, synthetic fungicides, and other chemicals.
Industries: In Ohrid Lake Region include automobile spare parts, electrical parts, textile and
ceramics processing plants. All of these industries produce wastewaters that are
contaminating the Sateska, Velgoska and Koselska Rivers. The metal pollution has a
cumulative negative effect on human health and it can be expressed long time after the
exposure on their presence. There is no precise register of the potential pollutants in this
Region.
Tourism: Macedonian shoreline of Ohrid Lake is the most important tourist destination in
the country. Ohrid is uniquely positioned to appeal to the growing market in cultural
tourism, with the many historic sites, monasteries, and other national treasures in the area.
Lake Ohrid could also be promoted within the ecotourism market, but an essential
prerequisite for this kind of tourism is a healthy and unpolluted environment, with clean
water. In the other way, tourism is a strong pressure on the environmental status due to
higher production of wastewater and pollution load.
Sediment load: Before 1961, the River Sateska flowed into the Black Drim River. In 1962, it
was diverted to drain the Struga marshland. It drained about 2,500 ha and regulated the
course and slope of Black Drim River through the town of Struga and the agricultural area
around the town. When the Sateska was diverted, antierosion measures intended to reduce
sediment suspension in the river and the input of sediment to Lake Ohrid were put in place.
These measures were initially effective, but they were later terminated. Since then,
sediment has since accumulated in the constructed riverbed, the channel has degraded, and
shoreline vegetation has been lost.
Solid waste: The lack of suitable infrastructure for adequate waste disposal in whole
Macedonia. None of the landfill in Macedonia is lined or had drainage systems to collect and
treat the contaminated leachate from waste. Solid waste in Ohrid is collected and taken to
the landfill Bukovo, about 25 km outside of town. In Struga, waste is collected and taken to
the landfill Kafasan. This landfill is situated 12 km southwest of Struga, near the village Mali
Vlaj.
29

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
The concentration of phosphorus now may be 3 or 4 times higher than the concentration
measured before World War II. Considering the very large volume of water in Lake Ohrid this
is a very significant change. Therefore, it is predicted that the state of the lake will move
from its present state (oligotrophic) to mesotrophic or even eutrophic in the next ten years,
if measures are not taken to limit phosphorus loading into the lake.
2.3
Current population and population development

2.3.1 Population development in Macedonia
According to the data from the last official Census of Population, households and dwellings
in 2002, Macedonia had 2,022,547 inhabitants, which is 3.9% more compared with the
Census in 1994 and 43% more compared with the Census in 1948. Based on the data from all
official Census Total population in the Macedonia is increasing on a long-term level.
According to the last Census in 2002 population density were 78.7 inhabitants per km 2.
Table 2-6:
Total population of the Republic of Macedonia according to the Official Census

year
Population
Population density per km2
1921
808,724
31.5
1931
949,958
36.9
1948
1,152,986
44.8
1953
1,304,514
50.7
1961
1,406,003
54.7
1971
1,647,308
64.1
1981
1,909,136
74.2
1991
2,033,964
79.1
1994
1,945,932
76.0
2002
2,022,547
78.7
Source: Statistical Yearbook, 2014 (Republic of Macedonia State Statistical Office)
State Statistical Office of the Republic of Macedonia gives the statistical data and estimation
of population on the regional and municipality level. Table 2-7 and Figure 2.8 show that
despite of the fact that population on the state level is growing, population in Southwest
Region is decreasing.
30

the European Union
Table 2-7:
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Total population of the Republic of Macedonia and the Southwest Region from
2007-2013
Total population
year
Southwest Region
2007
2,043,559
222,182
2008
2,046,898
222,142
2009
2,050,671
221,982
2010
2,055,004
221,855
2011
2,058,539
221,517
2012
2,061,044
220,840
2013
2,064,032
220,325
Source: Regions of the Republic of Macedonia 2009, 2012, 2013 and 2014 (Republic of Macedonia State
Statistical Office)
Figure 2.8.
Population of the Republic of Macedonia and the Southwest Region from 20072013
As regarding age of population in the Region, the participation of the young population (age
group 0-14) in the total population was 16% in 2013 and the participation of the old
population (age group 65 and over) was 10.8%. The birth rate in 2013 was 9.6 live births per
1,000 inhabitants, and compared with the previous year, the number of live births decreased
by 0.4%.
31

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Figure 2.9. Estimate of population of the Southwest Region as at 30.06.2013, according to the
gender and five-year age groups
Source: Regions of the Republic of Macedonia, 2014 (Republic of Macedonia State Statistical Office)
Estimation about population on municipality level for municipalities Struga, Ohrid and
Vevchani is given in Table 2-8. According to the data, population is increasing in Struga,
decreasing in Ohrid, while in Vevchani number of inhabitants is practically on the same level.
Looking at the total population of the area, number of inhabitants is decreasing.
Table 2-8:
2002
Total population of the Municipalities of Struga, Ohrid and Vevchani for 2002 and
from 2007-2013
Struga
Ohrid
Vevchani
Total
63,376
55,749
2,433
121,558
2008
64,109
55,266
2,499
121,874
2009
64,287
55,023
2,498
121,808
2010
64,453
54,759
2,499
121,711
2011
64,657
54,269
2,495
121,421
2012
64,864
53,467
2,484
120,815
Source: Estimations of the Population, by Municipalities and by Statistical Regions 2007-2012 (Republic of
Macedonia State Statistical Office)
32

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Figure 2.10. Estimations of the Population by Municipalities and by Statistical Regions 2007-2012
2.3.2 Predictions for Population development in the Project Area

The project area includes settlements of three municipalities: Struga, Ohrid and Vevchani.
Municipalities Struga and Ohrid are mostly urban areas, while the municipality of Vevcahni is
rural area. Statistical population data for the municipalities Struga, Ohrid and Vevchani are
given in Table 2-9.
Table 2-9:
Total Population in Municipalities Struga, Ohrid and Vevchani by Census, 2002
Municipality
Total
Macedonia
Struga
Ohrid
Vevchani
Total
reference
Population
(people)
Household
(nos)
All dwellings
(nos)
Population/
Households
All
dwellings/Households
2,022,547
564,296
698,143
3.58
1,24
63,376
55,749
2,433
121,558
14,485
16,012
593
31,090
18,834
28,437
715
47,986
4.38
3.48
4.10
3.91
1.30
1.78
1.21
1.54
Projections of population change by the State Statistical Office are predicting growth of
population on the state level. According to the data on regional and municipality level it is
visible that number of inhabitants in the project area is decreasing, so it is not in compliance
with official statistical predictions and cannot be used for further projections.
33

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
UN predictions are that the population of Macedonia will decrease over the coming decades.
UN predictions and population growth rates for different variants of growth are given in
Table 2-10.
Table 2-10:
Population projection Division of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of

the United Nations Secretariat for Republic of Macedonia
Population growth. %/year
Period
Low variant
Medium variant
High variant
2000-2005
2005-2010
0.37
0.12
0.37
0.12
0.37
0.12
Constant-fertility
variant
0.37
0.12
2010-2015
2015-2020
2020-2025
2025-2030
2030-2035
2035-2040
-0.12
-0.31
-0.47
-0.58
-0.70
-0.83
0.07
-0.02
-0.12
-0.24
-0.36
-0.45
0.25
0.26
0.20
0.06
-0.05
-0.08
0.10
0.01
-0.13
-0.28
-0.40
-0.50
2040-2045
-0.98
-0.52
-0.05
-0.59
2045-2050
-1.13
-0.57
-0.02
-0.67
Population Division of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations
Secretariat, World Population Prospects: The 2012 Revision
Medium variant of growth is used for the long-term projection of population. Projections of
population for Municipalities of Struga, Ohrid and Vevchani for project period are given in
Table 2-11.
Table 2-11:
year
population
growth %/yr
Municipality
Struga
Ohrid
Vevchani
Total
Population projection in project area by Division of the Department of Economic and

Social Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat World Population Prospects (by
medium variant)
2002
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
2035
2040
2045
0.37
0.12
0.07
-0.02
-0.12
-0.24
-0.36
-0.45
-0.52
-0.57
63,376
63,922
64,147
64,256
63,871
63,108
61,980
60,598
59,039
57,736
55,749
56,230
56,427
56,568
56,229
55,558
54,565
53,348
51,976
50,511
2,433
2,454
121,558
122,606
2,463
123,036
2,469
123,292
2,454
122,554
2,425
2,381
121,091
118,927
2,328
116,275
2,268
113,283
2,204
110,091
34

the European Union
2.4
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Current tourism and tourism development
Last tourism development in the Republic of Macedonia has all characteristics of tourism on
international level, with main orientation to achieve higher economic benefits, by neglecting
the environmental and social aspects of tourism at same time. The result of such
development is emerging need in recent period, particularly among the creators of tourist
policy and facilitators of tourist activity that future orientation of tourism development
necessarily has to consider its sustainability along with the care for natural and cultural
values as tourist offer inevitable components.
Changes of tourist arrivals and overnights in the Republic of Macedonia and Southwest
Region from 2006 to 2013 are shown in Table 2-12. Number of tourist arrivals in Macedonia
rapidly increased in 2008 at a rate of approximately 15%, while after that has slightly
decrease, which is caused by economic conditions. In last few years, tourism in Macedonia is
increasing. Southwest Region is traditionally devoted to tourism as a primary industry and
has approx. 50% of all tourist nights of all Macedonia.
Table 2-12:
Number of tourist arrivals and overnights from 2006 to 2013 in Macedonia and
Southwest Region
Year
Southwest Region
tourist arrivals
tourist nights
tourist arrivals
tourist nights
2006
499,473
1,917,395
233,218
1,244,487
2007
536,212
2,019,712
255,257
1,351,806
2008
605,320
2,235,520
276,669
1,452,205
2009
587,770
2,101,606
257,480
1,326,192
2010
586,241
2,020,217
234,665
1,168,824
2011
647,568
2,173,034
249,746
1,209,187
2012
663,633
2,151,692
251,462
1,198,260
2013
701,794
2,157,175
264,826
1,152,651
Source: Regions of the Republic of Macedonia 2009, 2012, 2013 and 2014 (Republic of Macedonia State
Statistical Office)
2.4.1 Tourism on Ohrid Lake

In Macedonia, 50% from whole tourism is in the Southwest Region. The main touristic
destinations in the Southwest Region are the Lake Ohrid and the National park Galicica.
Tourism is one of the leading economy industries in the Region with nearly 30% from the
whole income.
Ohrid is a city recognised and accepted by UNESCO as one of 29 places in the world with
mixed cultural and natural heritage with its lake which is one of two lakes in its kind in the
35

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
world and its cultural heritage which is a big mixture of cultural varieties starting from
Byznatine to Ottoman culture and customs.
Most of the cultural events in Macedonia are concentrated in Ohrid in the summer period.
The area of the city Ohrid and Struga Region has conditions for the development of the
following tourist activities such as: flying, lake tourism, weekend tourism, transit tourism
congress and educational tourism and winter sports tourism.
The Ohrid airport is situated 10 km west from the centre of Ohrid. It is near the
southwestern line of the corridor east west (E-850 and E-871), close to the Albanian
border, and is the backbone of tourism development of the wider area.
Statistical data about tourism only record data on the level of Regions on yearly basis. Ohrid
Lake is summer touristic destination and during summer months number of tourist and
tourist overnights are highest. During the touristic season the population along the
Macedonian shore of Lake Ohrid increases from 80,000 to 120,000.
2.4.2 Predictions for tourist development in the Project area

Since statistic data about tourism on a municipality of settlement level are not officially
known, prediction of tourist development is based on the methodology and predicted
growth from the previous and ongoing studies for this area (JICA and KfW Study). Predictions
of number of the tourists and occupancies of tourist facilities were assumed in JICA and KfW
Study by following:
For the tourist population for resort villas (apartments) in the urban area was assumed
by actual water consumption from monthly water consumptions.
For the tourist population in rural area was assumed by the occupancies of tourist
facilities which previously identified in the KfW Study because of the difficulty in
collecting current status of those facilities.
Peaking population was determined by fluctuation of monthly water usage.
Unit water consumption was applied as same amount as domestic water flows.
The Projections of tourist in Radozhda and Kalishta was foreseen like in the Detailed design
of West collector Radozhda Kalishta, as 0.5% growth per year.
36

the European Union
Table 2-13:
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Projection of number of tourist in project area for project period

Tourists projection per years (PE)
Municipality
2013
2015
2017
2020
2025
2030
2035
2040
2045
Struga
Ohrid
Vevchani
Radozhda
TOTAL
10,836
18,918
0
29,754
11,297
19,127
0
30,424
12,335
21,831
0
562
34,728
14,075
26,620
0
570
41,265
14,862
27,142
0
584
42,588
15,661
27,664
0
599
43,923
16,503
28,196
0
614
45,313
17,390
28,738
0
630
45,757
18,325
29,291
0
646
48,261
2.5
Environmental Aspects and Impact

2.5.1 Environmental Impact Assessment process
The EIA Directive requires that projects likely to have significant effects on the environment
by their nature, size or location are made subject to an assessment of their environmental
effects.
All projects listed in Annex I are considered as having significant effects on the environment
and require an EIA overall process (scoping process). For the projects listed in Annex II, the
national authorities have to decide whether an EIA is needed. This is done by the "screening
procedure", which determines the effects of projects on the basis of thresholds/criteria or a
case by case examination.
Due to Annex I, for WWTPs with a capacity exceeding 150,000 population equivalent, EIA
scoping process is mandatory. According to the Annex II for Any change or extension of
projects listed in Annex I or Annex II, already authorized, executed or in the process of being
executed, which may have significant adverse effects on the environment it is necessary to
determine whether the proposed project is likely to have significant effects on the
environment or not.
Projects for which EIA scoping process is mandatory in the Macedonian legislation are
defined in the Regulation for determining the projects and the criteria that determine the
need for conducting the assessment of environmental impact (OG 74/05). The EIA process is
mandatory for WWTPs with a capacity exceeding 10,000. In case that project includes only
reconstruction or extension of the EIA mandatory project, EIA screening process must be
done.
Since this project includes reconstruction and upgrading of the WWTP Vranishta with design
capacity of 125.000 PE, an EIA screening process needs to be done by the Macedonian and
European legislation.
37

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
EIA screening process for reconstruction and upgrading of the WWTP Vranishta will be
performed after the final decision about wastewater treatment technology and it is
important to define measures and monitoring programme regarding environmental issues.
It is very important that the environmental authorities and the public must be informed and
consulted during the screening process.
Preparation of an Environmental Protection Elaborate is obligation of the Municipality of
Struga. Elaborate is now under preparation and after finalization it will be submitted to the
authorized body (MoEPP) for evaluation. Based on the Elaborate, MoEPP will give official
decision if it is for the reconstruction and upgrading of the WWTP Vranishta necessary to go
in EIA scoping process or not. Environmental Protection Elaborate will be submitted to
MoEPP at the beginning of July 2015.
2.5.2 Protection zones

Wide area of the Ohrid Region is defined as protected area (Figure 2.11) and need to be
taking into consideration in the EIA process.
In 1980, UNESCO declared the Macedonian side of Lake Ohrid as a site of cultural and
natural values of the global patrimony and all projects on that area must take into account
all measures to prevent all negative impacts and protect values of the surrounding area.
38

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Figure 2.11.
Particip GmbH
Protected areas
Lake Ohrid is one of the worlds oldest lakes and isolated by surrounding hills and mountains
that a unique collection of plants and animals has evolved. These include a number of relict
species, or living fossils, and many endemic species, found only in Lake Ohrid. For example,
10 of the 17 identified fish species of the Lake Ohrid are endemic, as are many of the lakes
snails, worms and sponges.
The lakeshore reed beds and wetlands provide critical habitat for hundreds of thousands of
wintering water birds, including rare and threatened species such as the Dalmatian pelican,
ferruginous duck, spotted eagle, and imperial eagle, because of their high biodiversity and
unique cultural heritage.
39

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
With the implementation of EU Directives and new legislation for the water which was
passed in 2007. Ohrid Lake is declared as a sensitive area and therefore it is necessary to
upgrade the WWTP to the tertiary treatment. Lake Ohrid can still be classified as
oligotrophic, but progressing eutrophication has recently been noted.
2.5.3 Main environmental impacts

Main purpose of this project is to improve protection of the Lake Ohrid from the negative
impact of untreated sanitary wastewater. By extension of the sewerage system, all west
shore of the Macedonian part of the lake will be covered with sewerage system. Wastewater
will be treated on WWTP Vranishta and discharged into the river Drim outside the Ohrid
lake.
Main negative impacts on the ecological state of Lake Ohrid due to discharging of untreated
wastewaters is polluting with nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus) and heavy metals.
Although the industrial activities in the two sides of Ohrid Lake are reduced after the political
and economic changes in the beginning of the years 90 the actual activities and the
historical pollution have considered impact in this lake. According to the State of the
Environment Report for Lake Ohrid and its Watershed the heavy metals comes mainly from
the rivers of Cerava, Velgolska, Koselska, Sateska, but also the trace of heavy metals are
observed in the littoral zone adjacent to the tributaries to the Ohrid Lake.
40

the European Union
Figure 2.12.
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Sampling stations and locations for the Lake Ohrid Monitoring Program
Table 2-14:
Mean concentration of metals in river water collected from the major tributaries to
Lake Ohrid and Lake Prespa
Cu
Ni
Cr
Fe
Cd
Pb
Mn
g l-1
g l-1
g l-1
g l-1
g l-1
g l-1
g l-1
Cerava River1
2.21
5.95
0.49
4.86
0.02
1.53
1.68
1
Velgolska River
2.94
11.61
1.99
3.71
0.03
1.43
2.05
Koselska River1
2.43
5.02
0.37
3.42
0.03
1.46
1.00
1
Sateska River
1.31
5.48
0.42
3.18
0.02
1.53
0.76
Brajcinska River2
1.68
1.82
0.39
11.48
0.05
1.07
1.31
2
Kranska River
1.90
1.86
0.35
10.92
0.12
1.26
1.44
Golema River2
1.60
2.39
0.49
13.24
0.07
1.09
2.32
1
Samples collected 1997-1998. Samples collected 2000-2001
41

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Table 2-15:
Mean concentration of metals in river water collected from the major tributaries to
Lake Ohrid and Lake Prespa
Cu
Ni
Cr
Fe
Cd
Pb
Mn
g l-1
g l-1
g l-1
g l-1
g l-1
g l-1
g l-1
Cerava Littoral1
1.35
3.34
0.37
1.64
0.02
1.53
0.72
Velgolska Littoral1
1.53
5.78
0.61
1.81
0.02
1.45
11.22
Koselska Littoral1
1.00
4.68
0.42
1.25
0.02
0.87
0.85
Sateska Littoral 1
1.19
4.51
0.34
1.14
0.03
1.50
0.95
Brajcinska Littoral 2
1.63
1.92
0.41
9.94
0.06
0.95
1.18
2
Kranska Littoral
1.50
1.69
0.32
7.54
0.13
1.01
1.63
Golema Littoral2
2.04
1.87
0.40
10.99
0.05
1.03
1.39
1
Samples collected 1997-1998. Samples collected 2000-2001
For the Albanian part of the lake, in general, there is a lack of data about concentration of
heavy metals in the water, but it is well known the existence of the large industrial dumpsite
at the former iron-nickel ore enrichment factory Guri Kuq close to the shore of Lake Ohrid.
Although the factory was closed 12 years ago the dumpsite with 350,000 ton left outs
presents a real threat for the lake.
42

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
EXISTING WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND TREATMENT SYSTEM,

DEMAND PROJECTIONS
3.1
Wastewater collection system
Basic concept for implementation of the Regional collection and treatment system for
Protection of Ohrid Lake is prepared in 1979 year in order to ensure full protection of the
Ohrid Lake and its sensitive eco system.
Further realization and constructions of the wastewater system on Ohrid Lake was
developed in compliance with financial possibilities. Regional sewage system is designed to
collect, transfer and treat all wastewater in the Lake region. WWTP is constructed near
settlement Vranishta whit outflow into the river Crni Drim, away from the Ohrid Lake.
The existing Regional collection and treatment system includes the following technical units:
2 separated secondary sewerage networks in Ohrid and Struga,
13 pumping stations on secondary sewer networks,
primary collectors,
12 pumping stations of the primary collectors,
wastewater treatment plant for mechanical and biological treatment.
The current system for collection and treatment of wastewater and protection of Ohrid Lake
don't cover all waste water along the coast. Unfortunately, from Gradishte (popular autocamp) to St. Naum (near the Macedonian - Albanian border) on the side of Municipality of
Ohrid, the wastewater is discharged into the lake. In this area are located two settlements:
Trpejca and Ljubanishta, and some tourist facilities as auto camps in Gradishte, St. Naum and
Ljubanishta, hotels and restaurants. The number of the permanent population is about 600,
but in summer the situation is alarming because the number of visitors is about 12,000,
which means 20 times more than in rest of the year. The most dramatic situation is in
Trpejca, one of the most popular and most visited places on the coast. Moreover, as close to
Trpejca offshore sources are used for the Ohrid Lake water supply to the citizens of the city.
For this area a Feasibility study and CBA was performed which indicated that these two
settlements would need to have separate system for waste water treatment due to the large
distance from the first possible connection point to the collector which brings waste water
into the sewage system of the municipality of Ohrid.
Almost identical situation is from Kalishta to Radozhda on the side of Municipality of Struga,
where that wastewater is also not covered by the existing system. Namely, the settlement
Radozhda is on the western coast of the Ohrid Lake and is adjacent to the Macedonian Albanian border. Construction of primary collector Radozhda-Kalishta is foreseen with
previously adopted Feasibility Studies for Struga-Ohrid agglomeration and part of already
43

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
started projects for protection of Ohrid Lake. With construction of collector RadozhdaKalishta, wastewater from this area will be collected and transported to the WWTP Vranishta
instead of discharging into the Ohrid Lake. Permanently there live about 850 inhabitants and
its a typical fishing village. In the summer due to the tourism facilities, auto-camps (Treska
and Livadishte) and restaurants, a massive attendance and the number of users in the
system is almost double increased. Currently the most of the households and tourist
facilities discharged wastewater directly in the lake, while only a smaller part of them have
septic tanks that also impact on water pollution in the Ohrid Lake through drainage of the
soil and vicinity of the shore.
Ohrid Agglomeration is defined in
3.1.1 Primary collectors

Total length of the existing primary collectors (East, West and Main collector) is around 37
km. East collector is 26 long, while length of the West collector is 9 km. East and West
collectors are transferring wastewater into the PS Struga 3, after which wastewater go by
Main collector to the WWTP Vanishta.
East collector was built with a donation by German Government and accepts wastewater
from secondary sewerage systems of Ohrid and Struga which are the biggest settlements.
As the primary collectors are pressure pipelines, and there are 12 pumping stations.
Diameters of pipes are from 150-1,200 mm, mostly constructed from concrete and PVC
pipes.
Table 3-1:
Collector
Detailed data about the primary collectors

Section
Length (m)
Diameter
(mm)
Slope
(%)
Gravity/
Pressure
pipeline
Material
East
Peshtani - Krusha
1.518
500
0.20
PVC
East
Krusha - Elesec
1.345
500
0.20
PVC
East
Elesec - Metropol
1.852
600
0.20
PVC
East
Metropol - Granit
1.400
600
0.15
PVC
East
Granit - O.Nikolov
1.550
800
0.15
Concrete
East
O.Nikolov - Ohrid 1
3.000
800
0.15
Concrete
East
Ohrid 1 - Ohrid 2
1.045
1000
0.10
Concrete
East
Ohrid 2 - Daljan
3.337
1200
0.15
Concrete
East
Daljan - Podmolje
5.006
1200
0.08
Concrete
East
Podmolje - Sateska
2.404
1200
0.17
Concrete
East
Sateska - Struga 3
4.264
1200
0.10
Concrete
West
E.Kamen - Struga 3
9.102
150-600
PE
Main
Struga 3 - Vranishta
3.934
1200
0.08
Concrete
44

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
List of PS on the primary collectors and their technical characteristics are shown in Table 3-2.
Most of the pumps are screw type pump, with installed capacity of pumps from 30 l/s to
2,240 l/s
The most important pump station is PS Struga 3 as the connecting point of the East and the
West collector. The PS Struga 3 is built with two chambers, each one can receive
wastewaters from east or west arm of primary collector, because on PS Struga 3 is
connection west and east primary collector. From this pump station goes the pipeline to
WWTP which is called main collector and it will take all wastewaters from Macedonian part
of Ohrid Lake.
Chambers on PS Struga 3 are divided by overflow wall, and because wastewater flow load of
east primary collector is larger than west, this overflow wall allows discharging the part of
the largest wastewater load from east to the west chamber and if necessary flow from west
collector into the other chamber. By this way chamber PS Struga 3 has flow buffering
function.
Pumps and respective electromechanical equipment from PS Elen Kamen are missing and
within this project new pumps will be purchased.
45

the European Union
Table 3-2:
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Pump stations on the primary collectors
5.50
Elevation
of the
overflow
bottom
(masl)
692.61
Diameter
of
overflow
pipe
(mm)
1000X500
5.50
5.50
693.30
1000X500
170.0
4.86
3.76
no overflow
130.00
260.0
3.85
2.55
no overflow
170.00
340.0
6.00
4.70
no overflow
screw pump
315.00
945.0
4.98
3.18
no overflow
PS Ohrid 2
screw pump
425.00
1275.0
5.30
3.43
no overflow
PS Daljan
screw pump
400.00
1600.0
4.92
3.00
694.35
1000
1069.00
PS Podmolje
screw pump
410.00
1640.0
4.92
2.78
693.70
800
1160.00
PS Sateska
screw pump
410.00
1640.0
3.74
2.09
694.60
1000X700
PS Struga 3 west collector
screw pump
225.00
675.0
6.40
4.80
PS Struga 3 -east
collector
691.20
screw pump
Q
(l/s)
Q
installed
(l/s)
H
(m)
H
Water
lifting
40.00
80.0
5.50
Submersible Flygt NP 3127 MT
40.00
80.0
PS Metropol
submersible
85.00
PS Granit
screw pump
PS Orce Nikolov
screw pump
PS Ohrid 1
Pump type
Num
of
pumps
PS Krusha
Submersible Flygt NP 3127 MT
PS Eleshec
Pump station
PS Elen Kamen
WWTP
Vranishta
3+1
412.00
1236.00
4.40
2.80
560.00
2240.00
5.50
3.91
Q
overflow
(l/s)
L
overflow
(m)
J
overflow
(%)
Recipient
of
overflown
water
80.0
1.0
Ohrid Lake
80.0
1.0
Ohrid Lake
44.0
2.00
r. Koselska
27.0
7.00
1640.00
10.0
120.00
Ohrid Lake
by-pass
towards PS
Struga 3
1000
1911.00
20.0
60.00
r. Crni Drim
1200
2240.00
50.0
10.00
r. Crni Drim
not in function, missing pumps

screw pump
Red measured values (in situ) from JICA Study Team
46

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
The primary collector had serious difficulties in its operating. It is in function from 1988, and
is characterize with outdated technology of the equipment that requires huge maintenance
cost. The collector accepts also the storm and ground waters. Overloading of the collector is
caused when level of groundwater is increased. The bodies responsible for the management
and maintenance of the system warn that unless appropriate measures are taken to
premeditate the collector, just a matter of time is before it will be out of order.
Generally, the problems of existing primary collector are:
overloads,
illegal connections,
very large infiltration,
blockages in the pipelines.
Certain sections of the collectors are below the level of lake water which further increases
the problems of infiltration especially in the rainy period.
3.1.2 Sewerage collection in Struga

Secondary sewage network in Struga is separate and includes pipes with profiles 200mm600mm (total length around 59 km) and 7 pumping stations. Materials of pipes are
asbestos-concrete, PVC, PE and concrete.
Table 3-3:
Pump stations on the secondary network in Struga
Pump station
East collector
Pump type
Motor type
Submersible
KSB; KLT
S150-315/
96xG290
P=9KW
955 /min
I=20A
Ezerski lozja
Submersible
KSB
AMAREX
Daljan (Stormwater)
Submersible
AMAGAN
Daljan (Plitishta)
Misleshevo 1.2.3
Submersible
ABS ASO631
142- SE17/2
P=2.4KW.
1420 /min
I=6A
P=10KW.
1465 /min
I=22A
/
P=1.7KW
2900 /min
I=4A
Mixer type
No. of
pumps
No. of
mixers
Q
(l/s)
Qinstalled
(l/s)
H
(m)
26.67
26.67
8.46
AMAMIX
P=1.25KW
1415
/min
I=3.2A
12.36
12.36
4.5
200.00
200.00
3.5
13.89
13.89
16
47

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Pump type
Motor type
Mixer type
No. of
pumps
No. of
mixers
Q
(l/s)
Qinstalled
(l/s)
H
(m)
West collector
Submersible
25.00
50.00
F III
Submersible
10.00
20.00
Pump station
Red measured values (in situ)
Figure 3.1.
Sewer network in Struga
Problems in existing sewerage system are mostly related to flood problems caused by huge
infiltration, illegal connections of storm wastewater on sewerage pipelines and blockages in
pipes because of bad maintenance of the system.
48

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
3.1.3 Sewerage collection in Ohrid

Total length of secondary sewage network in Ohrid is around 108 km and includes:
mixed sewage network (54km),
separated sanitary sewage system (43km),
6 pumping stations,
storm sewage (15km).
Profiles of the pipes are from 200mm- 600mm, materials of pipes are asbestos-concrete,
PVC, PE, concrete. Technical characteristics of pumping stations on secondary system are
given in Table 3-4.
Table 3-4:
Pump station
Pumping stations on the secondary network for Ohrid

Pump type
Motor type
PS Kaneo
Submersible
BLIMED
BM 40.152
SEVER
ZK - 132S-6
3KW
960 /min
PS Kosta
Abrash
Submersible KSB
AMAREX F - 100
210/034 Y26190
P=3.15KW
1405 /min
8.1A
PS Radojca
Novicic
Submersible KSB
AMAREX F - 100
210/034 Y26190
P = 3.15
kW
1405/min
8.1 A
PS Potpes
PS Grdano
PS Raca
Submersible
LOWARA
DOMO 15 VX
Submersible
LOWARA
DOMO 15 VX
Submersible
LOWARA
DOMO 15 VX
Mixer type
AVM 10J
P=4KW
1460 /min
10A
KSB
AMAMIX
222/14M6
P=1.25KW
1415 /min
3.2A
KSB
AMAMIX
222/14M6
P=1.25KW
1415 /min
3.2A
Num Num.
of
of
pumps mixers
Q
(l/s)
Qinstalled
(l/s)
H (m)
l/s
l/s
22.22
44.44
60
35.81
71.61
6.2
35.81
71.61
6.2
P = 1.1 kW
3.50
14.00
6.5
P = 1.1 kW
4.25
17.00
5.25
P = 1.1 kW
0.8-7.5
8.8-2.10
49

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Figure 3.2.
Particip GmbH
Sewer network in Ohrid
Problems in existing sewerage system in Ohrid are, like in Struga, mostly related to flood
problems in some parts of system, which are caused with illegal connections of storm
wastewater on sewerage pipelines, connections of sanitary wastewater on storm pipelines
connections of flowing wells on system, and blockages in pipes because of bad maintenance
of system.
3.1.4 Problems of the existing sewerage system

In the last ten years with the implementation of several projects to build more than 50 km a
new sewer system which contributes to the increased percentage of connectivity of the
system (Ohrid for about 92% and Struga more than 90%) This positive trend of increasing
the percentage of connectivity to wastewater system cause however negative effects and
difficulties in the operation of all facilities of the system and particularly:
secondary sewer,
primary collector,
pumping stations and
wastewater treatment plant Vranishta.
50

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
It seems that this additional connectivity has also as a consequence much higher percentage
of rain and ground water in the faecal sewer. The ratio of faecal and other waters reaches
even values of 1: 5, which seriously jeopardizes the normal function of the system.
The primary collector, pump stations and WWTP Vranishta are designed and built for
acceptance, transport and treatment of sewage only. On the other hand, great part of
sewerage network in the city of Ohrid and partly in the town of Struga practical function as
combined sewage which inevitably causes that all urban water from the area of Ohrid and
Struga flow in the primary collector and to WWTP Vranishta.
There are several reasons identified for existing conditions of wastewater system:
age of the system,
poor conditions due to insufficient maintenance and/or low workmanship,
illegal or wrong connections (e.g. roof rein gutter connected to faecal sewer)
leakages on connections between different types of pipes
system design capacity
user behaviour (garbage into the sewer)
Existing situation with above mentioned issues have several negative technical
consequences on the sewerage system:
design capacity of trunks and pumping stations is too low
hydraulic load WWTP Vranishta is too high. Actual average daily high hydraulic loads
SP Vranishta about 10-20% more than designed
increased accumulation of sand and other inert materials in pools of pumping
stations
pump damage (damage to the lower bearings pumps, damaging spiral and pump
body, anticorrosion protection, etc)
increased consumption of electricity in the pump stations due to the increased
volume of water to be transported to WWTP Vranishta,
environmental pollution due overflow and spillage of urban wastewater
increased costs for maintenance of buildings
increased costs for maintenance of hydro-mechanical equipment
shortening the lifecycle of the system-more defects and maintenance
In the existing secondary sewerage system there are some critical sections with frequent
over flooding of wastewater from the system during the heavy rain or winter period which
needs to be resolved as soon as possible. Over flooding on the critical section causes health
and environment problems in area where people live.
51

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Critical sections in Struga wastewater collection system, as identified by the IMPUC ProAqua
are:
1. st. "Partizanska" L=2260
2. st. "JNA" L=600m
3. st. "Risto Krle" L=510m
4. st. "XV Korpus" L=360m
5. st. "Proleterski brigadi" L=720
6. st. "Cvetan Dimmov" L=300
7. st. "Kuzman Josifovski Pitu" L=200
8. Urban Unit 2. "Plitista" L=400
9. st. "Slavej Planina" L=200
Critical sections in Ohrid wastewater collection system, as identified by the Municipality
Ohrid Niskogradba are:
1. Boul. Turisticka (existing non-functional storm pipeline) L=650m
2. st "Abas Emin" from st. "Turisticka" to st. "Zeleznicka" L=1100m
3. Main square
4. storm sewer in Urban Area 10 streets: "Aleksandar Guso", "Vangel Nikoloski",
"Prvi Maj" L=1300m
5. st. "GJorce Petrov " L=300m
6. storm sewer on st. "Mirce Acev", "Vanco Pitoseski" L=700m
7. storm sewer on st. "Stiv Naumov" L=1000m
8. storm sewer on st."Bistrica" (from st. "Goce Delcev" do ezero)L=300m
9. storm sewer on st. "Kuzman Sapkarev" and "Vasil Glavinov" L=600m
10. storm sewer in Hristo Uzunov (st. "Bogomilska") L=430m
11. storm sewer on st."Serafim Kitanoski" L=300m
12. storm sewer on st. ul. "Marko Cepenkov", "Momcilo Jordanoski" L=450m
13. storm sewer on. "Ilindenska" L=500m
14. separation of the foul and storm system on :
Egejska(from st. "7-mi Noemvri" to st. "Zeleznicka") L=530m
Pitu Guli (from st "Jane Sandanski" to petrol station) L=800m
52

the European Union
3.2
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Wastewater treatment plant Vranishta
The Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plant at Vranishta was constructed from 1984 to 1986
and had been designed for household wastewater which is conveyed by the East and West
collectors around the Ohrid Lake. The wastewater from municipalities Ohrid and Stuga treats
their wastewater in WWTP Vranishta. Wastewater is collected by separate as well combined
sewer system in these municipalities the catchment area. Totally, there are 13 operational
pumping stations in the service area that deliver wastewater into the sewage plant and are
operated/maintained by employees of the Environment Protection Department of MJP
"PROAQUA" Struga.
Figure 3.3.
Lay out of Existing WWTP Vranishta
The original design made by UNION-INVEST, provides design capacities of the first phase of
the WWTP Vranishta were as follows:Maximum capacity:
120,000 PE
Maximum daily flow:
705 l/s
53

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
The maximum population equivalent of 120,000 PE was envisaged for summer season with
tourism. In the winter period, the population equivalent ranges now from 60,000 to 70,000
PE. In the future winter load of WWTP can rise up to some 88,000 PE in 2045.
This is second upgrade project of WWTP Vranishta. Within the framework of the
Environmental Protection of Ohrid Lake, the first project for upgrading and rehabilitation of
the Vranishta WWTP was implemented in 2003/2004.
3.2.1 Original load and effluent requirements

The plant was originally designed for a capacity of 120,000 PE, with a goal to reach the
following effluent requirements:BOD5 <25 mg O2/l and
SS
< 30 mg/l.
East and west wastewater collectors of Ohrid lake were designed for transport of sewerage
to WWTP. Due to the high infiltration/leakage into the sewerage system in the cities and into
these collectors, the raw wastewater is strongly diluted and the original organic design load
was not reached. It is envisaged and essential for proper working of WWTP that in the future
the infiltration will significantly decrease by the reparation of collectors/secondary sewers
combined with complete separation of secondary sewer. By this way only the inlet
concentration of the raw wastewater will be able to increase to designed level.
3.2.2 Description of old wastewater treatment line

The influent is boosted via an inlet pumping station equipped originally with 4 screw pumps
each with a capacity of 560 l/s. At present, one or two pumps are sporadically operational
what enough for the original design flow is. Since last year mainly due to financial situation
of the Proaqua company the maintenance is not adequate and particularly the reparation of
inlet and RAS pumps are becoming critical parts of the treatment.
In front of the inlet pump sump, an overflow/bypass chamber has been constructed to allow
the isolation of the pump station if needed (using manual penstock) and also to allow the
discharge of any excess flows to the river which is necessary as the system has, due to
infiltration, a significant(> 80%) storm water component.
No rake or coarse screen in overflow chamber is installed. The rake would improve
protection of pumps and following parts of the plant particularly the coarse screen and
overflow of coarse debris to river Crni Drim.
Behind the inlet pumping station, an automatic sampler for 24 h-composite sampling was
installed.
54

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
The inlet flow is split into two streams and passes first positon through the remainings of
two coarse screen (broken since 2004) to be followed then by to two parallel fine screens.
The fine screens have a bar spacing of 17 mm and have operational problems too. The
removal of screenings from the screens automatically functions, depending on the water
level in front of the screen via a level float switch in each screen channel. The screenings are
transported via a belt conveyor into a container.
Then, the wastewater flows through two units of aerated grit chambers with a total volume
of 330 m3. The grit chambers aim to remove grit and grease/scum using scrapers, a
pneumatic grit pump and a sand classifier. The outlet of the grit chambers flows into a
distribution chamber where the wastewater is to be equally distributed into the two
aeration tanks type Passavant.
The two aeration tanks as circulation tank with a total volume of 6,400 m 3 are equipped with
three operational rotor aerators in each tank and are parallel operated. Each rotor has a
oxygen transfer capacity of 66 kg02/h into clean water at 10 C with a rated motor power of
37 kW.
In addition, there are 2 submersible, horizontal axial mixers installed in each tank. Each
mixer has a rated motor power of 4 kW.
The outlet weir of each tank is actuated with an electrical motor so that the water level in
the tank can be automatically regulated in accordance with the set values in PLC. For control
and record of the dissolved oxygen concentration, a DO sensor is installed in each tank.
The aeration tanks were originally planed for removal of organic substances in the raw
wastewater (or BOD removal). However, nitrification or even denitrification can take place
when the influent BOD load is lower than the design value.
The effluent of the aeration tanks flows into a distribution chamber for the two secondary
sedimentation tanks. A sensor for MLSS was installed in this chamber for monitoring the SS
of the aeration tanks.
The two secondary sedimentation tanks have a diameter of 40 m and a volume of 4,400 m3
each. For monitoring the sludge-water interface, a sludge blanket level sensor was installed
in each tank.
A return sludge pumping station was equipped with two screw pumps to elevate the return
sludge into the aeration tanks and to draw off the excess sludge. Each pump has a capacity
of 706 l/s.
The effluent of the sedimentation tanks passes through a discharge channel where an
ultrasonic level sensor for flow rate measurement was installed. A chlorination station
55

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
building exists for disinfection of the effluent but, according to staff of WWTP it has never
been used.
3.2.3 Sludge treatment line

The excess sludge is drawn from the outlet of the return sludge pumping station and led via
a pipeline into the sludge stabilisation tanks. In this pipe, a MID flow meter was installed.
The excess sludge is aerobically oxidised and stabilised in the two circulation tanks. Each
tank has a volume of 3,200 m3 and is equipped with two operational rotor aerators. An
ultrasonic level sensor was installed in each tank to monitor the water level in the tank.
The stabilized sludge is pumped by a submersible pump (30 l/s, duty and standby) into a
sludge thickener which has a diameter of 16 m and a volume of 850 m 3. In the thickener the
sludge will be concentrated/thickened up to 2-3 %.
Then, the thickened sludge will be dewatered by 2 dewatering belt press each with a
capacity of 8-16 m3/h. Polymer preparation and dosing units so that polymer can be dosed
to strengthen the dewatering of sludge.
The dewatered sludge is being sold by tractor loads in agriculture or disposed on local
landfill.
3.2.4 Outline mechanical design description

The Treatment plant is designed for a population of 120,000 and covers the catchment areas
of Ohrid and Struga.
On the eastern side of the lake, the collector extends down to Peshtani. On the western side
of the lake a project is planned to connect Radozhda to the existing western collector and at
the same time injecting flows from the campsite at Livadsita so that the existing plant there
can be abandoned.
In each of these areas, flows are received by gravity and pump stations constructed under
the sewerage rehabilitation programme. Flows from Ohrid and Struga are combined at the
main Struga transfer station and passed forward to the treatment plant.
Flows in excess of 560 l/s overflow into the river at the storm bypass upstream of the inlet
pump station.
56

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
A.1.1.1. Inlet pump station

Three 560 l/s screw pumps are installed, one as duty and two standby which lift flows into
the inlet screens.
A.1.1.2. Inlet screens
Two screen channels with a penstock in each inlet and outlet have coarse and fine screens
installed. These are of the raked bar type.
The screenings drop onto a conveyor which discharges into a skip for offsite disposal.
A.1.1.3. Grit trap
Flows leave the inlet screens and pass into the grit trap which has two chambers, each of
which have air pipes supplied by total three air blowers, two duty one standby.
The settled grit is scraped to the grit lift chamber in which an air lift passes a mixture of grit
and influent to the grit classifier. The grit is removed in the classifier to a skip and the surplus
water is returned to the grit tank.
A.1.1.4. Flow splitting chamber
Flows are split to enter aeration tanks 1 & 2 manually operated penstocks at this chamber
allow flows to be shut off to either tank.
A.1.1.5. Aeration tanks
Each tank has three rotor aerators and two mixers. These, together with an adjustable weir,
are controlled by a dissolved oxygen sensor/controller to maintain a set level of DO in the
tanks.
A.1.1.6. Final sedimentation tanks distribution chamber
Flows from the aeration tanks enter this chamber and are split between Final tanks 1 & 2,
either of which can also be isolated at this location.
This chamber has a mixed liquor suspended solids (turbidity) monitor for control of the
surplus sludge valve.
A.1.1.7. Final sedimentation tanks
Flow from the aeration tanks passes to the final sedimentation tanks where the sludge
settles and is moved to the cone in the base of the tanks by a half bridge scraper. The tanks
have an actuated penstock on the outlet of the sludge line from each tank.
57

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
The level of the sludge blanket in each tank is monitored by a pair of detectors which open
or close the actuated penstock on the return sludge line.
A.1.1.8. Return activated sludge

The return activated sludge from the final tanks enters the well of the Return activated
sludge pump house.
A set of duty return screw pumps lift the return sludge to a high level distribution chamber,
which then splits the flows, returning them to tanks 1 & 2.
At the base of this chamber there is a valve draw off point for surplus activated sludge.
A.1.1.9. Surplus activated sludge
SAS is drawn off from the distribution chamber by a motorised valve which allows the flows
to gravitate to the aerated sludge stabilisation tanks (no. 10)
The rate of surplus sludge draw off can be varied in response to one of three selectable
operating modes.
A.1.1.10.
Aerated sludge stabilisation tanks
Surplus sludge is treated in these sludge aging tanks prior to thickening. Each tank is fitted
with a pair of rotor aerators. The level in each tank is individually monitored by an ultrasonic
level monitor.
A.1.1.11.
Sludge transfer pump station
Sludge is drawn from the sludge stabilisation tanks from where it can be pumped by the
transfer station to either the picket fence thickener or directly to the sludge drying beds.
58

the European Union
A.1.1.12.
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Sludge thickener
This is used as a batch thickening vessel for the sludge drying beds and/or the belt press.
Sludge is pumped into the tank and the rotating action of the picket fence induces
separation of the liquor from the sludge.
When the plant operator decides that the sludge is at the right condition it is then fed to the
drying beds and/or the belt press.
A.1.1.13.
Sludge belt presses
Sludge from the picket fence thickener is fed into the two belt presses together with a
conditioning polymer solution. This cause the sludge particles to flocculate and the resulting
liquor falls through the weave of the belts into the site drainage system.
The thickening sludge is further compressed by the belts before leaving the machine on a
conveyor belt. This discharges into the hopper of the sludge conveyor which transfers it to
the nearest chamber of the sludge drying beds.
3.2.5 Operation of the WWTP

INLET PUMPING STATION
The main task of the inlet pumping station is to boost the sewage to such an elevation that
the sewage goes through the treatment units/components by gravity and even the effluent
can be discharged into the receiving water body without further intermediate boosting
pumping station.
In front of the pump sump an overflow chamber was constructed. At the connection
between the overflow chamber and the pump sump, a sluice gate (1,500 x 1,500 mm,
Manufacturer MZT Pumpi) with manual drive was installed.
The wastewater collected within the treatment plant including the filtrates from the sludge
thickener and the sludge dewatering press is also delivered back to the pump sump.
59

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Originally, four screw pumps, each with same capacity, were installed. Now only two pumps
are sporadically operational. The specification of the two recently functional pumps is given
as follows:
Quantity: 2
Capacity: 560 (l/s)
Delivery head: 5.5 (m)
Rated motor: 55 (kW)
Manufacturer Of pump: Union Invest
Manufacturers of motor and gearbox: Rossi Motoriduttori
The diameter of the screw pumps is 1.65 m, with an angle of inclination of 35.
In normal operation one pump is on duty and another one is as standby. The pumps are
manually operated and not controlled by flow condition or water level in pump sump.
If one pump is operated 24h a day, then the maximal total inlet amount should be estimated
as follows:
560 l/s x 24 h/d x 3.6 = 48,384 m3/d
The actual inlet amount will be less than the above estimated figure, because the pump
cannot permanently work at its rated capacity (due to variations in the incoming water level
in the pump sump).
Since the plant was commissioned, one pump has always been sufficient for the flows. Two
or more pumps have therefore never been in operation at the same time.
There has been circumstance in which no pumps could run for brief periods of power
outages. These outages can occur up to 15 times a month, but are usually short lasting only a
few minutes, although some outages of up to 2 hours have also been recorded. When these
longer outages occur, the sewer system overflows at the manhole Struga 3 nearest the
WWTP and discharges into a farmers field. Recently due to defect of gearbox, the both inlet
pumps were not working for several days and whole plant standed still.
According to the existing practice, if the inlet wastewater amount is larger than the capacity
of the pump being on duty, the overflow in front of the pump sump will be activated and
part of the wastewater will be directly discharged to the receiving water body, the River Crni
Drim. Normally, this only happens during wet weather conditions to relieve the low polluted
storm water load. This overflow measure limits the maximum hydraulic capacity of WWTP
which is in general higher than capacity of one pump.
In the pump sump, an ultrasonic level sensor (Manufacturer: Endress and Hauser) was
installed. Its function is to provide a signal to the RAS penstocks to fully open, normally
60

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
during the rain weather flow thus allowing a maximum preventive withdrawal of sludge to
prevent overflow of the Final Secondary Sedimentation Tanks.
SCREENS
The task of the screens is the removal of large clogging materials like waste paper, cartons,
wood, plastic etc., in order to protect the following treatment units/components. There are
two separate inlet channels into the screen house with each channel originally having a
coarse screen and a fine screen.
The coarse screens with a channel width of 1,450 mm and a bar space of 40 mm were
damaged and the bars were demolished. The fine screens with a channel width of 1,750 mm
and a bar space of 17 mm are still operational but need permanent adjustment.
The screen plant is automated and each screen is activated by a high level float switch in the
inlet chamber upstream of each screen. The collected material is automatically transported
to a metal container by a conveyor system.
In normal operation, both channels are in operation, so both secondary screens are on duty.
There is a manual penstock (width 1,450 mm) in front of each screen and a manual penstock
(width 1,600 mm) behind the screen.
To avoid sand deposits in the channel the velocity in the screen channels should be larger
than 0.5 m/s. The flow velocity in the channel can be estimated as follows:
v = Q / (W x H)
where:
v- flow velocity in the channel (m/s)
Q - wastewater flow rate (m3/s)
W -width of the channel (m)
H - water depth in channel (m)
eg., with one inlet pump running (Q = 560 l/s = 0.56 m 3/s) and using one screen channel with
a channel width (W) of 1.75 m in operation, for the given necessary v = 0.5 m/s, the maximal
water depth (H) in the channel will be:
H = 0.56/(1.75x0.5) = 0.64 m.
If the water depth is larger than 0.64 m, the flow velocity is then lower than 0.5 m/s and a
sand deposit problem can be encountered (this is possible even when only one screen is in
operation).
To remove or to avoid the sand deposits, one fine screen can be taken out of operation for a
short time (e.g. hour) in order to increase the flow velocity in the channel.
At the connection channel between the inlet pumps and the screens an automatic sampler
and a pH/temperature sensor are installed. The sampler can automatically take samples
61

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
either time-proportionally or flow-proportionally. In this plant, the program for timeproportional sample taking is activated.
Installed equipment:
2 fine screens, width 1,750 mm, bar spacing 17 mm, Manufacturer: Union Invest,
year 1986, rated motor power for screen lift 1.1 kW each, designed to handle 2.6 m 3
of screenings/d.
1 screening conveyor belt, 500mm wide, 8.5m long with rated motor power 2.2 kW.
2 penstocks at inlet, manual drive, width x height 1,450 x 1,200 mm, Manufacturer:
Union Invest, year 1986
2 penstocks at outlet, manual drive, width x height 1,600 x 1,200 mm, Manufacturer:
Union Invest, year 1986 .
1 automatic sample taker, type ASP-station 2000, 12 bottles in each of two trays
(eachI), Manufacturer: Endress & Hauser, year 2003.
1 pH sensor, Manufacturer: Endress & Hauser, year 2003.
GRIT CHAMBERS
The grit chambers aim at removing sand and grit from the wastewater in order to avoid
deposits in the aeration tanks and pipelines, and to protect pumps, pipelines and machines
in the sludge treatment from damage.
The grit chambers are constructed of reinforced concrete and are separated into two units.
The total size of the structure is 10.5 m wide by 26.5 m long. The cross-sectional area of each
grit chamber is approx. 6.1 m2 (width/depth: 2.6 m/ 3.1 m). The entire volume of the grit
chambers amounts to 330 m3. A grease chamber is arranged parallel to each grit chamber to
removal floating materials and grease/fats to ensure functional performance of the following
treatment units. The grit separation/settlement is aided by aeration with nozzles. A double
scraper with scraper blade pushes the sand towards the hopper at the inlet side of the grit
chamber. Via an air lift, the sand-water mixture is transported from each of the two hoppers
towards the sand classifier. The floating sludge in the two grease traps is pushed together by
means of a scraper blade and may be directly withdrawn via a lowerable channel sluice gate.
The retention time in the grit chamber can be estimated as follows:
T = V/Q/60
where:
T-retention time in grit chamber (min)
V- volume of grit chamber in operation (m3)
Q - inlet wastewater flow rate (m3/s)
If one inlet pump (0.56 m3/s) and two grit chambers (330 m3) are in operation, the retention
time will be:
T = 330/ 0.56/ 60 = 9.8 min.
62

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
A retention time of about 9.8 min can be referred as enough for an effective separation of
the sand. An effective grit chamber shall effectively remove sand with a diameter bigger
than d = 0.20 mm by more than 90 %.
If just one grit chamber and one inlet pump are in operation, the retention time in the grit
chamber is then approx. 4.9 min which is considered on lower side for effective grit removal.
For aeration, three blowers were installed in the screen house but only two are now
operational. One blower can serve one grit chamber and the third one is as standby. Each
blower has a capacity of 4.5 Nm3/min at P = 0.6 bar. The aeration intensity can be estimated
as follows:
I= Q/V
where:
I-aeration intensity (m3/m3/h, the index being about 1-1.5 m3/m3/h)
Q -air flow rate (m3/h)
V- volume of the grit chamber in operation /m3)
If one blower (Q=4,5 x 60 =270 Nm3/h) serves one grit chamber (330/2=165 m3), the
aeration intensity is then
I= 270/165 =1,64 m3/m3/h
and can be referred as a little too high. Operational experiences of other wastewater
treatment plants show that too large an aeration intensity has negative impact on the grit
separation.
If one blower serves the two grit chambers, the aeration intensity is then 0.82 m3/m3/h and
can also be considered as enough.
For grit withdrawal a blower with a capacity of 4.3 m 3/min at 0.8 bar was also installed in the
screen house. The grit delivery pump delivers the sand-water mixture to the sand classifier,
both having a nominal capacity of 20 l/s. The sand classifier is interlocked with the blower
for grit withdrawal, and has an adjustable run-on timer in the circuit.
Travelling bridge/scrapers originally the bridge travelled constantly, but is now controlled by
timer so that the scraper operates for 12 h/day, with individual traverses controlled by limit
switches.
Frequency of grit withdrawal: the grit/sand removal is carried out 2-3 times/day shift. The
blower is manually started, and the air isolating valves opened and the blower runs for 15-30
minutes depending on the quantity of accumulated grit.
If the interval between two grit withdrawals is too long, the sand deposit in the hopper can
become so settled and solid (crusted) that a withdrawal without extra help will not be
possible. The frequency of the grit withdrawal should be so arranged that such situations
shall not take place.
63

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Through opening of the lowerable sluice gate, the floating material will be removed from the
grease trap. The opening /closing of the sluice gate will be manually actuated. There is no
outlet from this chamber (so there is no flow back from this chamber to the inlet of the
treatment plant).
The withdrawal frequency of the floating materials: depending on the amount of surface
material, the surface skimmer of the travelling bridge is lowered at least once/ week, and
the scum/floating materials is directed to the chamber. The accumulated material is
removed by an outside contractor approx. every two months depending on apparent load
(but occasionally 6 months), and the removed material is taken to a recognised dump site.
The time period of each penstock opening: the penstock is lowered for typically 5 minutes.
To each grit chamber, a sluice gate with manual drive was installed at the inlet side for
isolation.
Normally, both grit chambers shall be put in operation to ensure an effective grit removal.
Installed equipment:
2 penstocks at inlet, manual drive, width x height 1,600 x 1,800 mm, Manufacturer:
Union Invest, year1986.
2 travelling bridges, wheel centres 5.25 m and length 3.0 m, Manufacturer: Union
Invest, year 1986, rated motor powers and gearbox outlet speeds -scraper 1.1 kW
and 12.05 rpm and bridge long travel 0.37 kW and 2.8 rpm.
2 lowerable sluice gates for floating material withdrawal, manual drive, width x
height 1,000 x 750 mm, Manufacturer: Union Invest, year 1986.
3 air blowers for aeration of grit chambers, capacity 4.5 NVmin each at 0.6 bar, rated
motor power 15 kW, Manufacturer of blower Djurdjenuvac (from Serbia).
Manufacturer of motor Sever.
6 gate valves for blower air pipelines, DN 125, gate valves for grit pump air pipelines,
DN 40, and 22 gate valves for air discharge nozzles, DN 25.
1 air blower for grit withdrawal, capacity 4.3 m3/min each at 0.8 bar, rated motor
power 13 kW, Manufacturer of blower Fagram (from Serbia), Manufacturer of motor
Sever, year 1986.
1 pneumatic grit pump, capacity 20 l/s, delivery height 4 m, DN 125 discharge.
1 sand classifier, capacity approx. 70 m3/h, Manufacturer: Econometec, rated motor
power 0.75 kW, Manufacturer of motor WAM.
64

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
AERATION TANKS - INLET DISTRIBUTION CHAMBER

The outlet of the grit chambers flows to a distribution chamber and then is divided into two
streams. The distribution chamber has the task to quantitatively divide the wastewater
amount into two equal portions. Normally, this task can only be ensured when:
the length of overflow weir for each side is same and
a complete overflow drop hydraulically exists.
However, at the distribution chamber there does not exist a complete overflow drop. To
ensure an equal distribution, it is essential to undertake the following two measures: the opening of the two sluice gates at the distribution chamber must be the same;
the outlet overflow weirs of the two aeration tanks must have the same opening
height.
Otherwise, a quantitatively equal distribution cannot be ensured. The operator shall daily
view if there is scum within the chamber or not and remove it if any.
AERATION TANKS - GENERAL DESCRIPTION
The activated-sludge process in aeration tanks is a biological process used to convert the
finely divided and dissolved organic matter in wastewater into flocculent settleable
biological and inorganic solids that can be removed in sedimentation tanks.
There are two parallel, identical aeration tanks which are constructed of reinforced concrete
and have a geometrical configuration of a circulation tank. Each tank is approx. 60 m long by
m wide and 3 m deep and has a volume of 3,200 m3. Each tank had been originally equipped
with 6 rotors for aeration. Due to the long-term operation, the old rotors were mostly
collapsed/damaged. In the rehabilitation measures three new rotors were installed in each
aeration tank, which are working.
Each rotor (D = 1,000 mm) has a maximal oxygen transfer capacity of 66 kg02/h (into clean
water at 10C) with a rated motor power of 37 kW. In addition, there are 2 submersible,
horizontal axial mixers installed in each tank. Each mixer has a rated motor power of 4 kW.
One of the 4 mixers is not working at the moment. The outlet weir of each tank is actuated
with an electrical motor so that the water level in the tank can be automatically regulated in
accordance with the set values in the PLC. For control and record of the dissolved oxygen
concentration, a DO sensor is installed in each tank. Both DO sensors are not working at the
moment and there is no automatic control of aeration.
65

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
The return sludge is delivered by the RAS return sludge pumping station and via a
distribution chamber into the aeration tank to keep the sludge content (so called mixed
liquid suspended solid, MLSS) in the aeration tanks as required and constant. This
distribution chamber for the return sludge was constructed like the distribution chamber for
the aeration tanks. Recently the RAS pumping station was not working due to mechanical
problems as well as inlet pumping station, and the whole plant was our of usage.
AERATION TANKS - LIST OF OPERATIONAL PARAMETERS
For operation of the aeration tanks the following terms are essential:1.
Bd :
DAILY BOD5 LOAD into the aeration tank (kgBODs/d)
The Bd shall be calculated as follows:-Bd = Q x Cbod /1,000

Here: Q - daily influent wastewater quantity (m3/d), being measured through inlet or
outlet flow rate measurement;
Cbod - BOD5-concentration of inlet wastewater (mg/l), is being measured through 24h
composite sample of inlet wastewater.
2.
PE:
PEOPLE EQUIVALENT
Assuming that each person has a daily BOD5-load of 50-60 g.

3.
V: VOLUME OF AERATION TANKS (m3),

the total volume of aeration tanks at WWTP Vranishta: 6,400 m3
4.
MLSS: SLUDGE CONTENT (or mixed liquid suspended solid) in aeration tank (gSS/l),
being measured as dry solids, e.g. MLSS = 4 gSS/l.
5.
TSS:
TOTAL SLUDGE AMOUNT in the aeration tanks (kgMLSS)
TSS = VxM LSS

6.
BTS:
SLUDGE LOAD (kgBODg/kgMLSS/d)
BTS= Bd / TSS
7.
SV30:
SLUDGE VOLUME after 30-minute sedimentation (ml/I),
being sampled from the aeration tanks

8.
SVI:
SLUDGE INDEX (ml/g)
SVI = SV30/MLSS
9. RS: RATIO OF RETURN SLUDGE, ratio between the quantity of return sludge and the inlet
wastewater quantity. The quantity of return sludge equals the difference between the
delivered quantity by the return sludge pump and the quantity to the sludge stabilization
tanks.
66

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
RS = QRS / Qh
Here:
QRS - return sludge into the aeration tanks (m3/h)
3
Q -inlet wastewater quantity (m /h)
10. SSrs: SLUDGE CONTENT OF RETURN SLUDGE (g/l or kg/m3),
being sampled from the return sludge
11. USS:
EXCESS SLUDGE (kgSS/d) from the aeration system
USS = Quss x SSRS

Here: Quss- excess sludge amount withdrawn from the aeration system (m 3/d)
12. Td: SLUDGE AGE (d), the average solids residence time, reflecting approximately the time
the micro-organisms spend in the system.
Td = TSS / USS = Quantity of sludge in the aeration tank (kgSS) / excess sludge (kgSS/d)
13. DO:
DISSOLVED OXYGEN CONTENT (mg/l)
AERATION TANKS - USE OF THE OPERATIONAL PARAMETERS

For operation of the aeration tanks, the following indices of operational parameters can be
referred to:
MLSS: SLUDGE CONTENT IN AERATION TANKS
Because there is no primary settling tank in the WWTP Vranishta, the MLSS can range from
3.5 to 4.5 g/l. For a given influent BOD5 load (Bd), a lower MLSS reflects a higher sludge
loading (BTs), and conversely.
The MLSS should not be lower than 2.5 - 3 g/l. Otherwise there are foaming problems in the
system or the sludge loading will be too high and an efficient BOD removal can not be
ensured.
The MLSS should also not be higher than e.g. 7 g/l, because the oxygen transfer to the microorganisms will be impeded and due to the capacity constraints of the rotors, an efficient
oxygen supply cannot be ensured.
To increase the MLSS, no or less excess sludge should be withdrawn from the system for a
short period. In contrast, more withdrawal of excess sludge will reduce the MLSS.
SLUDGE LOADING
For complete treatment of carbonaceous BOD, the sludge loading shall be at or smaller than
0.3 kgBOD/d.kgMLSS.
If the sludge loading is larger than 0.3 kgBOD/d.kgMLSS, a complete BOD removal will not be
ensured.
If the sludge loading is less than 0.15 kgBOD/d.kgMLSS nitrification will take place.
For simultaneous sludge stabilization (extended aeration), in dependence on temperature,
the sludge loading could vary between 0.05-0.075 kgBOD/d.kgMLSS. e.g. if the inlet BOD5
67

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
load is 4,000 kgBODs/d (or 80,000 PE if PE= 50 gO2/day), and if the total sludge amount in
the aeration tanks is 25,600 kgMLSS (4 kgMLSS/m3), then the sludge loading is:
4,000 / 25,600 = 0.156 kgBOD/d.kgMLSS
That means that almost complete nitrification can take place if the inlet BOD 5 load is less
than 4,000 kgBODs/d (or 80,000 PE).
SLUDGE AGE
If the sludge age is shorter than approximately 4 days (at 12C), there is no nitrification in the
system.
If the sludge age is larger than approximately 6 days (at 12C), there is nitrification in the
system.
For simultaneous sludge stabilization (extended aeration) the sludge age will be
approximately 25 days (at 10C),.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SLUDGE LOADING AND SLUDGE AGE
Figure: BOD removal related to sludge loading, sludge age and excess sludge parameters
obtained from the operational data of German treatment plants (Karl Imhoff s Handbook of
Urban Drainage and Wastewater Disposal)
68

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
DISSOLVED OXYGEN CONTENT

The following DO values are recommended:Plant without nitrification: 2 mg/l
Plant with nitrification: 1.5-2 mg/l
Plant with nitrification and simultaneous denitrification: 0.5-1 mg/l
The DO content should not be higher than the recommended values. If the DO content is 1
mg/l higher than the recommended value, the energy consumption for the aeration will be
approximately 15 % higher.
In addition, if there is simultaneous denitrification in the system, a high DO content (higher
than 0.5 mg/l) will negatively impact the denitrification.
The oxygenation capacity requirements are different per goal of the treatment:
Conventional (removal of carbonaceous BOD) process:
1.2 - 2.0 kg02/kgBOD5
Single stage with nitrification:
1.8 - 2.5 kg02/kgBOD5
Extended aeration:
2.5 - 3.0 kg02/kgBOD5
The higher the sludge age and the lower the sludge loading, the higher the oxygen
requirement because more of the incoming BOD is removed and nitrification takes place.
AERATION CAPACITY
Each rotor has a capacity of 66 kg02/h with a rated motor power of 37 kW. Therefore, the
specific energy consumption is 66/37 = 1.78 kg02/kWh.
Total rotor capacity: 66 kg02/h.pc x 6 pes = 396 kg02/h
The total capacity of the rotors is also enough for complete nitrification of an inlet load of
approximately 3,312 kgBOD5/d or 66,000 PE.
SVI: SLUDGE VOLUME INDEX
Sludge volume index is the volume 1 g of sludge occupies after 30 min of settling expressed
in ml. A good settling sludge would have an SVI between 50 and 100 ml/g.
Bulking sludge, with poor settling characteristics, could have an SVI up to 400 ml/g. Because
there is no primary settling tank in the WWTP Vranishta, the sludge index shall be generally
in a range of a good settling performance. A good sludge settling performance means a high
content of return sludge. For design a value of 150 ml/g will be used for the safety reason.
RS:
RATIO OF RETURN SLUDGE
Through return sludge, the sludge content in the aeration tanks will be kept. The necessary
ratio of return sludge depends on the content of return sludge (SS RS):
RS = QRS / Qh = MLSS / (RSss - MLSS).
E.g. if the MLSS = 4 g/l, RSSS = 8 g/l, then the necessary RS = 4 / (8-4) = 1.
69

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Figure: AS system
If the content of return sludge is high, then the ratio of return sludge would be low.
A low ratio of return sludge means a low delivery quantity of return sludge (energy saving!).
At a given content of return sludge (RSSs) and a given ratio of return sludge (RS), the MLSS
can be calculated as follows:MLSS = RS x RSss / (1 + RS)
E.g. if the RS = 1, the RSSS = 7 g/l, then the
MLSS= 1 x 7 / (1+1) = 3.5 g/l.
The normal ratio of return sludge (RS) varies in the range of 0.5 to 1.5. Normally, a good
sludge settling performance (low SVI) needs a low ratio of return sludge (RS).
A poor sludge settling performance (high SVI) and a high MLSS require a high ratio of return
sludge (RS).
AERATION TANKS - OPERATIONAL SCENARIOS
The two aeration tanks are parallel operated. There are two operational scenarios which
depend on the inlet loads and on the sludge content (MLSS) in the aeration tanks, as follows:
HIGH INLET LOAD WITHOUT NITRIFICATION
If the inlet load is high and the sludge loading (BTs) is in the rage of e.g. 0.2 to 0.3 kgBODs/d.
kgMLSS, the sludge age in the system is then not long enough (e.g. shorter than 4 days) and
nitrification in the system does not take place.
The operation will be automatically controlled depending on the on-line measurement of the
DO via PLC control based on the Control Philosophy. Because the immersion depth of the
rotors has influence on the oxygen transfer capacity of the rotors, therefore the water depth
of the aeration tanks (i.e. the opening degree of the outlet sluice gates of the aeration tanks)
is integrated into the Control Philosophy.
The DO value should be about 2 mg/l.
Attention: The parallel two tanks shall have the same water depth or same opening degree
of the outlet sluice gates, otherwise the tank with a lower water depth will be loaded
stronger than the tank with a higher water level. One rotor alone cannot mix the tank
properly.
70

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
RELATIVELY LOW INLET LOAD WITH NITRIFICATION

If the inlet load is relatively low and the sludge loading (BTs) is lower than 0.15 kgBODs/d. Kg
MLSS, the sludge age in the system is then long enough (e.g. longer than 8 days) and
nitrification in the system does take place. The operation of the rotors and mixers in each
tank can be as follows:
All rotors (R1, R2 and R3) in operation
Only two rotors (R1+R2 or R1+R3 or R2+R3) in operation
Only one rotor and one mixer (R1+M1 or R2+M2 or R3+M2) in operation
If one rotor and one mixer is in operation, an aerobic zone is established immediately
downstream of the aerator, and an anoxic zone is created upstream of the aerator and then
simultaneous denitrification takes place. The DO sensor shall be located downstream of the
aerator. The DO value shall be kept at about 0.5 mg/l.
Intermittent denitrification can also take place if all rotors are shut off and all mixers are in
operation. The operation shall be as follows:
Phase 1: Two rotors (R1+R2 or R1+R3 or R2+R3) in operation for a duration of e.g. 3.0
h for nitrification
Phase 2: Two mixers in operation for a duration of e.g. 1 h for denitrification The DO
value should also be kept at about 0.5 mg/l.
AERATION TANKS - OTHER OPERATIONAL FACTORS
WASTEWATER TEMPERATURE
The higher the wastewater temperature, the larger the capacity of the aeration tanks both
for BOD removal and for nitrification.
NUTRIENTS
The growth of the micro-organisms requires a ratio BOD5:N:P = 100:5:1. For wastewater
mainly from households, this ratio is ensured.
ONE AERATION TANK OUT OF OPERATION
Generally, two aeration tanks shall be fully put into operation. For the purpose of
maintenance, one tank might be out of operation. In this situation the plant treatment
capacity should be decreased.
71

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Installed Equipment
2 sluice gates at the distribution chamber for inlet, manual drive, DN 800,
Manufacturer Union Invest, year 1986.
6 rotors, capacity 66 kg02/h each (into clean water at 10C), Manufacturer PassavantRoediger, rated motor 37 kW, year 2003
mixers, rated motor 4 kW, Manufacturer EMU, year 2003
2 DO sensors, manufacturer Endress and Hauser.
2 sluice gates at the distribution chamber for return sludge, manual drive, DN 800,
Manufacturer Union Invest, year 1986.
SECONDARY SEDIMENTATION TANKS
INLET DISTRIBUTION CHAMBER
This chamber works the same as distribution chamber before aeration tanks.
Installed Equipment:
2 sluice gates, manual drive, DN 700, Manufacturer MZT Pumpi, year 2003.
sensor for suspended solid, TurbiMax scattered light type, Manufacturer

Endress and Hausser, 2003.
SEDIMENTATION TANKS
The aeration tanks and secondary sedimentation tanks form an operational unit and
influence each other mutually. Secondary sedimentation tanks have the task of separating
the activated sludge from the biologically treated wastewater.
The loading of an activated sludge plant with organic pollutants is determined according to
the dry solids content in the activated sludge and the volume of the aeration tank. This dry
solids content depends essentially on the functional efficiency of the secondary
sedimentation tank with changing hydraulic feed, the sludge volume index and the return
sludge flow feed to AT.
Along with the biological treatment effected in the aeration tank the achieved degree of
separation of dry solids in the secondary sedimentation tank has great influence on the
outflow characteristics of the sewage treatment plant. The residual pollution of the outflow
of the secondary sedimentation process, measured as BOD5 or COD, is caused in part by
soluble or colloidal substances which are stripped off with the filterable substance in the
outflow of the secondary sedimentation process can correspond to 0.3 to 1.0 mg BOD5 or
0.8 to 1.6 mg COD.
There are two sedimentation tanks. Each has a diameter of 40 m and an average depth of
app. 3.5 m, and a volume of 4,400 m3. Each tank is equipped a scraper bridge.
72

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
The parameter for sedimentation tank is the hydraulic surface load:

qa =Q / A (m3/m2/h)
where:
Q - inlet into the secondary sedimentation (sum of the inlet and the return sludge
into the aeration tank, m3/h)
A - surface of the sedimentation tank, m2.
The higher the qa and the SVI, the poorer the sedimentation and separation effect are.
The scum collected in the tank flows into the pump sump of the return sludge pumping
station. The amount of clear water together with the scum shall be as little as possible.
Otherwise, the return sludge will be unnecessarily diluted with this Clearwater.
The routine work of the operator shall include removal of the floating scum within the tank.
In each tank, a sludge blanket sensor (infrared sensor type, Manufacturer Partech) for
measurement of sludge-liquor interface was installed respectively.
RETURN SLUDGE PUMPING STATION
The task of the return sludge pumping station is to boot the return sludge to such an
elevation that the return sludge flows into the aeration tanks by gravity. The return sludge is
distributed to the both aeration tanks via a distribution chamber.
Part of return sludge is conveyed as excess sludge into the sludge aging (stabilization) tanks.
Two screw pumps, each with same capacity, were installed. The specification of the two
functional pumps is given in
Table 3-5:
Screw pumps specification
No.
Rated capacity
Delivery head
Rated motor
(l/s)
(m)
(kW)
706
5,22
706
5,22
Manufcturer of Manufacturers
pump
motor/gearbox
55(75)
Union Invest
Rossimotoriduttori
55(75)
Union Invest
Rade Koncar of
of
Croatia motor and

Strojna of Slovenia
gearbox.
Due to failure of one Rossimotoriduttori gearmotor, one of the old drives has been refitted.
Also recently the motors of 75 kW are installed.
73

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
The screw has a diameter of 1,800 mm.

In normal operation, one pump is on duty and another one is as standby. The pumps are
manually operated and not controlled by flow condition or water level in the pump sump.
The sludge withdrawal from each secondary sedimentation tank can be manually regulated
via a sluice gate (DN 600, Manufacturer: Union Invest) on the return sludge pipe installed at
the pump sump. This regulation mainly has two functions:
REGULATING THE RETURN SLUDGE RATIO
The capacity of the return sludge pump can only be regulated by itself via the
water level in the pump sump. This water level depends on the opening degree of
the sluice gates. Therefore, the regulation of the opening degree of the sluice
gates at the pump sump will affect the capacity of the return sludge pump. The
index for return sludge ratio (RS) is as already described.
For normal operation, the opening degree of the sluice gates should depend on
the inlet water Quantity, so that a relatively constant ratio of return sludge can be
ensured.
An unnecessary too large ratio of return sludge leads to high energy consumption
of the return sludge pump and to enlarging the hydraulic surface load of the
secondary sedimentation tanks, and therefore should be avoided.
A too low ratio of return sludge results in decreasing MLSS in the aeration tanks
and in drifting of sludge from the sedimentations into the effluent.
BALANCING THE SLUDGE WITHDRAWAL FROM BOTH SST's
If the sludge level in one sedimentation tank is higher than in the other one, then
the opening degree of the sluice gate for this tank should be larger.
CHLORINATION STATION BUILDING AND EFFLUENT MEASUREMENT
An ultrasonic level sensor (Type FDU 80, Manufacturer Endress and Hauser) was installed in
the channel in front of the chlorination building where a complete overflow exists.
Through measuring the water depth in front of the overflow (hydraulic critical section) the
flow rate will be calculated.
The flow rate is shown on the display unit and it is supposed to be recorded by staff.
Chlorination station has never been used.
SLUDGE STABILISATION TANKS
The task of the sludge stabilization (or aging) tanks is to oxidize the organic substances in the
excess sludge and therefore to stabilize the excess sludge.
74

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
The oxygen supply for oxidization is ensured by two rotors in each tank. There are in total
two tanks, each of which has the same configuration as the aeration tanks. The total volume
of the two tanks amounts to 6,400 m3.
The essential operational parameter for the sludge stabilization tanks is the retention time
which is defined as follows:
Tsludge = V / Quss (d)
Here:
V - volume of the sludge stabilisation tanks, m3
Quss - daily amount of excess sludge (m3/d)
To properly stabilise the sludge the retention time should be kept in the range of 10-15 days.
After stabilisation the organic content of the sludge should be approximately 50-55 %. The
dissolved oxygen content in the tank should be in the range of 1-2 mg/l. In dependence on
nitrification process is inhibited or not the oxygen requirements can vary.
The regulation of the oxygen supply is realized via the opening degree of the outlet sluice
gate which depends on the ultrasonic water level in each tank.
Withdrawal of the excess sludge:
The excess sludge is withdrawn from the outlet of the return sludge pumping station. On the
withdrawal pipeline, a flow meter (MID) was installed.
The main criteria for excess sludge withdrawal is the sludge content (MLSS) in the aeration
tanks and the sludge level in the secondary sedimentation tanks. The higher the MLSS and
the sludge level in the secondary sedimentation tanks, the more the excess sludge
withdrawal.
The excess sludge depends on load (and SRT) and can be estimated as follows:
Dry solid of excess sludge:
ca. 40 - 80 gDSS/PE/d
Solid content of the sludge:
ca. 7 - 9 g/l (or 0.7 - 0.9%)
Daily excess sludge each PE:
ca. 5 - 10 l/PE/d
A large quantity of circulation of sludge from the sludge stabilization tanks into the
secondary sedimentation tanks should be avoided. This circulation:
shortens the retention time in the sludge stabilisation tanks,
increase surface loads to the secondary sedimentation tanks unnecessarily and
increase the energy consumption at the return sludge pumping station.
By circulation (or decanting) of the supernate from the sludge stabilisation tanks, the solid
content in the tanks can be increased, and then the retention time can be increased.
75

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
However, too high solids content of the sludge will impede the oxygen transfer and
negatively impact the aeration.
Flow meter (MID), DN 200, Manufacturer Endress and Hauser
5 Gate valves DN 200.
4 rotors, capacity 66 kg02/h each (into clean water at 10C), Manufacturer PassavantRoediger, rated motor 37 kW, year 2003
2 level sensors, ultrasonic type FMU 40, manufacturer Endress and Hauser
2 sluice gates at the outlet, manual drive, size 600 mm, Manufacturer Union Invest,
year 1986.
SLUDGE PUMPS AND THICKENER
Two submersible pumps (one on duty and one standby) deliver the stabilized sludge into the
thickener. The thickener has a diameter of 16 m and a volume of approx. 850 m 3 The
operational parameters for the thickener include:
Retention time:
0.5 -1 d
Hydraulic loading: < 0.75 m3/m2/h
Mass loading:
50 kg DSS/m2/d.
The sludge quantity can be estimated as follows:
Dry solid of sludge after stabilization:
Solid content of the sludge after thickening:
Sludge amount after thickening each PE:
ca. 40-50 gDSS/PE/d

ca. 20 - 30 g/l (or 2-3 %)
ca. 2 l/PE/d
One ultrasonic level sensor was installed in the thickener to monitor the level and control
the feeding pump for the thickener.
submersible pumps, type KP27, each 30 l/s, H=10 m, rated motor power 11 kW,
Manufacturer Jugoturbina of Croatia, year 1986.
gate valves at the inlet pipelines into the pump sump, manual drive, DN 250 2 gate
valves at the pressure pipelines, manual drive, DN 200 2 non-return valves, DN 200 1
rake in thickener
1 ultrasonic level sensor, type Prosonic M, Manufacturer Endress and Hauser.
76

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
SLUDGE DEWATERING AND SLUDGE DISPOSAL

The thickened sludge will be delivered via a helical pump to the 2 sludge belt presses for
sludge dewatering. The each of dewatering machines has a capacity of 8 - 16 m3/d. After
dewatering the dry solid content will be in the rage of 18 to 25 %.
Dry solid content after thickening: If the thickener works well a dry solid content of about 23% should be reached. Otherwise, the sludge amount to be dewatered is high and results in
high consumption of polymer and energy.
Polymer dosing: The dosing amount generally influences the dry solid content of the
dewatered sludge. Because the polymer is expensive, the dosing amount should be
optimized in the practical operation.
The sludge amount after the thickening or to be dewatered was approximately 135 m 3/d.
That means the dewatering machines could work 10-16 hours a day, i.e. two-shift operation
with one machine or one shift with two. The capacity is big enough for new situation.
The dewatered sludge could be applied in agriculture, disposed at sanitary landfill at cost of
20 EUR/t or some other feasible, local available final advanced treatment
The existing sludge drying beds can be used as emergency dewatering facility.
Installed Equipment
First unit
1 helical sludge feed pump, Manufacturer Netzsch Mohnopumpen, rated motor
power 4 kW, year 1999.
1 Belt press unit, width of filter belt 1,600 mm, width of discharge conveyor belt
700 mm, Manufacturer Roediger (CH), type Roepress 16-4 rated motor power 14 kW,
year 1999.
1 polymer preparation and dosing unit, Manufacturer Roediger, type Roedos 38A,
rated motor power 2.5 kW, year 1999.
1 sludge belt conveyor, Manufacturer MZT Pumpi, belt width 600 mm
Second unit
1 helical sludge feed pump, Manufacturer Netzsch Mohnopumpen, rated motor
power 4 kW.
1 Belt press unit, width of filter belt 1,600 mm, width of discharge conveyor belt
700mm, Van Roll, rated motor power 14 kW.
1 polymer preparation and dosing unit, type, rated motor power 3.5 kW.
1 sludge belt conveyor, Manufacturer MZT Pumpi, belt width 600 mm
77

the European Union
3.3
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Input data for WWTP Vranishta

3.3.1 Water quantities
Besides existing sewerage system and connection of Radozhda which will be implemented in
the scope of this project, into hydraulic load calculation of WWTP have been taken into
account rural areas of the Struga municipality (Struga villages) and municipality Vevchani
which will be connected to the WWTP in exploitation period till 2045.
Hydraulic load of WWTP is calculated on assumptions given in JICA study. Total hydraulic
load is including domestic (households), tourists, commercial and public hydraulic
wastewater. Difference from the assumptions from JICA Study is in assumption of annual
growth, which is in this FS based on medium variant of United Nations prediction (discussed
in 2.3). Assessment of connections to the WWTP in the project area is based on initial
number of the population that is already connected to the sewerage system.
The number of tourists, prediction of touristic development and connection of tourist
facilities during the exploitation period in the project area is also taken from the JICA study.
Calculation is based on the existing data of tourist during the high season in summer
(August).
Commercial and public wastewaters are taken in hydraulic load as percentage of connected
number of inhabitants. According to the JICA Study commercial load is taken in account as
30% and public load is 10%.
78

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Table 3-6:
year
Projected load of WWTP in PE

2015
2025
2035
Connected population projection per years (PE)
19,265
19,088
18,484
Struga
39,130
38,771
37,544
Ohrid
864
856
829
Radozhda
2,474
2,451
2,374
Vevchani
8,083
8,083
8,083
Struga villages
69,815
69,250
67,314
TOTAL
Connected tourists projection per years (PE)
11,297
14,862
16,503
Struga
19,127
27,142
28,196
Ohrid
0
584
614
Radozhda
30,424
42,588
45,313
TOTAL
2045
17,586
35,719
789
2,258
8,083
64,435
18,325
29,291
646
48,261
Commercial and public wastewater load projection per years (PE)

COMMERCIAL
PUBLIC
17,518
6,000
17,358
6,640
16,808
6,562
15,992
6,388
Unit wastewater generation is determined on the basis of yearly and monthly water
consumption in Struga and Ohrid. The yearly accountable water consumption is 4.6 4.9
million m3/year. Based on calculation given in JICA Study, average domestic water
consumption is 135 lit/PE.
Table 3-7:
Projected daily average flow of WWTP
Daily average flow
unit
2015
3
8,100
domestic
m /day
3
4,107
tourist
m /day
3
2,365
commercial
m /day
3
810
public
m /day
3
m /day
15,383
TOTAL
lit/s
178
2025
8,964
5,749
2,343
896
17,953
208
2035
8,859
6,117
2,269
886
18,131
210
2045
8,624
6,515
2,159
862
18,160
210
Peak factors
For design hydraulic load of WWTP it is necessary to take into account peak factors to
calculate daily peak flow and hourly peak flow. Peak factor are determined in JICA Study,
where daily peak flow is determined by the variations of monthly flow fluctuation in 2013,
and hourly peak flow is determined on the basis of actual flow measurement which was
observed at WWTP in October 2014.
According to the JICA Study daily peak flow is 1.26 and hourly peak flow is 1.80.
79

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Infiltration
According to JICA study, the amount of infiltrating water is based on the actual
measurement and calculation amount 32,464 m3/day or 375.74 l/s, without assuming that to
separate faecal and storm water sewer in the cities of Ohrid and Struga, so in the future
storm water will not discharge more to the main collector and Treatment Plant. In this study,
it was assumed that the reconstruction of the storm water network in cities Ohrid and
Struga will be performed before finalization of reconstruction of WWTP, so the infiltration in
system is taken as 50% of daily average flow (DAF). According to JICA study, maximum load
of infiltration is currently in the following sections of the main collector: PS Ohrid 2 - PS
Dalian (166.81 l/s) and Downtown PS Struga - PS Struga 3 (104.74 l/s) (Figure 2.2), which
refers to the inflows of wastewaters of two largest cities Ohrid and Struga on the main
collector.
PROJECTED HYDRAULIC LOAD
Table 3-8:
Projected hydraulic loads of WWTP
2015
HYDRAULIC LOAD
unit
lit/s
267
3
average dry flow
m /h
961
m3/day
23,074
lit/s
493
3
peak dry flow
m /h
1,774
3
m /day
42,579
lit/s
591
3
peak wet flow
m /h
2,129
3
m /day
51,095
2025
312
1,122
26,930
575
2,071
49,695
690
2,485
59,634
2035
315
1,133
27,197
581
2,091
50,187
697
2,509
60,224
2045
315
1,135
27,240
582
2,094
50,267
698
2,513
60,321
Here it should be noted that this hydraulic load corresponds summer conditions (ca. 125,000
PE), particularly Augustus when the greatest amount of tourist occurs (ca. 48,000 PE). In the
other 9 months the load is about 80,000 PE
3.3.2 Water quality

3.3.2.1 Existing pollution load
Analyses of wastewater are preforming on the inlet and outlet of WWTP by PROAQUA and
results of analysis for period from 2011-2014. are given in Table 3-9, Table 3-10, Table 3-11
and
Table 3-12.
80

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
81

the European Union
Table 3-9:
Parameter
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Wastewater quality before and after treatment for 2014 (monthly average)
January
February
March
April
May
June
WWTP Inlet
July
August
September
October
November
December
BOD5 at 20C
COD
Total suspended solids
Total phosphorus
35
45.5
46.3
87.5
70
60.6
81.2
73.75
57.5
60
80
63.42
84.78
85.3
128.5
132.3
102.5
105.6
101.5
71.81
75.91
108.38
70.75
89.94
113.5
108.1
77.7
80.6
96.9
73.92
78.12
66.33
94.2
0.69
0.65
1.14
1.11
1.28
1.02
Total nitrogen
0.1
0.07
0.09
0.05
0.11
0.09
BOD5 at 20C
COD
Total phosphorus
3.5
3.5
5.5
11.63
12.89
11.52
14.25
16.6
16.9
19.9
17.4
21.02
20.82
27.65
21.91
17.53
8.3
20.2
15.7
16.1
23.1
17.46
12.52
9.57
19.6
11.63
12.89
11.52
14.25
16.6
16.9
19.9
17.4
21.02
20.82
27.65
Total nitrogen
21.91
17.53
8.3
20.2
15.7
16.1
23.1
17.46
12.52
9.57
19.6
WWTP Outlet
Table 3-10:
Parameter
January
February
March
April
May
June
WWTP Inlet
July
August
September
October
November
December
40
45
28
35
41.67
40
53.75
60
65
50
42.5
35
66.94
85.99
63.12
55.54
77.34
65.9
85.51
93.33
126.01
97.82
78.13
61.26
60.6
60.94
50.24
89.5
38.52
74.25
70.7
65.75
67.32
68.52
57.55
36.3
0.58
0.56
1.06
1.27
1.21
0.44
Total nitrogen
0.15
0.11
0.08
0.11
0.15
0.1
BOD5 at 20C
COD
Total phosphorus
3.8
2.2
3.67
5.67
3.5
20.96
16.7
18.08
15.51
14.58
15.79
17.32
19.11
19.6
15.99
20.38
13.57
31.68
12.3
14.12
12.42
12.49
18.15
15.01
13.85
9.4
12.24
15
14.5
0.41
0.4
0.87
0.69
0.75
0.63
0.03
0.05
0.03
0.07
0.08
0.11
BOD5 at 20C
COD
Total phosphorus
WWTP Outlet
Total nitrogen
82

the European Union
Table 3-11:
Parameter
Feasibility Study
January
February
March
April
BOD5 at 20C
COD
Total phosphorus
40
92.7
/
1.61
35
89.6
/
/
68.33
90.95
/
/
75.5
119.36
/
1.35
Total nitrogen
0.16
0.05
6
14.04
/
0.29
5
12.9
/
/
3
10.02
/
/
5.75
16.18
/
0.51
0.08
0.23
BOD5 at 20C
COD
Total phosphorus
Total nitrogen
Table 3-12:
Parameter
May
June
WWTP Inlet
51.25
50
98.5
77
/
/
/
0.8
July
August
September
October
November
December
85
116.8
/
1.14
75
112.7
114
1.11
55
109.58
111
/
60.0
98.4
96.4
/
46.67
89.4
104.1
1.09
37.5
89.6
72.25
/
0.07
0.07
0.08
0.09
WWTP Outlet
6
4
19.83
15.7
/
/
/
0.59
6.6
23.93
/
2.73
6
22.25
21.45
1.71
5.5
17.87
12.2
/
4
16.2
11.3
/
4
15.1
10.68
0.62
4
15.55
14.2
/
0.1
0.04
0.04
November
December
0.03
BOD5 at 20C
COD
Total phosphorus
Total nitrogen
BOD5 at 20C
COD
Total phosphorus
Total nitrogen
Particip GmbH
January
February
March
April
35.00
86.18
/
1.67
30.00
158.57
/
/
36.25
171.96
/
/
131.25
190.01
872.50
1.38
0.15
0.40
4.00
10.11
/
0.30
3.66
16.88
/
/
3.33
16.25
/
/
4.50
15.50
8.27
0.57
0.08
0.26
May
June
WWTP Inlet
65.00
80.00
178.50
136.27
136.50
152.60
/
0.85
July
August
September
October
71.00
121.68
56.43
0.78
75.00
129.02
41.27
2.26
96.00
176.29
122.80
/
82.00
167.11
89.10
/
103.33
236.16
/
2.10
35.00
88.20
/
/
0.11
0.09
0.16
0.18
WWTP Outlet
4.25
5.00
15.06
13.16
5.67
18.15
/
0.52
5.25
15.96
13.67
1.21
4.50
12.20
5.16
0.83
5.75
17.88
21.50
/
5.35
16.30
12.55
/
5.67
19.26
/
1.19
4.50
11.40
/
/
0.11
0.10
0.08
0.17
83

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Additional analyses for the purposes of JICA Study are made in 2014. Wastewater samples
for analysis are taken on the inlet and outlet of WWTP ( Table 3-13 and Table 3-14), on 11
locations on primary collector (Table 3-15) and 11 locations in cities of Struga and Ohrid
(Table 3-16).
84

the European Union
Table 3-13:
No
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Results of examining of wastewater on WWTP Vranishta 1 (sampling date: 30.9.2014.)
Description of
location
Temp.
pH
Electrical
conductivity
on 20C
SS
TN
T-P
DO
BOD5
CODch
Escherichia
coli
mS/cm
mg/l
mg/L
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
cfu/100ml
WWTP Inlet
18
7,21
533
47
8,121
0,775791
0,95
58,9
165
1.400.000
WWTP Outlet
17,5
7,16
491
45,1
6,906
0,653372
2,8
4,85
31
630.000
Source JICA study

Table 3-14:
No
Results of examining of wastewater on WWTP Vranishta 2 (sampling date: 1.10.2014.)
Description of
location
Temp.
pH
Electrical
conductivity
on 20C
SS
TN
T-P
DO
BOD5
CODch
Escherichia
coli
mS/cm
mg/l
mg/L
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
cfu/100ml
WWTP Inlet
17,8
7,12
550
51,4
8,389
0,694137
1,2
59,71
184
1.600.000
WWTP Outlet
17,3
7,14
482
48,2
6,847
0,521361
2,7
5,12
34
700.000
Source JICA study
85

the European Union
Table 3-15:
No
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Results of examining wastewater in primary (main) sewer (sampling date:

1.10.2014.))
Description of location
Temp.
pH
Electrical
conductivity
on 20C
SS
DO
BOD5
CODch
mS/cm
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
L.S. Struga 3 (Sewer)
18
7,61
515
61,2
3,17
49,88
175
L.S. Struga 3 (Sewer)
18
7,68
524
73,8
2,7
38,12
133
18
7,27
654
95,6
0,39
25,17
111
10
Sv.Erazmo Hospital
(Sewer)
Voska (Sewer)
18
7,38
633
63,8
1,5
28,01
118
11
L.S. Ohrid 1 (Sewer)
18,8
7,34
560
53,4
1,06
4,07
30
12
L.S. Orce Nikolov

(Sewer)
L.S. Granit-Metropol
(Sewer)
L.S. Metropol (Sewer)
(Acapulco Beach)
L.S. Eleshec (Sewer) (H.
Dva Biseri)
L.S. Eleshec-Krusha
(Sewer) (Camp Eleshec)
L.S. Krusha (Sewer)
(Peshtani)
18,1
7,14
488
15,8
2,21
4,33
38
18
7,64
584
99,4
3,31
6,4
57
18
7,55
524
87,6
2,11
3,12
28
18,2
7,18
575
19,2
3,96
3,06
22
18
7,17
559
24
1,67
4,62
43
18,5
7,72
670
116,8
1,33
27,8
100
13
14
15
16
17
Source JICA study

Table 3-16:
No
Results of examining wastewater secondary sewer (sampling date: 2.10.2014.)
Location
Temp.
pH
Electrical
conductivity
on 20C
TS
DO
BOD5
CODch
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
21
Sewer 1
18,1
7,17
674
38
1,5
51,2
151
22
Sewer 2
18,2
7,21
625
46,4
2,51
67,11
182
23
Sewer 3
18
7,28
696
57,6
2,2
56,1
126
24
Sewer 4
18
7,29
720
42
2,39
60,62
137
25
Sewer 5
18
7,38
829
87,2
1,55
117,88
301
26
Sewer 6
18
7,31
574
43,2
5,18
94,53
215
27
Sewer 7
18
7,33
848
184,8
1,7
170,89
452
28
Sewer 8
18
7,41
563
105,2
2,84
56,7
155
29
Sewer 9
18
7,87
398
57,6
6,38
2,94
19,2
30
Sewer 1
18
7,56
812
78,4
2,42
86,48
210
31
Sewer 2
18,2
7,08
269
4,8
7,23
2,6
12,5
Source JICA study
86

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Recent analysis of pollution load of wastewater was performed on 9 th March 2015. Samples are
taken on the same locations two times during different day period, one during morning period and
the other one during afternoon.
Result of analysing of collected samples of wastewater was made in P.H.I. Centre for Public Health
Ohrid is accredited with IARM certificate number LT 035/2013, according to MKS EN ISO/IEC
17025:2006 standard for chemical and microbiological water testing. Results of analysis of taken
samples of wastewater are shown in following table.
87

the European Union
Table 3-17:
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Recent result analyzed samples of waste water (samples date: 9th March 2015)
Num of
sample
Period of day
6
7
8
10
11
XX
6.1
7.1
8.1
10.1
11.1
XX.X
morning
morning
morning
morning
morning
morning
afternoon
afternoon
afternoon
afternoon
afternoon
afternoon
T
[C]
10.7
11.2
11.4
11.1
11.6
11.3
10.9
11.3
11.4
11.3
11.5
11.4
pH
7.44
7.59
7.52
7.63
7.54
7.64
7.48
7.51
7.49
7.55
7.49
7.50
El.con.
[S/cm]
529
261
574
575
558
572
542
583
611
544
484
578
DO
[mg/l]
2.48
2.62
2.58
3.18
3.12
3.21
1.61
1.87
1.73
2.98
3.0
3.03
BOD5
[mg/l]
32.2
28.6
31.4
22.4
8.6
23.8
34.3
31.7
33.9
23.2
9.1
27.8
SS
[mg/l]
28.6
47.1
55.7
53.1
33.7
12.8
29.2
50.3
60.0
55.2
37.4
14.1
ANALYZED PARAMETERS
E.coli
[cfu/100ml]
Kjeldahl
2,000,000
4.46759
440,000
8.62414
6,000,000
2.47885
5,000,000
5.55149
200,000
2.20552
16,000,000
6.13586
8,000,000
3.54389
530,000
6.53333
7,000,000
3.42376
7,000,000
4.11683
400,000
1.47855
20,000,000
3.44686
TN [mg/l]
NO3
0.33362
0.30548
0.49174
0.62561
0.36814
0.66091
0.53386
0.29862
0.51986
1.16266
0.32672
0.47059
NO2
0.10844
0.05389
0.07647
0.09256
0.06149
0.07982
0.05867
0.02707
0.05315
0.04187
0.03625
0.04042
TN
[mg/l]
4.90965
8.98351
3.04426
6.26966
2.63515
6.87659
4.13641
6.85902
3.99677
5.32138
1.84152
3.95787
COD
[mg/l]
50.0
78.0
38.2
130.0
9.38
35.0
56.0
92.2
41.0
150.2
13.8
68.0
TP
[mg/l]
0.49064
0.76427
0.30268
0.64041
0.24354
0.64838
0.58291
0.75739
0.60916
0.69279
0.35827
0.50801
88

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Concentrations of pollutants in wastewater are below typical wastewater concentrations and shows
that waste water in whole system is highly diluted because of high infiltration to the system. In some
samples, concentrations of pollutants in sewerage system and at the inlet of WWTP are below
maximum limiting values (MLV) for discharging into the surface waters according to the national and
EU legislation. Because of that it is necessary as soon as possible to implement measures and works
for reconstruction of sewerage system, especially primary collector and separation of secondary
sanitary and storm network in the cities of Struga and Ohrid.
3.3.2.2 Designed pollution load

Since analysis of wastewater does not give the right state of pollutant loads to the WWTP, daily load
of pollutants are given according to the JICA Study and literature data. In JICA Study it is foreseen
that specific BOD pollution per PE is 50 g/PE day instead literature value of 60 g/PE day, because part
of the sewerage system is mixed type of network and assumed infiltration.
Designed daily loads of pollutants are based on:
the projected load of WWTP,
specific pollutants load per connected population and number of tourists,
average pollutants concentration of commercial and public wastewater,
Table 3-18:
type of
wastewater
domestic
Tourist
Commercial
Public
Unit pollution load

unit
g/PE day
g/PE day
mg/L
mg/L
BOD
50
50
295
12.5
COD
100
100
590
70
Suspended
solids
45
45
265
110
Total
nitrogen
10
10
10
3.8
Total
phosphoro
us
2
2
2
0.28
89

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Table 3-19:
Daily BOD
domestic
Tourist
Commercial
Public
TOTAL BOD
Daily pollution load

unit
kg/day
kg/day
kg/day
kg/day
kg/day
2015
3,000
1,521
698
10
5,229
2025
3,320
2,129
691
11
6,152
2035
3,281
2,266
669
11
6,227
2045
3,194
2,413
637
11
6,255
Daily SS
domestic
Tourist
Commercial
Public
TOTAL SS
unit
kg/day
kg/day
kg/day
kg/day
kg/day
2015
2,700
1,369
627
89
4,785
2025
2,988
1,916
621
99
5,624
2035
2,953
2,039
601
97
5,691
2045
2,875
2,172
572
95
5,713
Daily COD
domestic
Tourist
Commercial
Public
TOTAL COD
unit
kg/day
kg/day
kg/day
kg/day
kg/day
2015
6,000
3,042
1,395
57
10,495
2025
6,640
4,259
1,383
63
12,344
2035
6,562
4,531
1,339
62
12,494
2045
6,388
4,826
1,274
60
12,548
Daily Nitrogen
domestic
Tourist
Commercial
Public
TOTAL N
unit
kg/day
kg/day
kg/day
kg/day
kg/day
2015
600
304
175
23
1,102
2025
664
426
174
25
1,289
2035
656
453
168
25
1,302
2045
639
483
160
24
1,306
Daily Phosphorous
domestic
Tourist
Commercial
Public
TOTAL P
unit
kg/day
kg/day
kg/day
kg/day
kg/day
2015
120
61
35
2
218
2025
133
85
35
2
255
2035
131
91
34
2
257
2045
128
97
32
2
258
Needed capacity of WWTP is projected based on the total daily BOD load and specific pollution load
per PE:
Capacity WWTP = 6,255 kg/day / 50 g/PE/day = 125,100 PE ~ 125,000 PE
90

the European Union
Feasibility Study
LONG TERM INVESTMENT NEEDS IN THE SECTOR
4.1
Regulatory framework for Water Management
Particip GmbH
4.1.1 General objectives

The Law on Waters (2008) is a framework for protection and sustainable management of
water resources. It regulates issues concerning surface water (watercourses, lakes,
accumulations and springs) and underground water within an integrated policy and
represents the legislative framework for the future management of water resource..
According to the Law on Waters, the Ministry of Environment and Physical Planning (MoEPP)
has the leading role in the water policies. EU Water Directives (WFD) had been transposed in
the Law on waters. Secondary legislation has fully achieved the transposition of the
requirements of WFD 2000/60/EC concerning river basin plan preparation. Specifically, this
legislation refers to the establishment of methodology for drafting, reviewing and updating
the master plan; the manner of preparation of river basin management plans; the content
and the manner of preparation of the programme of measures; the preparation of
information and cartographic overviews of activities for waters monitoring; as well as the
methodology for river basin assessment.
Beside Law of Water, water management issues are also regulated by:
Law on Environment (2005) and related secondary legislation,
The Law on Water Supply, Collection and Treatment of Waste Water (Official Gazette
68/2004),
The Law on Water Economies and
Law on Water Users Associations.
Responsibilities and obligations in water management are shared by several ministries:
Ministry of Environmental and Physical Planning (MoEPP), Ministry of Agriculture Forestry
and Water Economy (MAFWE), Ministry of Transport and Communications (MTC) and
Ministry of Health (MH).
4.1.2 Legal framework of the European Union

The EUs water policy is based on the Water Framework Directive (WFD), which seeks to
impose an integrated water basin management regime in Europe. This is an overarching
system designed to protect all waters and it sets clear objectives, so that a good status
must be achieved for all European waters by 2015 and that water use will be sustainable
throughout Europe.
91

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
The most important Directives in the water management sector are:

Water Framework Directive, 2000/60/EC,
The Directive was published in the Official Journal (OJ L 327) on 22 December 2000
and entered into force the same day, but some amendments have been introduced
into the Directive since 2000. It introduces a new legislative approach to managing
and protecting water, based not on national or political boundaries but on natural
geographical and hydrological formations: river basins. The European Water
Framework Directive (WFD) establishes a framework for the protection of all waters
(including inland surface waters, transitional (estuarine) waters, coastal waters and
groundwater) which: (i) prevent further deterioration, protect and enhances the
status of water resources; (ii) promotes sustainable water use; (iii) aims at enhancing
protection and improvement of the aquatic environment through specific measures
for the progressive reduction of discharges; (iv) ensures the progressive reduction of
pollution of groundwater and prevents its further pollution, and (v) contributes to
mitigating effects of floods and droughts. It also requires coordination of different EU
policies, and sets out a precise timetable for action, with 2015 as the target date for
getting all European waters into good condition. Directive is a framework in the sense
that it prescribes steps to reach the common goal rather than adopting the more
traditional limit value approach.
Urban Waste Water Directive, 91/271/ EEC,
The Council Directive 91/271/EEC concerning urban waste-water treatment was
adopted on 21 May 1991. Its objective is to protect the environment from the adverse
effects of urban waste water discharges and discharges from certain industrial sectors
(see Annex III of the Directive) and concerns the collection, treatment and discharge
of: domestic waste water, mixture of waste water and waste water from certain
industrial sectors. Four main principles are laid down in the Directive:
Planning
Regulation
Monitoring
Information and reporting.
Specifically the Directive requires:
The Collection and treatment of waste water in all agglomerations of >2000
population equivalents (PE),
Secondary treatment of all discharges from agglomerations of > 2000 PE, and
more advanced treatment for agglomerations >10 000 population
equivalents in designated sensitive areas and their catchments,
A requirement for pre-authorisation of all discharges of urban wastewater, of
discharges from the food-processing industry and of industrial discharges
into urban wastewater collection systems,
Monitoring of the performance of treatment plants and receiving waters; and
92

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Controls of sewage sludge disposal and re-use, and treated waste water reuse whenever it is appropriate.
Drinking Water Directive, 98/83/EC,
This Directive (of 3 November 1998 on the quality of water intended for human
consumption) concerns the quality of water intended for human consumption. Its
objective is to protect human health from adverse effects of any contamination of
water intended for human consumption by ensuring that it is wholesome and clean.
The Drinking Water Directive applies to:
all distribution systems serving more than 50 people or supplying more than
10 cubic meter per day, but also distribution systems serving less than 50
people/supplying less than 10 cubic meter per day if the water is supplied as
part of an economic activity,
drinking water from tankers,
drinking water in bottles or containers;
water used in the food-processing industry, unless the competent national
authorities are satisfied that the quality of the water cannot affect the
wholesomeness of the foodstuff in its finished form.
The Drinking Water Directive doesn't apply to:
natural mineral waters recognised as such by the competent national
authorities,
waters which are medicinal products for human use
The Directive laid down the essential quality standards at EU level. A total of 48
microbiological, chemical and indicator parameters must be monitored and tested
regularly. The Directive also requires providing regular information to consumers. In
addition, drinking water quality has to be reported to the European Commission every
three years. The scope of reporting is set out in the Directive. The Commission
assesses the results of water quality monitoring against the standards in the Drinking
Water Directive and after each reporting cycle produces a synthesis report, which
summarizes the quality of drinking water and its improvement at a European level.
Bathing Water Directive, 2006/7/EEC
This Directive (2006/7EEC) concerns the quality of bathing water in the Member
States of the European Union (EU). It concerns those waters in which bathing is
authorised by the national authorities and regularly practised by a significant number
of bathers. This Directive does not apply to water intended for therapeutic purposes,
or to water used in swimming pools. It lays down the minimum quality criteria to be
met by bathing water. They relate to:
the limit values of substances considered to be indicators of pollution;
the minimum sampling frequency and method of analysis or inspection of
such water.
93

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Member States may fix more stringent values than the criteria laid down in the
Directive. In addition, where it does not give any values for certain substances,
Member States are not obliged to fix any.
Sampling is carried out by Member States at different intervals for each polluting
substance. The water testing must be adapted to the geographical and topographical
conditions and to the presence of existing or potential polluting discharges.
This is repealed by Directive 2006/7/EC with effect from 31 December 2014. However,
it still applies in Member States where transposition of the new Directive is not
finished.
Measurement of Drinking Water, 79/869/EEC not valid, repealed by Water
Framework Directive, 2000/60/EC; 81/855/EEC not valid, amended by 79/869/EEC.
91/692/EEC.
Surface Water for Abstraction, 75/440/EEC, 79/869/EEC not valid, repealed by
2000/60/EC; 91/692/EEC.
Groundwater, 80/69/EEC not valid, 91/692/EEC,
The purpose of this Directive is to prevent the pollution of groundwater by substances
belonging to the families and groups of substances in lists I or II in the Annex.
Member States shall take the necessary steps to:
prevent the introduction into groundwater of substances in list I, and
limit the introduction into groundwater of substances in list II so as to avoid
pollution of this water by these substances.
By this Directive the protection of groundwater was taken out of Council Directive
76/464/EEC of 4 May 1976 on pollution caused by certain dangerous substances
discharged into the aquatic environment of the Community.
The Directive has been amended by:
-Directive 91/692/EEC of 23 December 1991 standardizing and rationalizing
reports on the implementation of certain Directives relating to the
environment further amended by Regulation 1882/2003/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 29 September 2003 adapting to Council
Decision 1999/468/EC (Celex N31999D0468) the provisions relating to
committees which assist the Commission in the exercise of its implementing
powers laid down in instruments subject to the procedure referred to in
Article 251 of the EC Treaty.
Nitrates Directive, 91/676/EEC,
The Nitrates Directive (91/676/EEC) (external link) Council Directive of 12 December
1991 concerning the protection of waters against pollution by nitrates from
agricultural sources has the objective of reducing water pollution caused or induced
by nitrates from agricultural sources. The objectives of the directive are to ensure that
the nitrate concentration in freshwater and groundwater supplies does not exceed
the limit of 50 mg NO3 per litre, as imposed by the EU Drinking Water Directive, and to
94

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
control the incidence of Eutrophication. Having set the overall targets, the directive
requires individual Member States, within prescribed limits, to draw up their own
plans for meeting them.
In accordance with this Directive each Member State is obliged to put in place a
Nitrates Action Programme and to review and if necessary revise their action
programme at least every four years. Article 10 of the Directive obliges Member
States to report every four years to the European Commission on the implementation
of the Directive in their country.
4.1.3 Legal framework of the Republic of Macedonia

The basic legal document that lays down the principles for cooperation between the
Republic of Macedonia and the European Commission, in the field of IPA implementation is
the Framework Agreement. The most important legislation of the Republic of Macedonia in
the field of water management is established. The transposition of most of the directives
from the water sector has progressed with the adoption of the Law on Water. With the
provisions of the Law on Waters (Official Gazette of the RM No.87/08), the Ministry of
Environment and Physical Planning has the leading role in the water policies, and the
responsibility for water resources management start from 2011. The Law on Waters
regulates: water use and exploitation, protection against harmful effects of water,
protection of water against exhaustive water extraction and pollution, sources for financing
of water management activities, concessions, transboundary water resources management
Main national laws and regulations concerning local self-government, communal services
and in particular water and wastewater management are summarized below
THE LAW ON WATERS (Official Gazette no. 87/08, 6/09, 161/09, 83/10, 51/11, 44/12,
23/13, 163/2013)
The Law on Waters regulates conditions, ways and procedures under which use and
discharge of waters may be allowed. This Law regulates matters related to: surface waters,
including permanent watercourses or watercourses through which water flows occasionally,
lakes, reservoirs and springs, ground waters (hereinafter: waters), the riparian lands and
wetlands; management of waters, including also the water resources distribution, water
protection and conservation, as well as the protection against harmful impact of waters;
water management structures and services; organizational arrangements and financing of
water management; as well as the manner, the conditions and the procedures under which
water can be used or discharged. Unless specifically laid down in this law, the Law on
environment shall apply to the administration of issues regarding: access to environmental
information, public participation in the water management decision-making, assessment of
the impact on environment of certain strategies, plans and programmes, environmental
impact assessment from certain projects, prevention and control of accidents with presence
of dangerous substances, environmental liability and integrated environmental permits for
operation of certain installations that have effect upon the environment.
95

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
THE LAW ON DRINKING WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE OF URBAN WASTEWATERS

(Official Gazette, Nos. 68/04, 28/06, 103/08, 17/11 and 54/11)
The subject matter of this law is the regulation of the conditions and manner of supplying
drinking water, discontinuing the drinking water supply, and draining urban wastewaters
into a recipient through the water supply and sewerage systems, construction, maintenance,
protection of, and connection to, water supply and sewerage systems, the relations between
the provider and the user of the service, as well as the supervision over the implementation
of this Law.
THE LAW ON WATER MANAGEMENT ORGANISATIONS (WMO-S) (Official Gazette Nos.
85/03, 95/05, 103/08, 97/10 and 1/12)
The Law on Water Management Organisations regulates foundation (establishment),
organisation, activities, financing, control and terminations of water management
organizations, which are legal subjects sui generis that are established, operate and
terminate according to this Law. The objectives of this Law have been defined as: economic
business management, exploitation, functioning and maintenance of inter alia hydro
systems, through the WMO-s as autonomous legal entities; Setting out the size of water
services that WMO-s deliver to users of waters; Regulating conditions for transfer
(conferring) to the WMO-s of a right to exploit hydro systems; and Establishing of conditions
for regular and successful operation of WMOs and use of their services by users of waters.
THE LAW ON PUBLIC ENTERPRISES (COMPANIES) (Official Gazette Nos. 38/96, 9/97, 6/02,
175/2002, 19/02, 40/03, 49/06, 22/07, 83/09, 97/10 and 06/12)
The Law on Public Enterprises regulates all details regarding establishing (founding) of public
enterprise, which can be established by an act of establishing by RM (i.e. by the RM
Government in the name of RM), municipalities and the City of Skopje (i.e. by their councils
in their names) for performing only activities of public interest. An activity of public interest
is the activity or certain tasks of activity by which the public interest is realized, and those
activities can be performed by public enterprises or by associations which are conferred to
perform activities of public interest.
THE LAW ON ENVIRONMENT (Official Gazette Nos. 53/05, 81/05, 24/07, 159/08, 48/10,
124/10, 51/11, 123/12)
This Law shall regulate the rights and the responsibilities of the Republic of Macedonia,
municipalities, the City of Skopje and the municipalities of the City of Skopje as well as the
rights and the responsibilities of legal entities and natural persons, in the provision of
conditions required to ensure protection and improvement of the environment, for the
purpose of exercising the right of citizens to a healthy environment.
SECONDARY WATER LEGISLATION
CLASSIFICATION AND GRADING OF WATERS
Regulation on categorization of rivers, lakes, reservoirs and groundwater ("Official
Gazette" no. 18/99)
96

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
This regulation defines criteria for categorization of water quality on surface and
groundwater
Regulation on Water Classification ("Official Gazette" no. 18/99)
RIVER BASINS
Ordinance of the methodology for the assessment of river basins ("Official Gazette"
no. 148/09)
Ordinance of the content and manner of preparation of plans for river basin
management ("Official Gazette" no. 148/09)
Decision to determine the boundaries of the areas of the river basins ("Official
Gazette" no. 107/12)
THE PROGRAM OF MEASURES
Ordinance of the content and method of preparing the program of measures ("Official
WATER MONITORING
Ordinance for the content and manner of preparation of information mapping
displays of monitoring water ("Official Gazette" no. 148/09)
ADVISORY BODIES
Decision on establishing the National Council on Water ("Official Gazette" no. 149/09)
BASIC DESIGN DOCUMENTS
Ordinance of the methodology for the content, methods and procedures. review of
the water on RM ("Official Gazette" no. 148/09)
Ordinance of the form and content of the request because the failure to adopt a
decision request for water management agreement is accepted or rejected ("Official
Decision on putting the draft amendments to the Master Plan of the Republic of
Macedonia to the expert discussion ("Official Gazette" no. 70/12)
National Water Strategy 2012-2042 ("Official Gazette" no. 122/12)
WATER MANAGEMENT
Ordinance of the methodology for the content, methods and procedures. review of
the water on RM ("Official Gazette" no. 148/09)
Ordinance of the form and content of the request because the failure to adopt a
decision request for water management agreement is accepted or rejected ("Official
URBAN WASTE WATER
Ordinance of the procedure for the use of sludge, the maximum values of
concentrations of heavy metals in the soil in which the sludge is used. values of
concentrations of heavy metals in the sludge in accordance with its purpose and the
97

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
maximum annual quantities of heavy metals that can introduced into the soil ("Official
Gazette" no. 73/11)
Ordinance of collection, disposal and treatment, the manner and conditions for the
design, construction and operation of systems and plants for purification of waste
water, as well as technical standards, parameters, emission standards and quality
norms of pretreatment, removal and purification of waste waters. taking into account
the load and method for purification of waste water that is discharged into sensitive
areas of discharge of urban waste water ("Official Gazette" no. 73/11)
Ordinance of the requirements. method and maximum allowable values and
concentrations of parameters of purified wastewater for re-use ("Official Gazette" no.
73/11)
Ordinance of the conditions, manner and emission limit values for discharge of waste
water after purification, the method of their calculation. taking into account the
special requirements for the protection of protected areas ("Official Gazette" no.
81/11)
Ordinance of the criteria for determining the sensitive areas of the discharge of urban
waste water ("Official Gazette" no. 130/11)
WASTEWATER DISCHARGE
Ordinance of the conditions, manner and emission limit values for discharge of waste
water after purification, the method of their calculation taking into account the
special requirements for the protection of protected areas ("Official Gazette" no.
81/11)
Ordinance of hazardous and harmful substances and their emission standards that can
be discharged into the sewer or drainage system, in surface or ground waters. and in
coastal lands and wetland ("Official Gazette" no. 108/11)
SUBMISSION OF INFORMATION
Ordinance of the mode of transmission of information from the monitoring of
discharged wastewater. and the form and content of the form that submitted data
("Official Gazette" no. 108/11)
MONITORING OF WASTEWATER DISCHARGE
Ordinance of the methodology, reference measurement methods, the method of
monitoring the parameters of wastewater. including sludge from the treatment of
urban waste water ("Official Gazette" no. 108/11)
INSPECTION
Ordinance of the form and content of the call for education, manner of implementing
the training. and the way of doing the only record of conducting education - Br.076258 / 5 ("Official Gazette" no. 118/11)
POLLUTANTS
List of polluting substances ("Official Gazette" no. 122/11)
98

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
WATER RIGHTS
Ordinance of the form and contents of the order issuing the license or the failure to
adopt a decision rejecting the application for the permit for water use or license to
extract sand. gravel and stone from the beds and banks of surface water bodies
WATER PROTECTION
Ordinance of the form and contents of the order issuing the license or the failure to
adopt a decision rejecting the application for a license to discharge ("Official Gazette"
no 129/11)
Ordinance for establishing criteria for determining the areas vulnerable to nitrates
FUNDS FROM FEES AND CONTRIBUTIONS WATER
Program for water management for 2012 ("Official Gazette" no 12/12)
Program for changing the program for water management for 2012 ("Official Gazette"
no. 99/12)
4.1.4 National strategic framework

Water strategy for the Republic of Macedonia
The strategic water protection objective is to preserve water quality and prevent the
degradation of water primarily for the purpose of preserving human health and the
environment and achieving the good ecological status of water in order to make it suitable
for planned uses. Macedonia will move towards this strategic objective incrementally; it is
necessary to preserve surface waters and groundwater that are still clean (upper stretches of
watercourses. highland watercourses and especially groundwater; these all belong to water
quality class I) as a storage reserve for population supply and also to remedy or eliminate the
pollution of waters for use by industry, agriculture, fish farming, recreation (according to the
water classification they belong to water quality class II). Therefore, the focus should be on
the protection of human health and ecosystems with protected areas as a priority (sanitary
protection zones of the source, fish farms, bathing areas, nature parks, national parks, etc.)
which would be achieved through the following objectives:
The construction of wastewater treatment plants in settlements with existing sewerage

networks;
Increasing sewerage connection and wastewater treatment levels in areas with developed
water supply systems;
Repairing existing sewerage networks with significant permeability which affect drinking water
sources;
Increasing the efficiency and reliability of public sewerage and wastewater treatment systems
with the introduction of economic water price (polluter-pays principle).
99

the European Union
4.2
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Long Term Investment Programme
The objective of this chapter is to outline the preparation of a Long-Term Investment

Programme to set the general direction and determine the basic strategy, policies and
parameters including identifying the investment needs which will lead to the full compliance
with the UWWTD and to the least cost improvements in wastewater services in the Ohrid
Region.
Also, a few larger settlements of the territory of municipality Struga intended to be in
addition to the protection system of Ohrid Lake because of the fact that at the moment
much of the wastewater discharged into the river Crni Drim, which flows out of the Ohrid
Lake and goes into Adriatic Sea through Skadar Lake.
The driving forces in determining this Programme are:
improving and extension of existing collection and treatment system

Regional and municipal development plans
service objectives
water consumption targets
metering policy and tariff policy
The Long Term Investment Programme is determining the major investment needs and
related improvements and expansions to be made to the systems within a long-term
planning horizon of 30 years. The programme is used as the basis for the development of the
Short Term Investment Plan (this Project).
4.2.1 Investment programme waste water collection and treatment

The priorities in Ohrid wastewater project are:
Rehabilitation of secondary sewer
Disconnection of illegal or wrong connections
Rehabilitation of primary collector including pumping stations
Design, tendering and separation of the critical sections on the secondary sewer
Tendering and construction of part of the collector for Strugas villages and Vevchani
based on already revised design (check of revised design by project team)
Proakva institutional improvement.
Design of drainage in the part of cities where it is not already constructed
CSO combined sewer overflow measures at secondary sewer and at WWTP
Developing hydraulic model of complete Ohrid lake wastewater system and its usage
for system process control
100

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
4.2.2 Prioritization of the Long Term Investment Plan for waste water
collection and treatment
Rehabilitation of primary collector including pumping stations (can start immediately
by IMPUC)
Design, tendering and works on the separation on the secondary sewer
Tendering and construction of part of the collector for Strugas villages and Vevchani
based on already revised design (check of revised design by project team)
101

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
ANALYSIS OF OPTIONS FOR SHORT TERM INVESTMENT PROGRAMME
5.1
Collector Radozhda Kalishta (extension of West Collector)
Extension of collection system in the scope of this project is construction of primary collector
Radozhda-Kalishta as extension of the existing West collector.
Construction of primary collector Radozhda-Kalishta is foreseen with previously adopted
Feasibility Studies for Struga-Ohrid agglomeration and part of already started projects for
protection of Ohrid Lake. With construction of collector Radozhda-Kalishta, wastewater from
this area will be collected and transported to the WWTP Vranishta instead of discharging
into the Ohrid Lake. Because of sensitivity of Ohrid Lake and its further protection this is
better solution then construction of separate WWTP for this area with discharge into the
Ohrid Lake. Topography of the area is also demanding and one of the solutions, in case of
construction of separate WWTP, would be to construct pontoon WWTP on Ohrid Lake what
is questionably regarding the protection of Ohrid Lake like UNESCO site. Also in case of
construction of separate, smaller WWTP only for this part of the agglomeration, a sewer
system of similar diameter and length to the designed collector Radozhda-Kalishta will be
needed to transport wastewater from all big users in this area to this small WWTP. These
small WWT plants are relatively much more expensive per PE than the big one. This solution
could have higher investment and operational costs then construction of only collector
which will transport wastewater to existing WWTP Vranishta.
Design documentation for construction of collector Radozhda-Kalishta is prepared by
Macedonian company Hidro Energo Inzenering d.o.o. which is part of Particip team. Design
documentation is ready to be submitted for obtaining the Building permit. Because of that
no other alternatives for construction of this collector where not taken into account in this
Feasibility Study. Connecting of this area to existing collection and treatment system will
improve protection of Ohrid Lake from the pollution.
The collector extends from the camp Treska (near the border with Albania) to existing
collection system in Elen Kamen and will include wastewaters from:
camp Treska,
settlement Radozhda,
camp Livadishta.
102

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Figure 5.1:
Figure 5.2:
Particip GmbH
Planned collector Radozhda-Kalishta
Longitudinal intersection of the collector Radozhda-Kalishta
103

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Camp Treska
Camp Treska is situated near the border with Albania, 400m south from the settlement
Radozhda. Camp Treska capacity is approximately 500 beds. Campsite does not work during
the whole year, and the highest occupancy rate is between May and August.
Settlement Radozhda
The settlement Radozhda is located on the western shore of the lake, situated
approximately 10 km south of Struga, and 2 km from the Albania border. It is predominantly
a fishing resort of 850 inhabitants, without any significant industry. Settlement is situated at
an elevation 695-710 m asl.
Camp Livadiste
Livadiste camp is located approximately 2.3 km north of the settlement Radozhda. It was
built 30 years ago and it is the only camp on Ohrid Riviera with complete infrastructure. The
camp also has its own wastewater treatment station located in the vicinity of the camp, but
currently it is not operational.
TEHNICAL DESCRIPTION OF COLLECTOR
According to the topography and settlement positions collector Radozhda-Kalishta is
designed with main objects:
1. PS Camp Treska (lifting station),
2. gravity collector from Camp Treska to Radozhda,
3. PS Radozhda,
4. pressure pipeline from Radozhda to Elen Kamen (with Camp Livadishta connection
point).
Figure 5.3.
Shematic view of West collector
104

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Starting point of new Radozhda-Kalishta collector (extension of West collector) is pumping

station beside auto-camp Treska which is located 125 m from the camp. Pumping station
station serves only to overcome the height difference between the camp and the regional
road Radozhda-Elen Kamen. Lenght of pressure pipeline is 123 m, HDPE DN80 PN6.
The Pump station camp Treska lift wastewater to manhole located on regional road
Radozhda-Elen Kamen. After that, wastewater will be transported by gravity pipeline all way
to settlement Radozhda into the pumping station Radozhda. Lenght of the gravity pipeline is
913 m, profile DN250, material PVC SN8 (DN 250 mm PVC SN8)
From pumping station (PS) Radozhda collector becomes pressurized along to connection of
the existing sewerage network in Elen Kamen. Total length of the pressure pipeline is 4,269
m, profile DN 180 and DN 80, material HDPE PN6. Camp Livadishte will be connected on
the new collector by connection manhole. For connection of the Camp Livadishta to primary
collector, PS Camp Livadiste is also designed.
Table 5-1: Section of the Collector Radozhda-Kalishta
Section
Camp Treska lifting
pipeline
Gravity/ pressure
pipeline
Length
Profile
Material
Pressure
123
DN80
HDPE PN6
Gravity
913
DN250
PVC
Radozhda Camp Livadiste
Pressure
2,771
DN160
HDPE PN6
Camp Livadiste Elen Kamen
Pressure
1,374
DN180
HDPE PN6
Camp Treska - Radozhda
Total length pressure pipelines

Total length gravity pipeline
Total length COLLECTOR RADOZHDA-KALISHTA
4,268
913
5,181
OWERVIEW (flow direction: to-from): Existing connection manhole (settlement Elen Kamen connection on the western arm collector system for the Lake Ohrid protection) - Connection
manhole camp Livadishta (wastewater of camp Livadishta inflows in designed collector)
Pumping station (inflow) Radozhda (settlement Radozhda) Inspection mahhole (start of the
pressure collector) Pumping sation (camp Treska)
105

the European Union
Table 5-2:
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Pumping stations on Collector Radozhda-Kalishta
PS Camp Treska
PS Radozhda
Qk (2015) (lit/day PE)
180
Qk (2045) (lit/day PE)
160
PS Camp
Livadishta
Equivalent resident (2015)
516
1,186
1.127
Equivalent resident (2045)
723
1,844
1.127
Qmax (2015)
3.9
8.7
8.5
Qmax (2045)
4.8
11.8
7.5
PRO V06 D A - 214
FA 08.43-140ET13-2/16HEx
FA 08.73 W
Type of pumps
Number of pumps
2 (1 working and
1 spare)
power
1.5
17
3.75
2.1
4.1
2.5
DESCRIPTION OF THE CONSTRUCTION SECTION OF OBJECTS ON COLLECTOR RADOZHDAKALISHTA

Pumping station - camp Treska
Pumping station camp Treska is underground (well) station of reinforced concrete class
C30/37, ground plan dimension 185205 cm, depth 480 cm. Top of the station is on height
695.03 m asl and bottom of floor plane is on 690.51 m asl. Thickness of wall is 25 cm, and
thickness of floor plane is 30 cm. Height of inlet pipeline 692.03 m asl, and lowest water level
in water chamber is on 690.75 m asl, so the largest lifting height is 315 cm. Outflow pressure
pipeline is HDPE 90. Station consist two submersible pumps. The cap on pump station is
steel grid.
Manhole for flow energy reduction
This manhole is prefabricated object of polypropylene which embeds in a previously dug
hole. It consists of three parts: a rounded bottom rings whose usage may change its depth
and on top of the cone which has inspect entrance with grid cap. Diameter of rings is 1,000
mm. This manhole is used for dumping of flow energy on interface between pressure and
gravity pipelines sections, and reducing flow energy and velocity which must be limited to
not damage the pipeline.
106

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Pumping station Radozhda

Pumping station Treska is well station of reinforced concrete class C30/37. Ground plan
dimension of water chamber is 250250 cm and depth is 530 cm. Wall thickness is 25 cm,
and floor plane thickness is 30 cm. It consist two submersible pumps which have a maximum
lift height of water 360 cm to dry chamber. The water chamber and dry chamber are
separated objects. Ground plan dimension of dry chamber is 230240 cm, and height is
about 260 cm, of which is about 140 cm below ground level. Inlet gravity collector pipe is
PVC DN250 which inflows in wastewater in water chamber. Height between pipe inlet and
minimum water level in water chamber is 137 cm. Water chamber and dry chamber have
protection steel cap (grid), which will be used for control and servicing of pumping station
equipment.
Pumping station - camp Livadishte
Pumping station Livadishte is well station of reinforced concrete class C30/37. Ground plan
dimension of station are 250250 cm, and depth 490 cm. Ground level is 695.92 m asl.
Inflow pipeline is DN250, on level 693.50 m asl. Wall thickness is 25 cm, and floor plate
thickness is 30 cm. Lowest working level of water is 691.75 m asl, so the largest lifting height
is 280 cm. Station will have two submersible pumps. Outflow pipeline HDPE 90 connects to
manhole Livadishte. On the top will be steel grid cap.
Connecting manhole - camp Livadishte
Wastewater will push by pumping station Livadishte from camp Livadishte to the primary
collector. The connection of outflow pipeline from pumping station Livadshte to primary
collector is on connecting manhole. This object is reinforced concrete built chamber, ground
plan dimension 250180 cm, and depth of 180 cm of whom is 50 cm above ground level.
Thickness of walls and floor plane is 20 cm. Inlet pipeline (from Pumping station Radozhda) is
HDPE 160, and in connecting manhole on this pipeline is connected pressure pipeline from
pumping station Livadishte HDPE 90, and from manhole inlet pipeline is HDPE 180 (to west
collector Elen Kamen). Manhole have two inspection port at the top where there are
protected by steel covers. Because the part of height of manhole is above ground level, this
height difference will be decorated by embankment slope 1:2.
Inspection manhole
This manhole of polypropylene is prefabricated object which embeds in a previously dug
hole. It has three parts: bottom (substantially straight), rings whose usage may change its
depth and on top of the cone which has inspect entrance with grid cap. Diameter of rings at
107

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
the same diameter of manhole is 800 cm, and this object uses for control and maintenance
of sewage pipeline.
5.2
Waste water treatment technology

5.2.1 Basis for calculations, design elements and facilities
All calculations and sizing of components and facilities equipment for waste water treatment
is based on the following input data:
Capacity of the WWTP
125,000 PE
Daily dry weather flow (Qd, DWF)
27,300 m3/d
Dry weather flow (Qh, av)
1,130 m3/h
Wet weather peakflow (Qd, rwf)
2,530 m3/h
Minimal temperature of waste water
12C
Maximal temperature of waste water
20C
Organic load (input)
6,250 kg BOD5/d
Suspended solids (input)
5,630 kg DM/d
Total nitrogen (TN)
1,250 kg N/d
Total phosphorus (TP)
250 kg P/d
Expected concentration of the relevant parameters in the incoming waste water:
BOD5
230 mg/L
SS
207 mg/L
Total N
46 mg/L
Total P
9 mg/L
Expected concentration of the relevant parameters in the treated water output:
BOD5
<25 mg/L
SS
<35 mg/L
Total N
10 mg/L
Total P
1 mg/L
5.2.2 Analysis of variant technologies for upgrade of WWTP Vranishta

According to original ToR of this project, approved in October 2014, WWTP Vranishta was
supposed to be upgraded to tertiary treatment according to EU regulation for Urban
Wastewater Regulation 91/271/EEC. Here was considered that WWTP is reasonable good
conditions. However during inception phase it was recognized that the existing wastewater
treatment plant Vranishta is in bad conditions and has to go under serious reconstruction.
This new situation is immediately presented to the Beneficiary. MoEPP requested the
consultant to define which of the structures could be reused and which need demolition and
renewal. Additional site investigations and analysis were performed by Consultant by broad
team of experts (geodetic, geotechnical, civil, electrical, mechanical engineers) resulting in
108

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
two advises one with maximal renewal and another with optimal reconstruction of existing
structures. In the meantime the budget of the project is further reduced by the Macedonian
government to 8, 6 ME. Upon additional agreement the ToR has been changed respectively
in 1st week of April 2015. Having in mind limited budget for the project, the Beneficiary
asked consultant to develop the most feasible solution within the budget by using as much
as possible existing structures of WWTP. Objects given in red should be demolished and
yellow need serious reconstruction. An overview is given in the table here under.
109

the European Union
No. STRUCTURES
Feasibility Study
Civil construction
condition
capacity
1 Inlet PS
reparation
ok
2 Screen building
demolition
ok
3 Grit and fat removal
reparation
ok
4 AT aeration tanks
reconstruction low
5 DC-Distruibution chambre
reconstruction low
6 FST- final sedimentation tanks
reconstruction low
9 RAS retour sludge PS
reparation
ok
10 SST-sludge stabilisation tanks
reconstruction low
11 SAS surplus sludge PS
ok
ok
12 Thickener old
demolition
n.a.
12 Thickener newer
ok
ok
14 Administration-control-laboratory demolition
ok
15 Workshop
reparation
ok
16 Transformer
ok
ok
17 Diesel generator
ok
ok
21 Mechanical sludge dewatering
ok
ok
reconstruction ok
reparation
ok
26 flow meter chambre channel
reparation
ok
Particip GmbH
Electro-mechanical equipm.
condition
capacity
reparation
ok
demolition/new ok
demolition/new ok
reparation
low
replacement
low
demoltion/new low
reparation
ok
reconstruction low
ok
ok
demolition
n.a.
ok
ok
demolition/new ok
reparation
ok
ok
ok
ok
ok
reparation
ok
reconstruction ok
reparation
ok
ok
ok
110

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Technological options for tertiary treatment

For the technological design of all options the Consultant has considered optimal usage of
the existing WWTP with all its facilities. Additionally, after performing the several inspections
of the WWTP, the conditions and capacities of the process units and conditions of other
WWTP structures were evaluated and taken in final options evaluation and CBA.
Administration-control building (14) and Thickener (12) are in so poor condition that it
advisable to be demolished and if needed rebuilt up again.
Inlet PS and pre-treatment (1, 2, 3) at existing WWTP Vranishta, after needed
reconstruction/reparation, will have enough capacity for needed upgrade of the plant to
tertiary treatment. The same is valid for sludge dewatering system (21). Other WWTP
structures needs also reconstruction like AT aeration tanks (4), FST final sedimentation
tanks(6), sludge stabilization tanks(10) would need additional capacity to be installed, or will
get different purpose. Also the respective mechanical equipment needs replacement in
these objects.
To reach requested effluent quality several options are possible having in mind above
described situation and intention to reuse existing WWTP.
In general the main process units that need to be extended are:
Anaerobic tank for EBPR - enhanced biological phosphorus removal (same in
all options)
Biological reactors aeration tanks in water line
Aeration system capacity in water and sludge line
Final sedimentation tanks
Next three technological options were considered where the existing plant could be reused
as much as possible:
Extension to ULLAS WWTP with simultaneous sludge stabilization
Extension to N-DN WWTP with separate aerobic sludge stabilization
Extension to N-DN WWTP with separate anaerobic sludge stabilization
111
Feasibility Study

the European Union
Particip GmbH
5.2.3 Option 1 - Extension to ULLAS WWTP with simultaneous sludge

stabilization
Simultaneous sludge stabilization within water aeration tank is possible in ULLAS systems
where nitrification - denitrification occurs, and, when sludge retention time is long enough
for substantial mineralization of sludge or in other words oxidation of ODS -sludge organic
matter. In a green field WWTP design where hydraulic and biological load is relatively stable
it is envisaged to have SRT sludge retention time of about 25 days so that in winter
condition, besides nitrification, also sludge stabilization occurs. For the sludge stabilisation
longer SRT is necessary than for nitrification only. To create this process circumstances,
design BOD-biological load-Bts should be about 0.5 kg BOD/kg MLSSday. On the other hand
in the summer much shorter SRT is needed for simultaneous sludge stabilization e.g. some
10 days at 25oC (Table 5-3) and in summer period (WWTP can easily work with higher Bts.
This creates significant difference in needed biomass and biological reactors volume for
summer and winter conditions. In general therefore the classic extended aeration plants
with capacity above 100.000 PE are considered expensive to be built as ULLAS. Layout of
Option 1 is given in Annex 2.2.
Table 5-3:
Required sludge age for sludge stabilisation within water line
Temperature (oC Celsius)
Required sludge age for sludge stabilisation within AT
5
31
10
22
15
16
20
13
25
10
Source: De behandeling van afvalwater, Prof. Koot, TU Delft, the Netherlands
Here at WWTP Vranishta it should be noted two moments:

1.
Winter pollution load which is leading for defining of the volume of the biological
reactors of WWTP is only about of 70% of maximum load and amounts approx. 8087.000 PE. This level of load is also expected for the rest of the year except for the
high tourist season during the summer months when it could raise up to 125.000 PE.
2.
Due the length of collectors and the distance from which the wastewater has to be
pumped to the WWTP, daily organic and hydraulic load is evenly spread over the
day, so when the morning pick load from Struga will be already treated when the
wastewater pick form Ohrid and east collector will arrive.
The hydraulic and biological pick loads thus correspond to summer conditions (i.e. 125,000
PE), particularly Augustus when the greatest amount of tourist occurs (ca. 48,000 PE). In July
and September there are some 25,000 tourists in average. In the other 9 months and thus
also in the winter the load on WWTP is about 80-87,000 PE This seasonal load difference is
112

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
an advantage and must be taken in consideration for defining WWTP design capacity. This
winter load which 70 % of maximum load is used for the definition of needed volume of
additional biological reactors to foresee the simultaneous sludge stabilisation in water line. If
the load remains the same in the winter as in the summer the ULLAS plant would need to be
6500m3 bigger. Seasonal difference thus helps to avoid design of unnecessary big WWTP as
longer SRT needed for lower temperature conditions corresponds to lower (70% of
maximum load) load during the winter. If the WWTP would be designed on maximum load
with Bts of 0.05 kg/kgday as it is for classical ULLAS extended aeration system, the WWTP
would stay under loaded during the winter, spring and fall when only 80-87,000 people are
present. Design parameters are given in the table here under.
Table 5-4:
Design parameters Option 1

August - full load -20oC
Load [kgBOD/d]
Winter peak conditions- 12oC
6,250
5,000
0.065
0.05
24,800
24,800
18
22.5
SRT sludge stabilisation [days]
13
18
MLSS [kg]
Bts [kgBOD/kgMLSSd]
MLSS [kg]
Biological reactor volume [m3]
In this way, by choosing higher Bts for summer peak load condition, some 6,500 m3 smaller
plant could be built than for classic extended aeration. Extra reactor volume will be realized
in 2 AT - aeration tanks with the same shape as existing tanks except for the depth of 6.0 m
chosen to reduce needed area for extension. Additional benefit of deeper tank will be
possibility of application of more efficient fine bubble aeration in new AT. The depth of 6.0
m enhances total oxygen transfer efficiency of the fine bubble aeration. In the old AT fine
bubble aeration would not be as efficient as the water depth is only 3 m. Therefore the
existing aeration system with surface aeration will be kept there. As well as in old AT, the
mixers will be also installed in new tanks to enhance aeration and denitrification process.
Nitrification denitrification will be arranged as simultaneous with a possibility of intermittent
aeration what should additionally reduce electricity consumption for aeration. Aeration
system will be designed to cope easily with peak loads during the summer high tourist
season.
The phosphorus removal stringent norm of 1 mgP/l will realized combining normal sludge
phosphorus uptake, EBPR enhanced biological phosphorus removal and chemical
precipitation by adding metal salts chemicals.
To accommodate new situation an additional FST with diameter D = 40 m will be needed and
both old final sedimentation tanks will go under reconstruction and equipment renewal.
113
Feasibility Study

the European Union
Particip GmbH
The effluent results of this wastewater treatment system will be within requested limits and
the operation is reliable and relatively simple to control. Sludge will be stabilised in water
line and after thickening, this aerobically digested sludge will be dewatered with existing
belt-presses, after conditioning with polymer which is added to improve separation of sludge
water. Digested surplus sludge should be regularly tested on heavy metal content before its
application in agriculture. If this content is higher than allowed in EU Sewage sludge directive
(86/278/EEC/Annex 1B) than it should be disposed on local landfill at price of 20 EUR/t. Also
the agriculture land on which the sludge could be applied should be regularly tested on
heavy metals (86/278/EEC-Annex A). The centrate form sludge dewatering is collected and
brought back to the beginning of water line.
5.2.4 Option 2 Extension to N-DN WWTP with separate aerobic sludge

stabilization
Second option is application of such a design Bts load sufficient for nitrification denitrification process, but where the sludge retention time is not long enough for
substantial oxidation of ODS -sludge organic matter and mineralization of sludge. In WWTP
design for nitrification the envisaged SRT sludge retention time in winter conditions is
important design factor but it is shorter than for simultaneous sludge stabilization (see table
here under). Layout of Option 2 is given in Annex 2.3.
To create nitrification process conditions, design BOD-biological load-Bts should be lower
than 0.15 kg BOD/kg MLSSday and respective SRT sludge retention longer than 8 days at
12oC. During the summer much shorter SRT is needed for nitrification (4 days at 20C) than
for simultaneous sludge stabilization (13 days at 20 oC see in option 1 above). In this option
therefore WWTP can work with higher Bts if separate aerobic sludge separation system is
provided as here is the case. This higher Bts creates a respective difference in needed
biomass for WWTPs water line and biological reactors volume in comparison to the first
option.
Temperature (oC Celsius)
Required sludge age for nitrification within AT
18
10
15
20
25
Source: Stichting wateropleidingen, the Netherlands
Here at WWTP Vranishta, as explained above, it should be noted that hydraulic and
biological pick loads correspond to summer conditions (i.e. 125,000 PE), particularly to
month August, when the greatest amount of tourist occurs (ca. 48,000 PE) on the lake. In
July and September in average some 25,000 tourists are expected. In the other 9 months
114

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
and thus also in the winter the average load on WWTP will be about 87,000 PE. This fact is
used for definition of design load.
Table 5-5:

Load [kgBOD/d]
MLSS [kg]
Bts [kgBOD/kgMLSSd]
MLSS [kg]
SRT for nitrification [days]
Winter peak conditions- 12oC
6,250
5,000
0,125
0.10
12,800
12,800
9.9
10.7
7.8
Extra reactor volume of 6,400 m3, (above existing 2 AT) will be realized in 1 AT - aeration
tank with the same shape as existing tanks except for the depth of 6.4 m chosen to reduce
needed area for extension. Additional benefit of this configuration will be a possibility of
application of fine bubble aeration in new AT. The depth of 6.4 m enhances the fine bubble
aeration efficiency. In the old AT fine bubble aeration would not be efficient as the water
depth is only 3 m. Therefore the existing aeration system with surface aeration will be kept
there. As well as in old AT, the mixers will be also installed in new aeration tank to enhance
aeration and denitrification process.
Nitrification denitrification will be arranged as simultaneous process with a possibility of
intermittent aeration what should additionally reduce electricity consumption for aeration. .
Aeration system will be designed to cope easily with peak loads during the summer high
tourist season.
The phosphorus removal stringent norm of 1 mgP/l will realized combining EBPR and
chemical precipitation by adding metal salts chemicals.
To accommodate new situation an additional FST with diameter D = 40 m will be added.
The effluent results will be within requested limits and sludge will be stabilised in the
existing 2 aerobic sludge stabilisation tanks (10) which aeration capacity will be improved by
one extra surface aerator per tank. There formed stabilized sludge would be thickened and
dewatered in the existing sludge dewatering plant. Aerobically digested sludge will be
dewatered with existing belt-presses, after conditioning with polymer which is added to
improve separation of sludge water. Aerobically digested sludge should be regularly tested
on heavy metal content before its application in agriculture. If this content is higher than
allowed in EU Sewage sludge directive (86/278/EEC/Annex 1B) than it should be disposed on
local landfill at price of 20 EUR/t. Also the agriculture land on which the sludge could be
applied should be regularly tested on heavy metals (86/278/EEC/Annex A). The centrate
form sludge dewatering is collected and brought back to the beginning of water line.
115

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
5.2.5 Option 3 Extension to N-DN WWTP with separate anaerobic sludge

stabilization
Third option is application of PST - primary sedimentation pretreatment and separate
anaerobic sludge stabilization. By usage of PST it is possible to reduce total biological load of
design and save energy for the aeration of wastewater and sludge. The efficiency of PST
depends mainly on HRT hydraulic retention time as is given in the table hereunder.
HRT
PST
BOD5
N-Kj
P-tot
TSS
<1h
1,5-2h
efficiency
25%
9%
11%
50%
Efficiency
33%
9%
11%
64%
After PST one could again apply Bts < 0.15 kg BOD/kgMLSSday, a sludge load when
nitrification - denitrification occurs. Respective shorter SRT sludge retention time will not
allow for mineralization of activated sludge. Wasted activated sludge will need separate
stabilization. The same is valid for separated primary sludge that otherwise will putrefied.
To reduce organic matter in sludge and its mass, a mixture of these two sludge would be
conditioned with polymer and concentrated-thickened with mechanical dewatering devices
to some 8,5% DS and then will be treated anaerobically in mesophile or thermophile
digestion process where organic COD in sludge would be converted to biogas. Both process
of anaerobic stabilization have been analysed. Here however the seasonal load difference is
not an advantage as the lower amount of organic load from sludge during the longest part of
the year could lead to non-feasible application of anaerobic digestion. Digested sludge will
be dewatered with existing belt-presses, after conditioning with polymer which will be
added to improve separation of sludge water. Layout of Option 3 is given in Annex 2.4.
116

the European Union
Figure 5.4.
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
PFD of WWTP Vranishta with thermophile sludge digestion as by Colsen BV
Digested and dewatered sludge should be regularly tested on heavy metal content before its
application in agriculture. If this content is higher than allowed in EU Sewage sludge directive
(86/278/EEC/Annex 1B) than it should be disposed on local landfill at price of 20 EUR/t. Also
the agriculture land on which the sludge could be applied should be regularly tested tested
on heavy metals (86/278/EEC/Annex). The centrate form sludge dewatering is collected and
brought back to the beginning of water line. This centrate quality is different than by first 2
options and has high concentration Nitrogen and BOD/COD. By this way almost complete
NKJ removed by primary treatment will be brought back in the wastewater treatment
process. That is why it is used to conclude that primary settler in combination with anaerobic
digester does not have influence on N load. P of centrate also is higher but it is neglectable in
comparison to incoming load.
Here again should be noted that hydraulic and biological pick loads correspond to summer
conditions (i.e. 125,000 PE), particularly Augustus when the greatest amount of tourist
occurs (ca. 48,000 PE). July and September are covered with some 25,000 tourists. In the
other 9 months and thus also in the winter the load on WWTP is about 80,000 PE
Table 5-6:

Load [kgBOD/d]
Winter conditions- 12oC
6,250
4,400
MLSS [kg]
3.5
3.5
Bts [kgBOD/kgMLSSd]
0.1
0.073
MLSS [kg]
3.5
3.5
12,800
12,800
10.9
9.4
7.8

SRT for nitrification [days]
117

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Existing AT reactors in waterline with additional 6,400 m3 from 2 tanks for aerobic sludge
stabilisation would be used. The existing aeration system with surface aeration will be kept
here. As well as in existing AT in waterline, additional surface aerator (3 total) and the 2
mixers will be also installed in each sludge stabilisation tank to enhance aeration and
denitrification process.
Nitrification-denitrification will be arranged as simultaneous process with a possibility of
intermittent aeration what could additionally reduce electricity consumption for aeration.
It should however be noted the composition of wastewater after pre-treatment has
relatively low BOD/TKN ratio between 3.3 and 3.7. Theoretically the BOD/TKN ratio of 2.86 is
needed but the results from practice give that ratio above 4.5 is necessary for complete
nitrogen removal in nitrification-denitrification process.
Composition of Vranishta's wastewater after PST in dependence of HRT:
HRT
1,5-2h
<1h
BOD5
[mg/l]
153
172
TSS
[mg/l]
74
103
N-Kj
[mg/l]
46
46
P-tot
[mg/l]
That means that denitrification in option 3 would not be possible without external C-source.
This additional BOD will than additionally increase sludge production that further has to be
treated in digester and dewatered on the presses with help of polymers. External C-source
brings with it additional capital and operational costs. Only benefit is that some extra gas
would be produced.
The phosphorus removal stringent norm of 1 mgP/l will be realized combining EBPR and
chemical precipitation by adding metal salts chemicals.
Regarding sludge digestion, a well know benefit is production of biogas with high energy
value.
Sludge digestion plants are generally designed based on maximum month load. Available
COD with its specific energy value per kg COD of some 3.49 kWh/kg COD. Total COD amount
is based on the specific COD value per population equivalent which can vary and here is
estimated based on specific situation as 100 mgO2/l.
Having in mind substantial touristic seasonal difference, the yearly average load, equal to the
average number of PE has to be calculated, as is given in next table.
118

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Yearly average load

Touristic season
Out of touristic season
Medium touristic season
High touristic season
Average
Particip GmbH
Table 5-7:
day/year
275
60
30
PE
80,000
100,000
125,000
86,986
The calculation of energy production has to be based on average yearly load of the WWTP
and not on maximum monthly design capacity of WWTP which has to be used for design of
digester and auxiliary equipment for sludge treatment. For feasible usage of sludge digester
additional waste should be supplied for treatment in digester.
Table 5-8:
Calculation of energy production

Energy production in anaerobic digestion
Average yearly PE count
COD
Total COD load per year
Calorific value of COD
Total energy content per year
Specific energy from COD
Amount of primary and surplus sludge
Organic matter in sludge
Specific biogas production
Energy value of biogas
CHP effectiveness - heat
CHP effectiveness - electric energy
Specific heat production
Specific electrical energy production
Total yearly produced heat from the
CHP unit
Total yearly produced electrical energy
from the CHP unit
86,986
100
3,174,989
3.49
11,080,712
127
80
60
400
19
20
5.5
39
40
35
15
13
PE
g/(PE*day)
kg COD/YEAR
kWh/kg COD
kWh/YEAR
kWh/(PE*year)
g DS/(PE*day)
% DS
L/kg DS
L/(PE*day)
MJ/m3
kWh/m3
kWh/(PE*YEAR)
%
%
kWh heat./(PE*year)
kWh el./(PE*year)
1,341,115 kWh/year
1,130,818 kWh/year
This produced energy of formed biogas in CHP units results in WWTPs lower energy
consumption of this option in comparison with other two options. On the other hand the
usage of chemicals of this option is the highest as well as the highest capital investment
costs.
119

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
To accommodate new situation an additional FST final sedimentation tank is needed.

Diameter of D = 40 m is as chosen from operational and maintenance reasons.
The effluent results will be still within requested limits and sludge will be stabilised.
5.2.6 Treated (effluent) water quality

The quality of treated waste water from the device, and prior to discharge into the recipient
must meet the statutory criteria set, the following limit values of concentration (Regulations
on limit values OG 94/08):
COD
BOD5
SS
Total P
The total N
125 mg/l
25 mg/l
35 mg/l
1 mg P/l
10 mg N/l
In reality, it is expected to achieve the following minimum values of concentration:

COD
BOD5
SS
Total P
Total N
75 mg/l
15 mg/l
25 mg/l
0.8 mg P/l
8 mg N/l
Effects of treatment on this device will achieve the specific parameters the following values:
COD
BOD5
SS
Total P
Total N
75-90%
92-95%
88-93%
80-92%
80-90%
Parallel to this project, Macedonian government cooperates with JICA on project for
reconstruction of primary collector on the east side of Ohrid Lake and it was necessary to
take into account in this FS data from JICA project. Project includes reconstruction of primary
collector with all PS and construction of 2 retention tanks and what is the most important
infiltration in the primary collector will be decreased to app. 50%. It is not sure that JICA
project will be implemented till this project will be finished. Till JICA project will be
implement, excess wastewater will be bypassed to River Crni Drim without any treatment.
Quantity of bypassed waste water depends on the great number of parameters
(precipitation, level of groundwater,).
In several researches executed by STOWA, it was shown with help of the AS model and
practical research that the efficiency of WWTP under influence of dilution of wastewater are
lower for several important effluent parameters like nitrogen (N-tot), BOD/COD and
phosphorus removal. The effluent concentrations were calculated for a standard nutrients
120

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
removal WWTP for the following flow dilution situations: the volume flow share is increased
by 25, 50 m 100% of DWF with relatively clean water where the influent load remained the
same. Model calculations were performed for both: upstream denitrification and
intermittent aeration for nitrification denitrification. Both principles could be executed in
WWTP Vranishta.
These researches showed that by increasing the flow and keeping the same load the WWTP
efficiency will change:
a. N-tot efficiency will be lower for ca. 7% by doubling of the flow. The main
reason is deficiency of the substrate for denitrification. Further total N
effluent load (kg/day) can increase from 40% up to 70% by respective 50%
and 100% flow increment. However due dilution the effluent norm will still be
reached.
b. COD/BOD effluent load can increase from 20% up to 40% by respective 50%
and 100% flow increment. However due dilution the effluent norm will still be
reached.
c. Biological P will be lower due to is absence of the readily biodegradable
substrate and lower influent P concentration (Monod kinetics) and shorter
residence time in anaerobic tank. Also the influence of lower denitrification
efficiency and presence of nitrate in anaerobic tank have negative influence
on biological P removal. Luckily it can be compensate by chemical P removal.
d. For SS suspended solids, by circular sedimentation tanks the sludge blanket
filtration has the crucial role in determination of SS removal efficiency.
Although theoretically it should be influenced by square flow factor, in
practice almost no changes have been found by communal WWTP. The
measures should be taken that MLSS in aeration tank is never lower than 2
kg/m3.
It could be said that the effluent quality remains within the effluent limits while the total
pollution load in effluent that is discharged into the river shall increase. The approximate
distribution of load is therefore given in Table 5-9. Maximum load which could be accepted
to WWTP is 60,000 m3/d and DWF is dry weather flow after this project and JICA project will
be implemented. RWF is flow measured after PS Struga 3 (last measure point before WWTP)
in scope of JICA project.
121

the European Union
Table 5-9:
DWF
RWF
(max flow 0,58 m /s)
overflow
overflow
overflow
Particip GmbH
Distribution of hydraulic load and total BOD load to river Crni Drim in transitional
period till JICA project will be implement
QTOT
QEF
QOF
BODEF
BODOF
BODTOT
3
3
3
[m /d]
[m /d]
[m /d]
[kg/d]
[kg/d]
[kg/d]
27,240
27,240
0
409
0
409
(average flow 0,58 m /s)
RWF
Feasibility Study
50,112
50,112
752
752
61,344
80,000
100,000
120,000
60,000
60,000
60,000
60,000
1,344
20,000
40,000
60,000
900
900
900
900
76
1,133
2,267
3,400
976
2,033
3,167
4,300
EF = effluent from WWTP

OF = overflow to river Crni Drim
BODTOT = total cumulative discharge to river Crni Drim (overflow + treated wastewater)
5.2.7 Sludge Management

Sustainable sludge management is part of a general framework for wastewater treatment. It
consists of sludge stabilization, sludge volume reduction treatment (thickening and
dewatering), / hygienisation and sludge utilization or disposal. The objectives of sludge
management are:
to reduce the weight and volume
to stabilize the organic ingredients and remove odour
to eliminate pathogenic organisms
to improve sewage sludge characteristics for the further utilization or disposal
Thickening and dewatering are the important treatment in a WWTP and result with volume
reduction. Further treatment is possible aiming mainly to reduce pathogens, as well as
stabilizing the biodegradable content and odour, attracting therefore downstream market
users.
Following the dewatering and optionally the stabilisation process, there are three main
sludge management options:
Disposal to landfill
Land use
Incineration or co-incineration
Land use
Sludge is rich in nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorous and contains valuable organic
matter that is useful when applied on agricultural soils or soils that are depleted or subject
to erosion. Application of sewage sludge on agricultural land is beneficial if the physical,
122

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
chemical and biological properties of the soil are to be enhanced, increasing thus the
productivity of crops.
On the other hand, the application of sludge poses a potential risk to human health and the
environment, both as regards underground water, the surface water and soil. Spreading the
sludge on land shall be carried out according to the environmental restrictions.
Land use of sludge in Ohrid-Struga area could be very limited because of the concentration
of heavy metals in sludge and soil. Founded heavy metal pollution of soil and waters in the
area is a result of former mining activities in the lake watershed. Several FeNi and Cr mines
are located close to the lake (2.5 km). These can lead to the situation that sludge could not
be used on land because of the high concentration in sludge after implementation of the
project and also because of the relatively high concentration in the soil. In this phase of
documentation preparation heavy metal content in sludge after implementation of project
or agriculture soil is not known. For final decision for land use of sludge it is necessary to do
analysis of sludge and soil on which sludge will be applied. Particularly the content of heavy
metal in the soil could be critical in the region. Further having in mind typical sorts of
vegetables (e.g cabbage, salad, paprika, potato, cucumber, tomato, strawberry, etc.) in the
region it would be advisable to additionally hygienise the sludge before land application
what would involve additional costs (e.g. sludge post treatment with quicklime (CaO). The
price of quicklime is around 100 EUR/t, while typical dosage on weight to weight basis could
go above 0,7).
Sludge use in land can be practised if the following conditions are met:
the limits values for concentrations of heavy metals and organic compounds, in the
sludge and in the soil, are not exceeded
there is an agronomic interest for nutrients or for the improvement of the content of
organic matter in soil
the quantity of nutrients introduced is adapted to the needs of the crops or the soil
according to best practice
the use does not cause unreasonable odour nuisance to the nearest dwellings.
The EU Directive however forbids the appliance of the sludge on grassland or forage crops if
the land is used for grazing or harvesting forage crops on such land before it passed a certain
period of time; on fruit and vegetable crops during the growing season, except cultures fruit
trees; and on ground intended for cultivation of vegetables and fruits which are normally in
contact directly to the ground and eaten raw, for a period of 10 months before harvest and
during harvest.
Sludge incineration
This method includes full oxidation of the organic substances via the application of heat. The
final products include the inert ash, water and CO 2. Directive 2010/75/EU on industrial
emissions regulating the activities of incineration and co-incineration of waste, aims to
123

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
prevent the negative effects on the environment, air, water, soil, and sets the standards for
controlling emissions and types of wastes subject to incineration.
This practice is considered to be the less viable due to the high investment cost and may be
implemented in big areas with large quantities of sludge produced.
No incineration plant exists in the beneficiary country and this option is not feasible.
Sludge can be also co-incinerated in cement plants. It entails combustion in temperatures
higher than 1100C, which causes the complete oxidation of carbon and destruction of any
pathogenic agents contained. Typical gate fees for co-firing applications are 35-40 /t (price
for dry sludge), excluding transportation costs, a price that may constitute a significant part
of the overall WWTP operational cost.
Sludge disposal
Across EU, there is a general trend to divert sewage sludge from landfills, particularly where
co-disposal with Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) is practiced. The decomposition of the
organic matter within the landfill results in undesirable gas emission (such as CO, methane
and volatile organic compounds) and landfill leachate. This gas emission is often used, on
modern landfill as source of renewable energy. Caution must be exerted in case that the
slopes are high, because there have been incidences of landfill landslides that were
attributed to sludge masses. Therefore stability and long-term behaviour of landfill must be
considered when sludge disposal is practiced.
Non-dewatered sludge is prohibited to be disposed. In some countries a minimum DS
content has been set; however this content must not be set unrealistically high, i.e. more
than 25%.
The landfill Directive establishes three types of landfill:
a) hazardous,
b) non-hazardous and
c) inert.
The composition of the sludge should also be known in order to verify the non-hazardous
nature of the sludge and leaching tests according to the European Council Decision
2003/33/EC (on the criteria and procedure of waste acceptance in landfills) should have
been carried out in order to assess whether the sludge meets the criteria for disposal in nonhazardous waste landfills.
According to EU waste strategies, disposal is the lowest cost and the least preferable option
and should be avoided if other options are available.
124

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Landfill disposal cost for the Beneficiary country is estimated to 20 /t with additional 5-12
/t transport cost.
Conclusion
As there are no many WWTPs in Macedonia overall sludge management in Beneficiary
Country is in the early stage.
Strategy for Sludge Management on the State level is in phase of preparation. Similar
situation is with solid waste strategy.
Land application of sludge from WWTP Vranishta in Ohrid-Struga area, as defined by EU
Sewage sludge directive (86/278/EEC), could be limited due to natural or induced higher
content of heavy metals in soil. Broad investigation on country level is necessary.
Other typical European solution for final disposal like incineration or co-incineration plants
or sanitary landfills disposal do not exist in the beneficiary country. In the vicinity (12,5 km)
of the WWTP Vranishta there is a landfill however not fully constructed in accordance with
European regulations for sanitary landfill. It has impact on the environment
Land application of sludge could be very limited because of the potential higher
concentration of heavy metals in sludge/soil and additional cost for disinfection step (e.g.
with quicklime) so the only temporary feasible solution for the sludge disposal is on existing
landfills in the South West Region. That solution would have limited, local impact on
environment what is acceptable before definite solution for sludge would be provided.
Besides above mentioned typical solutions some other post treatment solutions could be
developed in the future by private entrepreneurs but the technology and operational costs
are not known for the analysis.
125

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
5.2.8 Overview of investment and O&M costs

Investment costs were estimated for three above described variants. Investment costs are
estimated based on the collected experience of design and bid on similar projects and
supported with vendor offers for specific equipment. Presented prices are expressed in
EURs.
INVESTMENT COSTS
Table 5-10: Estimation of investment costs for WWTP
VARIANT
Option 1
PREPARATORY WORKS
800,000
CONSTRUCTION WORKS
3,298,440
ELECTRO-MECHANICAL WORKS
TOTAL EUR
2,314,129
6,412,569
Option 2
800,000
2,747,140
Option 3
800,000
3,582,740
2,223,729
3,031,064
5,770,869
7,413,804
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS

Operation costs are based on the following items:
Salaries
Cost of energy
Cost of chemicals
Cost of maintenance
Costs of disposal of waste and sludge
Laboratory costs.
Salaries
Budget costs for salaries are based on gross personal income for various occupations needed
on the device for purifying waste water. Total yearly cost is calculated based on average
salary of 500 EUR.
Table 5-11:
Review of personnel salaries

Manager
Technologist
Laboratory leader
Laboratory technician
Administrative staff
Electro automation
Mechanical workers
Operators
No of employers
Annual cost of
employee (EUR)
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
EUR 84,000
126

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Cost of energy
It should be noted that energy costs does not include the electrical energy for pumping raw
sewage water to the wastewater treatment process.
In modern devices for waste water biological treatment, energy costs are mainly associated
with the aeration of biological reactors. Therefore, the energy consumption is associated
with the choice of methods of aeration. As reuse of old WWTP must be taken in
consideration here than we have a combination of surface and fine bubble aeration. The
consumption of old plant with surface aeration, when it is in proper function is about
3,956,000 kWh. In the table here under total energy costs, thus with extension of WWTP are
estimated.
Energy costs are based on the tariff of 0.07 EUR / kWh.
Table 5-12:
Estimation of energy consumption of upgraded WWTP
Energy consumption incl. old WWTP

Energy cost
kWh/year
EUR/ year
Option 1
6,207,770
434,000
Option 2
5,885,110
412,000
Option 3
4,143,866
328,000
Cost of chemicals
Cost of chemicals for sludge thickening / dewatering
Costs for the consumption of chemicals on the device are based on a polymer chemical
necessary for the thickening and dehydration of sludge. For the purpose the treatment
process of thickening/dewatering the sludge, the price of polymers is assumed at 7.4 EUR /
kg. Price of polymer is provided on the basis of local suppliers retail prices.
Cost of chemicals for phosphorus removal and denitrification
For the removal of phosphorus the use of iron compounds is envisaged. Prices are given on
the basis of EU suppliers (0.38 EUR / kg). For the use of methanol as external C-source in the
denitrification treatment process in option 3, it is assumed with the price of 2.0 EUR / kg.
Laboratory costs
It can be assumed that all the analysis of waste water according to the legislation will be
done by independent authorized laboratory. But other than that it is necessary to analyse
the basic parameters of the contamination on the device for treatment. These assays are
necessary for the proper management of waste water treatment plants and calibration
instruments. These costs are included in chemical costs and expected to amount of
5,000 EUR/ year.
127

the European Union
Table 5-13:
Chemical
Polymer
Iron salts
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Estimation of the costs of chemicals necessary to operate the WWTP

unit
Option 1
Option 2
kg/year
15,255
16,131
t/year
450
530
Option 3
15,547
464
Methanol
Polymer
Iron salts
kg/year
EUR/year
EUR/year
-112,885
171,184
-119,367
201,392
83,220
115,056
176,218
Methanol
EUR/year
--
Laboratory
EUR/year
5,000
-5,000
166,440
5,000
Total chemicals
EUR/year
289,069
325,759
462,714
Maintenance costs
Maintenance costs are linked to investment costs in the entire treatment plant. The
following relationships were used for estimation of maintenance costs:
Maintenance of structures - 0.5% of investment cost / year
Maintenance of mechanical and electrical equipment - 1.5% of investment cost / year
Table 5-14:
Estimation of maintenance costs of WWTP

Civil constructions
(EUR/ year)
Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
19,800
17,407
20,825
Electro mechanical
equipment
(EUR/year)
34,700
33,356
45,486
Total
(EUR/ year)
54,500
50,403
66,311
Costs of disposal of waste and sludge

There are no structural solutions for sludge disposal in the Macedonia. Costs of disposal of
waste and sludge for waste water treatment plant are based on price for disposal of solid
waste (20 EUR/t) and summarized in the table below.
Table 5-15:
Estimation of costs for sludge treatment and disposal at WWTP

Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
The volume of sludge
7,847
10,220
5,840
The amount of sludge
7,479
9,740
5,566
Polymer cost
112,885
119,367
115,056
Sludge disposal
186,967
243,492
139,138
Total sludge cost
315,178
382,819
265,600
m3/year
t/year
EUR/year
EUR/year
EUR/year
128

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Summary of O&M costs

The following table presents a summary of all operating and maintenance costs.
Table 5-16:
Estimated cost summary for analysed waste water treatment technologies

Option 1
Option 2
Option 3
EUR/year
EUR/year
EUR/year
Salaries
84.000
84.000
84.000
Energy for
151.839
134.873
12.986
upgrade
Chemicals
289.069
325.759
462.714
Sludge disposal
186.967
243.492
139.138
Maintenance
58.462
54.350
70.328
Total
770.337
842.474
769.166
EUR/PE
61,63
67,40
61,53
3
EUR/m
0.078
0.085
0.078
Comparison of life time costs

Table 5-17:
Cost comparison on NPV basis for WWTP Vranishta WITHOUT collector Radozhda
Kalishta
Comparison for WWTP
NPV (discount rate 4%)
CAPEX
OPEX
Option 1 (EUR)
18,418,503
7,012,144
21,458,872
Option 2 (EUR)
18,867,874
6,310,445
23,478,760
Option 3 (EUR)
19,375,549
8,113,894
21,308,620
Table 5-18:
Cost comparison on NPV basis for WWTP Vranishta WITH collector Radozhda
Kalishta
Comparison for Project
NPV (discount rate 4%)
CAPEX
OPEX
Option 1 (EUR)
19,058,850
7,628,532
21,569,388
Option 2 (EUR)
19,508,221
6,926,833
23,589,276
Option 3 (EUR)
20,009,887
8,723,382
21,419,586
5.2.9 Conclusion
Input data for water quality and quantities based on JICA study in preparation, were
sufficient for the preparation of preliminary design. Based on these JICA data preliminary
design was prepared with sufficient input information and supported with estimation from
UN population growth indicators for Macedonia.
All three proposed technological processes ensure appropriate treatment and satisfy
Regulations on limit values for emissions of waste water (OG 81/2011) and Urban Waste
129

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Water Directive (91/271/ EEC). All technological processes show satisfactory results and but
there is a slightly variation in cost value.
Based on expected technological results no preference can be given for either option above
one other. Based on investment costs the cheapest is the second option and the most
expensive is third one with anaerobic digestion.
Based on operational aspects a slight advantage is given to the conventional treatment as
given 1st option. These include in particular the buffer capacity for shock loads and simplicity
of operations. This 1st option is also cheapest from operational point of view what is
visible from above calculated NPV value.
As to the tendering according Yellow book it is proposed to apply no limitations regarding
technology.
130

the European Union
Feasibility Study
PROCUREMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
6.1
Procurement Plan
Particip GmbH
6.1.1 Contract types

All works within the scheme must be executed according to the standards of the Fdration
Internationale des Ingnieurs - Conseils (FIDIC).
Within the FIDIC scope of options typically the Works for sewerage systems are governed by
The Conditions of Contract for Construction for building and engineering Works designed by
the Employer (FIDIC Red Book) since it is rather simple to define the type and scope of works
which need to be performed. On the other hand for projects which are more technologically
sophisticated such as the Works for a Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP) are typically
governed by The Conditions of Contract for Plant and Design-Build for Electrical and
Mechanical Plant, and for Building and Engineering Works, designed by the Contractor (FIDIC
Yellow Book) since experience has shown that it is best of the Contractor designs, constructs
and commissions the WWTP himself in order to be fully responsible for proper performance
of the WWTP in the end in accordance with the defined requirements in the Tender Dossiers
and the Final Contract.
6.1.2 Contracts for works, services and goods

The following procurement packages are proposed:
Package 1 as a FIDIC Red Book work contract for:

o Construction of Radozhda-Kalishta collector
Package 2 as a FIDIC Yellow Book design and build contract for:

o Reconstruction and upgrading of WWTP Vranishta

o Supervision of the works

o Technical assistance

o Publicity and visibility
Publicity and visibility of the project should be performed in a way to ensure information
and communication to inform the public about the benefits of the project and the EU
participation in the project. Activities should include written material, press conferences,
presentations, invitations, labels, plaques and all other tools used to highlight EU
131

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
participation. In addition, the consultant should propose to design the tools to enable the
development of a dynamic communication strategy that will highlight the achievements of
EU support.
All activities should follow the written and visual identity of the EU in accordance with the
Manual on the visibility of the EU projects.
Budget for Publicity and visibility contract is 0,35% of the investment cost of the project.
Technical assistance has to be done in a way to ensure the identification and
implementation of procurement team for the strengthening of End Recipient capacity. If the
End Recipient has existing administrative and technical capacity which could perform the
projects financed by the EU and/or similar projects, it is necessary to analyze capability of
existing staff for project implementation. If the analysis shows that there is no existing
capability, it is necessary to establish institutional mechanisms for the implementation of the
project, such as the assistance of the project implementation units that can implement a
common project.
Budget for Technical assistance contract is 2% of the investment cost of the project.
Table 6-1: Procurement packages
Contract
Package
Work Component
Construction of Radozhda-Kalishta collector

Reconstruction and upgrading of WWTP
Vranishta
3
4
5
GRAND TOTAL
1
2
Estimated
contract value
(EUR)
620,051
7,053,826
537,171
153,478
26,859
8,391,385
Type of Contract
FIDIC RED BOOK
FIDIC YELLOW BOOK
PRAG Service Contract
--
132

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Based on the proposed procurement packages, the following table present indicative
procurement plan (services, works - design & build or measured works) with values of
contracts envisaged and start and completion dates.
Table 6-2: Indicative Procurement Plan
Contract
Package
Work Component
Estimated
value
(EUR)
Contingency
Estimated
contract
value (EUR)
Type of Contract
563,683
10%
620,051
FIDIC RED BOOK
6,412,569
10%
7,053,826
Construction of RadozhdaKalishta collector
Reconstruction and upgrading

of WWTP Vranishta
488,338
10%
537,171
PRAG Service
Contract
139,525
10%
153,478
PRAG Service
Contract
24,417
10%
26,859
PRAG Service
Contract
7,628,532
10%
8,391,385
GRAND TOTAL
FIDIC YELLOW BOOK
133

the European Union
6.2
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Implementation Plan
In the following table, main activities for tenders are presented.

Table 6-3:
Bar graph of main activities

2015
2016
2017
II.1
WORKS
(reconstruction
and
upgrading of the WWTP)
Tender process
Contracting
Preparation
of
project
documentation / permits
Works,
Handover, defect notification
WORKS
(primary
collector
Radozhda-Kalishta)
II.2
Tender process
II.3
Contracting
II.4
Works
II.5
Handover
III
III.1
III.2
III.3
III.4
SERVICES (supervision)
Tender process
Contracting
Duration of supervision
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
SERVICES (technical assistance)
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
I
I.1
I.2
I.3
I.4
I.5
I.6
II
IV
IV.1
IV.2
Tender process
IV.3
Contracting
IV.4
Duration of technical assistance
V
V.1
V.2
V.3
V.4
SERVICES (publicity and visibility)

Tender process
Contracting
Duration of publicity services
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
II
III
IV
134

the European Union
Feasibility Study
LIST OF ANNEXES
1.1.
Agglomeration area on a topographic map
1.2.
Agglomeration area on a topographic map
1.3.
Current state of primary collectors
1.4.
Scope of the works pipelines
2.1.
Wastewater Treatment Plant Vranishta current state
2.2.
Wastewater Treatment Plant Vranishta OPTION 1
2.3.
2.4.
3.
Conceptual design - calculation
Particip GmbH
135
The European Union's Operational

Programme for Regional Development
2007-2013
This project is funded by European Union

This project is designed by:
Particip GmgH Consortium
PROJECT CODE
Framework Contract EuropeAid/132633/C/SER/Mult; Lot 6: Environment

PROJECT TITLE
Preparation of necessary documentation for upgrading the WWTP in

Vranishta, extension of the collector system for Ohrid Lake and separation of
the foul and storm priority water network in the Cities of Ohrid and Struga
DRAWING NUMBER
1.1.
DRAWING TITLE
AGGLOMERATION AREA ON A TOPOGRAPHIC MAP

DESIGNED BY
REVISED BY
J. Boehringer
M. Bakula
ISSUE
1
APPROVED BY
SCALE
1:100 000
DATE
April 2015

2007-2013

PROJECT CODE

PROJECT TITLE

DRAWING NUMBER
1.2.
DRAWING TITLE
AGGLOMERATION AREA ON ORTOPHOTOGRAPHIC MAP

DESIGNED BY
REVISED BY
J. Boehringer
M. Bakula
ISSUE
1
APPROVED BY
SCALE
1:100 000
DATE
April 2015

2007-2013

PROJECT CODE

PROJECT TITLE

DRAWING NUMBER
1.3.
DRAWING TITLE
CURRENT STATE OF PRIMARY COLLECTORS

DESIGNED BY
REVISED BY
J. Boehringer
M. Bakula
ISSUE
1
APPROVED BY
SCALE
1:100 000
DATE
April 2015

2007-2013

PROJECT CODE

PROJECT TITLE

DRAWING NUMBER
1.4.
DRAWING TITLE
SCOPE OF THE WORK - PIPELINES

DESIGNED BY
REVISED BY
J. Boehringer
M. Bakula
ISSUE
3
APPROVED BY
SCALE
1:100 000
DATE
April 2015
LEGEND:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
14
5
9
21
20
13
21
Inlet pumping station

Screen building
Grit and Fat Chamber
Aeration tank
ST Distribution chamber
Sedimentation tank
Effluent Flow metering canal
Chlorination building
RAS pumping station
Aerobic sludge stabilization
Surplus sludge pump station
Gravity Sludge Thickener
Sludge drying beds
Administrative & Control building
Auxiliary structure
Diesel assembly
Transformer station
Mechanical sludge dewatering
Aeration tank distribution chamber
Return activated sludge
distribution chamber
Surplus sludge distribution chamber
Sludge
Sewer
Internal sewer network
Demolition
Reconstruction/ Reparation
15
10
10
2007-2013
17
16
11
12
River D R I M
19
19
18
3
12
18
2
PROJECT CODE

1
PROJECT TITLE

DRAWING NUMBER
2.1.
DRAWING TITLE
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT VRANISHTA - CURRENT STATE

DESIGNED BY
REVISED BY
APPROVED BY
SCALE
DATE
E. Spirovska
ISSUE
1
J. Boehringer
1:1 000
April 2015
LEGEND:
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
11
12
27
11
11
20
10
25
Fe
14
24
15
15
9
21
H=3m
H=3m
H=3m
H=3m
H=6m
H=6m
19

Screen building
Anaerobic tank - Selector
Main distribution chamber
Aeration tank distribution chamber
Aeration tank
New aeration tank
Collecting manhole
FST Distribution chamber
Final Sedimentation tank
Effuent Flow metering canal
Old chlorination building
RAS pumping station
Return activated sludge
distribution chamber
Gravity Sludge Thickener
Sludge mechanical dewatering
Sludge drying beds
Auxilary structure
Transformer station
Diesel assembly
Blower station
Chemical P removal
Air treatment
New Administrative &
Control building
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
22
23
River D R I M
Reconstruction / Reparation
New structure
18
3
4
Demolition

2007-2013
16
Sludge
Sewer
Air
17
18
26
PROJECT CODE
PROJECT TITLE

28
DRAWING NUMBER
2.2.
DRAWING TITLE
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT VRANISHTA - OPTION 1

DESIGNED BY
REVISED BY
APPROVED BY
SCALE
DATE
E. Spirovska
ISSUE
1
J. Boehringer
1:1 000
April 2015
LEGEND:
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
11
12
11
11
22
10
27
Fe
14
26
16
15
9
21
23
H=3m
H=3m
H=3m
H=3m
17
17
H=6m

Screen building
Anaerobic tank - Selector
AT distribution chamber
Aeration tank
New aeration tank
Collecting manhole
ST Distribution chamber
Sedimentation tank
Old chlorination building
RAS pumping station
Return activated sludge distribution chamber
Surplus sludge distribution chamber
Aerobic sludge stabilization tank
Sludge Thickener
Sludge drying beds
Auxiliary structure
Transformer station
Diesel assembly
Blower station
Chemical P removal
River D R I M
New structure

2007-2013
19
18
Demolition
24
25
Sludge
Sewer
Air
20
3
4
19
20
2
PROJECT CODE

PROJECT TITLE

DRAWING NUMBER
2.3.
DRAWING TITLE

DESIGNED BY
REVISED BY
APPROVED BY
SCALE
DATE
E. Spirovska
ISSUE
1
J. Boehringer
1:1 000
April 2015
15
LEGEND:
1
2
Screen building
3
4
PST distribution chamber
5
Primary sedimentation tank
6
Distribution chamber
7
Anaerobic tank selector
8
9
AT distribution chamber
10
Aeration tank
11
Collecting manhole
12
FST Distribution chamber
13
Final Sedimentation tank
14
15
Old Chlorination building
16
RAS pumping station
17
RAS distribution chamber
18
19
Pre-settled influent
20
Sludge Thickener
21
Belt thickener
22
Mixed sludge pump station
23
Sludge digester (anaerobic)
24
25
CHP
26
Sludge drying beds
27
28
Auxiliary structure
29
Transformer station
30
Diesel assembly
31
Chemical P removal
13
14
13
13
27
12
31
Fe
16
17
17
26
11
28
10
10
10
10
Sludge
Sewer
Demolition
New structure
29
30
18
River D R I M
20

2007-2013
24
4
6
21
P.S.
23
22
20
19
25
24
2
PROJECT CODE
PROJECT TITLE

DRAWING NUMBER
2.4.
DRAWING TITLE

DESIGNED BY
REVISED BY
APPROVED BY
SCALE
DATE
E. Spirovska
ISSUE
1
J. Boehringer
1:1 000
April 2015
Ontwerp:
Datum:
Status:
Engineer:
Vranishta
14/4/2015
Outline
Design
Particip
UNIT
Influent
Q- Piek
Q- nominal
COD
Ntotal
NKj/Ntotaal
NKj
Ptot
Temperatuur
min
max
COD/BOD ratio
Q year
COD
N total
Nkjeldahl total
Ptotal
i.e. nominal
m3/h
m3/h
mg/l
mg/l
%
mg/l
mg/l
C
C
m3/jaar
kg/d
kg/d
kg/d
kg/d
VE
Effluent quality
Ntot
NKj effluent
NO3-N effluent
Ptot
COD requested removal efficiency
COD concentration
PE nominal
PE efficiency
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
%
mg/l
VE
%
Pre-treatment-Existing
EXISTIING
Coarse Screens,
H channel depth
H water depth
W-width of channel
W-width of screens
bar thickness
Type openings
Dimesion opening clearance
Type
m
m
m
m
mm
mm
Original design maximum flow per
m /h
SUMMER CONDITION T=20 C

nominal
AMOUNT
total
2,513
1,135
459
46
100
46
9
nominal
AMOUNT
NEW
1,257
568
459
46
100
46
9
maximum
AMOUNT
NEW
1,257
568
459
46
100
46
9
nominal
AMOUNT
OLD
1,257
568
459
46
100
46
9
maximum
AMOUNT
OLD
1,257
568
459
46
100
46
9
12
20
2
9,942,644
12,509
1,253
1,253
250
125,100
12
20
2
4,971,322
6,255
627
627
125
62,500
12
20
2
4,971,322
6,255
627
627
125
62,500
12
20
2
4,971,322
6,255
627
627
125
62,500
12
20
2
4,971,322
6,255
627
627
125
62,500
10
2
6
1
90%
46
10,528
92
10
2
6
1
90%
46
5,264
92
10
2
6
1
90%
46
5,264
92
10
2
6
1
90%
46
5,264
92
10
2
6
1
90%
46
5,264
92
TO BE USED
coarse
screens
1.25
0.84
1.45
1.2
10
spleet/rond
40/20
3006
new screens needed
unit
max flow per unit
No. of units
angle of screen
m /h
stuks
degrees
1257
2
68
Fine Screens,
H channel depth
H water depth
W-width of channel
W-width of screens
bar thickness
Type openings
Dimesion opening clearance
Original design maximum flow per
unit
Type
m
m
m
m
mm
mm
fine screens
1.25
0.74
1.75
1.5
10
spleet/rond
17/6
m /h
3006
1257
2
68
2.7
max flow per unit

No. of units
angle of screen
m /h
stuks
degrees
amount of screenings
m /d
new equipment
needed
Grit and grease removal

Type
No. units
cross section
L - length
H water depth
W-width
m2
m
m
m
V-volume
SS efficency D>0,20mm
HRT
m
%
min
Biological treatment
Sludge growth
Sludge yield (incoming load)
Biological sludge production
Sludge yield (incoming load)
anorganic
Anorganic Chemical sludge
production
total sludge production
N in sludge
P in sludge
Nkjeldahl balance
new screens needed
aerated
2
8
23
3.8
2.8
165
90
17.44
New AT
peak
0.33
2,064
Existing AT
nominal
0.33
2,064
Existing
AT
peak
0.33
2,064
kg ds/kg COD
kg/d
0.33
4,128
New AT
nominal
0.33
2,064
kg ds/kg COD
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
kg/d
kg/d
kg N/kg ds
g P/kg ds
1,251
5,379
0.05
15
625
625
625
625
0.05
15
0.05
15
0.05
15
0.05
15
N innfluent as N-kjel
N in surpluslus sludge removed
N via filtrate detwatering retour
N in effluent
N influent load for nitirfication
kg N/d
kg N/d
kg N/d
kg N/d
kg N/d
1,253
-206
-54
992
627
-103
-27
496
627
-103
-27
496
627
-103
-27
496
627
-103
-27
496
NO3-N balance
N influent as NO3
N in effluent as NO3
N influent load for nitirfication
To denitrifiy N load
kg N/d
kg N/d
kg N/d
kg N/d
0
-163
992
829
0
-82
496
414
0
-82
496
414
0
-82
496
414
0
-82
496
414
kg P/d
kg P/d
250
-62
125
-31
125
-31
125
-31
125
-31
kg P/d
kg P/d
kg Fe/d
kg /d
yes/no
88
101
272
1,974
enough P
44
50
44
50
44
50
44
50
enough P
enough P
enough P
enough P
0.13
4.0
0.13
4.0
0.13
4.0
0.13
4.0
0.13
4.0
24,625
12,312
12,312
12,312
12,312
Volume bruto
Design temperature
Tank depth netto
Tank depth bruto
m
C
m
m
26,700
12
6.0
6.5
13,400
12
6.0
6.5
13,400
12
6.0
6.5
14,400
12
3.0
3.5
14,400
12
3.0
3.5
Anaerobic reactor
Retour sludge flow
Hydr. Retention time (dwf)
Requested retour sludge flow
% retour sludge flow (dwa)
no. Compartiments
Volume netto
Volume bruto
m3/h
min
m3/h
%
m3
m3
1,135
30
1,135
100.0
gN/kg ds*h
gN/kg ds*dag
gN/kg
Vss*dag
kg/d
1.00
24
1.00
24
1.00
24
1.00
24
1.00
24
27
829
27
414
27
414
27
414
27
414
P balance
P influent
P load removal in surplus sludge
Removed by EBPR with anaerobic
tank
P To be removed chemically
FeCl3
FeCl3(40%)
P nutirent check
Activated sludge volume
Sludge load (realible)
MLSS
kg COD/kg
ds*d
g/l
Volume netto
Denitrificatie (DNT)
Denitrification kinnetic
To denitrify N load
1,135
1,230
8,633
4,316
4,316
4,316
4,316
Needed denitrification volume bruto

Volume division
m
%
9,352
35%
4,676
35%
4,676
35%
5,036
35%
5,036
35%
total surface
Diameter tank -if round shape
Needed denitrification efficiency
Hydraulic retention time
m
m
%
h
1,439
42.8
66%
7.6
719
30.3
66%
7.6
719
30.3
66%
7.6
1,439
42.8
66%
7.6
1,439
42.8
66%
7.6
Nitrification (NT)
Volume ratio
65%
65%
65%
65%
65%
Volume NT netto
15,992
7,996
7,996
7,996
7,996
Volume NT bruto
17,325
8,662
8,662
9,329
9,329
1,333
14
4.0
496
0.65
10.1
12.6
2,665
14
4.0
496
0.65
10.1
12.6
2,665
14
4.0
496
0.65
10.1
12.6
19.2
Needed denitrification volume netto
total surface
Hydraulic retention time
MLSS
Maxim. N load NT
N sludge load (arob)
N sludge load (total volume)
m
h
g/l
kg/d
mgN/g ds*h
gN/kg ds*d
gN/kg Vss*d
4.0
992
0.65
10.1
12.6
1,333
14
4.0
496
0.65
10.1
12.6
SRT
day
19.2
19.2
19.2
Total
Nominal
126,000
1.00
1.00
1.1
New AT
nominal
63,000
1.00
1.00
1.1
New AT
maximum
79,000
1.15
1.50
1.1
14
Aeration capacity
Design loads
COD piek factor
Nitrification piek
COD in sludge
VE
kg CZV/kg ds
Minimum O2 concentration
Saturation concentration (CsT; 20C;)
O2 driving force correction
Alfa factor
aeration depth
mg/l
mg/l
m
1.5
8.48
1.21
0.7
5.95
1.5
8.48
1.21
0.7
5.95
1.5
8.48
1.21
0.7
5.95
aeration efficiency
Blowers motor and drives efficiency
Efficency blower theoretical / rotor
Efficency blower practice /rotor
gO2/(Nm3/m)
%
kg O2/kWh
kg O2/kWh
20
80
4.9
2.8
23
80
5.6
3.2
22
80
5.4
3.1
COD oxidation
kg O2/d
11,258
5,629
NKJ oxidation
kg O2/d
5,477
2,739
Sludge growth COD
kg O2/d
-4,541
Sludge growth NKJ
kg O2/d
-943
Denitrification
kg O2/d
Total oxygen demand

OC
19.2
Existing
Existing AT
AT
nominal maximum
63,000
79,000
1.00
1.15
1.00
1.50
1.1
1.1
1.5
8.48
1.21
0.9
3
Plate
aerator
1.5
8.48
1.21
0.9
3
2x1m
2.0
1.4
2.0
1.4
6,474
5,629
6,474
4,108
2,739
4,108
-2,270
-2,611
-2,270
-2,611
-472
-707
-472
-707
-2,370
-1,185
-1,778
-1,185
-1,778
kg O2/d
8,882
4,441
5,486
4,441
5,486
kg O2/d
15414
7,707
9,521
6,347
7,840
OC
kg O2/h
642
321
397
Rotor OC
kg O2/h
Max. air flow / no. of rotors
Nm /h
5,397
2,347
3,030
Flow per schotel
Nm /h
2.5
29.5
38.0
number of aeration elements

Requested netto power
stuks
kW
2,159
228
80
99
80
128
43
FST final sedimentation

3
surface load-piek
Ratio retour sludge/influent
(nominal)
Side depth
Drivng Bridge
Scum removal
m /m *h
0.67
m
ja/nee
ja/nee
1.0
2.7
yes
yes
Requested surface
No. of FST
Diameter
m
m
surface load-nominal
m /m *h
3,779
3
40
2
0.60
Retour sludge max.

Retour sludge concentration
m /h
g/l
2,513
8.0
Sludge thickener
Surplus sludge mass
MLSS
kg/d
g/l
5,379
8.0
Surplus sludge volume

Dry solid after thickening
m /d
g/l
672
25
Filtrate retour to denitrification

Surface mass load thickener
m /uur
kg ds/m2*d
19
26.0
Surface thickener - buffer tank

Diameter tank
slope
depth of conus
m
m
206.9
Total volume
Thickening factor
m
-
848
3.1
Volume thickend sludge
m /d
215
Supernatant back to AT
Sludge belt press
m /d
457
Solids load
detwatering time
kg ds/m *h
h/wk
needed belt surface

available belt surface 2 x 4,5
dry solids after press
m
m2
g/l
Volume dewatered surplus sludge

Filtrate retour to AT denitrification
16
60
4
250
35
4.3
9.0
200
m /d
27
38
m /uur
264
6.15
Plate
aerator
Plate
aerator
189
327
43
7.60
2x1m
2x1m
233
his project is funded by

the European Union
Feasibility Study
Particip GmbH
Disclaimer
The contents of this report are the sole responsibility of Particip and its consortium partners and
can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union.

Vol 1 - Feasibility Study Technical Part IPA1

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Vol 1 - Feasibility Study Technical Part IPA1

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

his project is funded by

the European Union

The European Unions Operational Programme Regional Development 2007-2011

Preparation of necessary documentation for

This project is funded by the European Union

This project is funded by

This project is funded by

Preparation of necessary documentation for upgrading

Document short title

Feasibility Study part 1

This report: the Feasibility Study consists of two parts:

This project is funded by

SUMMARY OF THE FEASIBILITY STUDY ................................................................. 5

Scope of the Project ....................................................................................................... 5

SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONTEXT .............................................................................. 15

Republic of Macedonia ................................................................................................. 15

Project area ...........................................................................................................................................15

Current population and population development.......................................................... 30

Population development in Macedonia ................................................................................................30

Current tourism and tourism development ................................................................... 35

Tourism on Ohrid Lake ..........................................................................................................................35

Environmental Aspects and Impact ............................................................................... 37

Environmental Impact Assessment process ..........................................................................................37

EXISTING WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND TREATMENT SYSTEM,

Wastewater collection system ...................................................................................... 43

This project is funded by

Wastewater treatment plant Vranishta......................................................................... 53

Original load and effluent requirements...............................................................................................54

Input data for WWTP Vranishta .................................................................................... 78

Water quantities ...................................................................................................................................78

LONG TERM INVESTMENT NEEDS IN THE SECTOR ............................................... 91

Regulatory framework for Water Management............................................................. 91

Long Term Investment Programme ..............................................................................100

Investment programme waste water collection and treatment........................................................ 100

ANALYSIS OF OPTIONS FOR SHORT TERM INVESTMENT PROGRAMME ............. 102

Collector Radozhda Kalishta (extension of West Collector).........................................102

Basis for calculations, design elements and facilities......................................................................... 108

PROCUREMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ................................................. 131

Contract types .................................................................................................................................... 131

LIST OF ANNEXES ............................................................................................. 135

This project is funded by

SUMMARY OF THE FEASIBILITY STUDY

Scope of the Project

According to the ToR, scope of the project is:

Implementation of the Project by EU Funds

The Contracting Authority for this project is:

This project is funded by

This project is funded by

This project is funded by

Technical solution and final concept of the project

This project is funded by

This project is funded by

SRT sludge retention time [days]

SRT sludge stabilisation [days]

Biological reactor volume [m ]

This project is funded by

This project is funded by

Procurement plan and implementation of the project

The following procurement packages are proposed:

Package 1 as a FIDIC Red Book work contract for:

Package 2 as a FIDIC Yellow Book design and build contract for:

Package 3 as PRAG Service type of contract for: