United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory
Cincinnati OH 45268
EPA-600/2-78-182
August 1978
Research and Development
Estimating Costs
for Water Treatment
as a Function of Size
and Treatment
Plant Efficiency

-------
                RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES

Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:

      1.  Environmental Health  Effects Research
      2.  Environmental Protection Technology
      3.  Ecological Research
      4.  Environmental Monitoring
      5.  Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
      6.  Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
      7.  Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
      8.  "Special" Reports
      9.  Miscellaneous Reports

This report has been assigned  to the  ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TECH-
NOLOGY series. This series describes research performed to develop and dem-
onstrate instrumentation, equipment, and methodology to repair or prevent en-
vironmental degradation from point and non-point sources of pollution. This work
provides the new or improved technology required for the control and treatment
of pollution sources to meet environmental quality standards.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia  22161.

-------
                                      EPA-600/2-78-182
                                      August 1978
 ESTIMATING COSTS FOR WATER TREATMENT  AS  A
 FUNCTION OF SIZE AND TREATMENT  EFFICIENCY
            Robert C. Gumerman
              Russell L. Gulp
             Sigurd P. Hansen

             Culp/Wesner/Culp
           Consulting Engineers
       Santa Ana, California  92707
          Contract No. CI-76-0288
              Project Officer

              Robert M. Clark
      Water Supply Research Division
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
          Cincinnati, Ohio  45268
MUNICIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
    OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
   U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
          CINCINNATI, OHIO  45268
                                Environmental Protection Agency
                                Region V, libro^/y

-------
                                 DISCLAIMER

     This report has been reviewed by the Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publication.
Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views
and policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does mention of
trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation
for use.


-------
                                         FOREWORD

              The Environmental Protection Agency was created because of increasing
      public and government concern about the dangers of pollution to the health
      and welfare of the American people.  Noxious air, foul water, and spoiled
      land are tragic testimony to the deterioration of our natural environment.
      The complexity of that environment and the interplay between its components
      require a concentrated and integrated attack on the problem.

              Research a'nd development is that necessary first step In problem
-x^   solution and it involves defining the problem, measuring its impact, and
^    searching for solutions.  The Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
\J    develops new and improved technology and systems for the prevention, treatment
      and management of wastewater and solid and hazardous water pollutant discharges
v    from municipal and community sources, for the preservation and treatment of
l«A    public drinking water supplies, and to minimize the adverse economic, social,
•^    health, and aesthetic effects of pollution.  This publication is one of the
>-    products of that research; a most vital communications link between the
r|    researcher and the user community.
&Q
f^            The cost of water treatment processes which may be used for the
      removal of contaminants Included In the National Interim Primary Drinking
      Water Regulations Is of Interest to the EPA, State and local agencies, and
      consulting engineers.  This Interim Report presents construction and operation
      and maintenance cost curves for thirty unit processes which are especially
      applicable, either individually or in combination, for the removal of
      contaminants contained in the Regulations.


                                             Francis T. Mayo, Director
                                             Municipal Environmental Research
                                             Laboratory
                                           iii

-------
                                  ABSTRACT

     This Interim Report discusses unit processes and combinations of unit
processes which are capable of removing contaminants included in the National
Interim Primary Drinking Water Standards.  Construction and operation and
maintenance cost curves are presented for 30 unit processes which are
considered to be especially applicable to contaminant removal.  The Final
Report for this Project will include similar cost curves for over 100
unit processes.

     For each unit process, conceptual designs were formulated, and
construction costs were developed for each conceptual design.  Construction
costs were developed, and are presented in tabular format, in terms of eight
individual categories:  excavation and sitework; manufactured equipment;
concrete; steel; labor; pipe and valves; electrical and instrumentation;
and housing.  Construction costs are also plotted versus the most appropriate
design parameter for the process, such as square feet of surface area for
a filter, to allow maximum flexibility in their use.

     Operation and maintenance requirements were determined individually
for three, categories:  energy; maintenance material; and labor.  Energy
requirements were determined separately for building requirements and
process requirements.

     All costs are presented in terms of January,  1978 dollars, but a
discussion is  included on cost updating.  For construction cost, either of
the two methods may be used.  One is to use indices which are specific to
the eight categories used to determine construction cost.  The  second is use
of an all encompassing index, such as the ENR Construction Cost Index.
Operation and  maintenance requirements may be readily updated,  or adjusted   „
to local conditions, since  labor  requirements are  expressed  in  hours per
year, and electrical requirements in kilowatt-hours per year.

     This report was submitted in fulfillment of Contract No. CI-76-0288 by
Culp/Wesner/Culp under the  sponsorship of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency.  Zurheide-Herrmann, subcontractor, checked the validity of all the
construction cost data that were developed.
                                      iv

-------
                                  CONTENTS
Foreword
Abstract                                                                 ^
Figures                                                                 vii
Tables                                                                   ix

1.  Scope                                                                 i
2.  Introduction                                                          2
3.  Purpose and Objectives                                                6
4.  Treatment Techniques for Contaminant Removal                          8
5.  Cost Curves                                                          25

    a.  Construction Cost Curves                                         25
    b.  Operation and Maintenance Cost Curves                            27
    c.  Updating Costs to Time of Construction                           27

    Package Pressure Filtration Plants                                   30
    Package Gravity Filter Plants                                        38
    Package Complete Treatment Plants                                    46
    Conversion of Sand Filters to Carbon Contactor                       53
    Pressure Carbon Contactors                                           56
    Gravity Carbon Contactors - Concrete Construction                    66
    Gravity Carbon Contactors - Steel Construction                       74
    Off-Site Regional Carbon Regeneration - Handling and Transportation  83
    Multiple Hearth Granular Carbon Regeneration                         90
    Granular Activated Carbon                                            99
    Chlorine Storage and Feed Systems                                   101
    Ozone Generation Systems and Contact Chamber                        113
    On-Site Hypochlorite Generation                                     121
    Chlorine Dioxide Generating and Feed Systems                        128
    Ammonia Feed Facilities                                             134
    Alum Feed Systems                                                   145
    Polymer Feed Systems                                                155
    Rapid Mix                                                           161
    Flocculation                                                        169
    Gravity Filtration Structure                                        179
    Filtration Media                                                    187
    Hydraulic Surface Wash Systems                                      191
    Backwash Pumping Facilities                                         197
    Reverse Osmosis                                                     203
    Ion Exchange Softening                                              213
    Ion Exchange - Nitrate Removal                                      226
    Activated Alumina for Fluoride Removal                              233

-------
                              CONTENTS (Cont'd)
                                                                       Page
    Powdered Activated Carbon Feed Systems                              240
    Pressure Filtration - Flows greater than 1 mgd                      246
    Continuous Automatic Backwash Filter                                254

6.  Example Calculation - Direct Filtration Plant                       261
7.  Example Calculation — Pressure Granular Activated Carbon Plant      270

Appendix A - Geographical Influence upon Building Related Energy        274

Appendix B - Estimating Costs for Granular Activated Carbon Systems     276
             in Water Purification Based on Experience in
             Wastewater Treatment
                                     VI

-------
                                    FIGURES

 Numb er

    1    Package Pressure Filtration Plants, Construction Costs
 2 & 3   Package Pressure Filtration Plants, 0 & M Summary
    4    Package Gravity Filter Plants, Construction Cost
 5 & 6   Package Gravity Filter Plants, 0 & M Summary
    7    Package Complete Treatment Plants, Construction Cost
 8 & 9   Package Complete Treatment Plants, 0 & M Summary
   10    Conversion of Sand Filter to Carbon Contactor,
         Construction Cost
   11    Pressure Carbon Contactor, Construction Cos:t
12 & 13  Pressure Carbon Contactors, 0 & M Summary
   14    Gravity Carbon Contactors — Concrete Construction,
         Construction Cost
15 & 16  Gravity Carbon Contactors —• Concrete Construction,
         0 & M Summary
   17    Gravity Carbon Contactors - Steel Construction,
         Construction Cost
18 & 19  Gravity Carbon Contactors - Steel Construction,
         0 & M Summary
   20    Off-Site Regional Carbon Regeneration -~ Handling and
         Transportation - Construction Cost
21 & 22  Off-Site Regional Carbon Reganeratlon - Handling and
         Transportation - 0 & M Summary
   23    Multiple Hearth Granular Carbon Regeneration -                   93
         Construction Cost
24 & 25  Multiple Hearth Granular Carbon Regeneration -                  96 & 97
 & 26    0 & M Summary                                                   & 98
   27    Granular Activated Carbon, Material Cost                        100
   28    Chlorine Storage and Feed Systems, Construction Cost            106
29 & 30  Chlorine Storage and Feed Systems, Cylinder Storage,            109 & 110
         0 & M Summary
31 & 32  Chlorine Storage and Feed Systems, On-SIte Storage              111 & 113
         Tank and Rail Car Feed
   33    Ozone Generation Systems:, Construction Cost                     115
   34    Ozone Contact Basin, Construction Cost                          117
35 & 36  Ozone Generation Systems, 0 & M Summary                         119 & 120
   37    On-SIte Hypochlorlte Generation, Construction Cost              124
38 & 39  On-SIte Hypochlorlte Generation, 0 & M Summary                  126 & 127
   40    Chlorine Dioxide Generating and Feed Systems,                   130
         Construction Cost
41 & 42  Chlorine Dioxide Generating and Feed Systems,                   132 & 133
         0 & M Summary
   43    Ammonia Feed Facilities, Construction Cost                      136

                                       vii

-------
                               FIGURES (Cont'd)

Number                                                                   Page

44 & 45  Anhydrous Ammonia Feed Facilities, 0 & M Summary             140 & 141
46 & 47  Aqua Ammonia Feed Facilities, 0 & M Summary                  143 & 144
   48    Alum Feed Systems, Construction Cost                            147
49 & 50  Liquid Alum Feed Systems, 0 & M Summary                      151 & 152
51 & 52  Dry Alum Feed Systems, 0 & M Summary                         153 & 154
   53    Polymer Feed Systems, Construction Cost                         157
54 & 55  Polymer Feed Systems, 0 & M Summary                          159 & 160
   56    Rapid Mix, Construction Cost                                    165
57 & 58  Rapid Mix, 0 & M Summary                                     167 & 178
   59    Flocculation - Horizontal Paddle, Construction Cost             173
   60    Flocculation - Vertical Turbine, Construction Cost              175
61 & 62  Flocculation - 0 & M Summary                                 177 & 178
   63    Gravity Filtration Structure, Construction Cost                 182
64 & 65  Gravity Filtration Structure, 0 & M Summary                  185 & 186
   66    Filtration Media, Construction Cost                             190
   67    Hydraulic Surface Wash Systems, Construction Cost               193
68 & 69  Hydraulic Surface Wash Systems, 0 & M Summary                195 & 196
   70    Backwash Pumping Facilities, Construction Cost                  199
71 & 72  Backwash Pumping Facilities, 0 & M Summary                   201 & 202
73 & 74  Reverse Osmosis, Construction Cost                           205 & 206
75 & 76, Revers.e Osmosis, 0 & M Summary                               209 & 210
77 & 78
   79    Ion Exchange — Softening, Construction Cost                     216
80 & 81  Pressure Ion Exchange - Softening, 0 & M Summary             221 & 222
82 & 83  Gravity Ion Exchange - Softening, 0 & M Summary              224 & 225
   84    Pressure Ion Exchange - Nitrate Removal,                        229
         Construction Cost
85 & 86  Pressure Ion Exchange - Nitrate Removal, 0 & M Summary       231 & 232
   87    Activated Alumina — Fluoride Removal, Construction Cos.t         236
88 & 89  Activated Alumina - Fluoride Removal, 0 & M Summary          238 & 239
   90    Powdered Activated Carbon Feed Systems, Construction Cost       242
91 & 92  Powdered Activated Carbon Feed Systems, 0 & M Summary        244 & 245
   93    Pressure Filtration Plants, Construction Cost                   249
94 & 95  Pressure Filtration Plants, 0 & M Summary                    252 & 253
   96    Continuous Automatic Backwash Filter, Construction Cost         257
97 & 98  Continuous Automatic Backwash Filter, 0 & M Summary          259 & 260
   99    General Contractor Overhead and Fee Percentage vs.              265
         Total Construction Cost
  100    Legal, Fiscal, and Administrative Costs-Projects Less           266
         Than $1,0.00,000
  101    Legal, Fiscal,, and Administrative Costs-Projects                267
         Greater Than $1,000,000
  102    Interest During Construction-Projects Less Than $200,000        268
  103    Interest During Construction-Projects Greater Than $200,000     269
                                    viii

-------
                                    TABLES
Number                                                                   PaSe
   1    Contaminants Included in the National Interim Primary              3
        Drinking Water Regulations and the MCL's
   2    Maximum Contaminant Level for Fluoride                             3
   3    Maximum Contaminant Levels for Coliform Organisms.                  4
   4    Most Effective Treatment Methods for Contaminant Removal           9
   5    Matrix of Water Treatment Processes Useful in Meeting the     IQ, 11, 12
        National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulation
        Maximum  Contaminant Levels, with Maximum  Raw Water
        Concentrations (Ci) Shown
   6    Percent Removal of Pesticides by Water Treatment                  21
        Processes
   7    Package Pressure Filtration Plants, Conceptual Designs            31
   8    Package Pressure Filtration Plants, Construction Cost             32
   9    Package Pressure Filtration Plants, 0 & M Summary                 35
  10    Package Gravity Filter Plants, Conceptual Design                  39
  11    Package Gravity Filter Plants, Construction Cost                  40
  12    Package Gravity Filter Plants, 0 & M Summary                      43
  13    Package Complete Treatment Plants, Construction Cost              47
  14    Package Complete Treatment Plants, 0 & M Summary                  50
  15    Conversion of Sand Filter to Carbon Contactor,                    54
        Construction Cost
  16    Pressure Carbon Contactors, Conceptual Designs                    57
  17    Pressure Carbon Contactors, Construction Cost                     58
  18    Pressure Carbon Contactors, Construction Cost                     59
  19    Pressure Carbon Contactors, Construction Cost                     60
  20    Pressure Carbon Contactors, 0 & M  Summary                         63
  21    Gravity Carbon Contactors.- Concrete Construction,                67
        Construction Cost
  22    Gravity Carbon Contactors — Concrete Construction,                68
        Construction Cost
  23    Gravity Carbon Contactors - Concrete Construction                 71
        0 & M  Summary
  24    Gravity Carbon Contactors - Steel  Construction,                   75
        Conceptual Designs
  25    Gravity  Carbon Contactors - Steel  Construction,                   76
        Construction Cost
  26    Gravity  Carbon Contactors - Steel  Construction,                   77
        Construction Cost
  27    Gravity  Carbon Contactors - Steel  Construction,                   80
        0 & M  Summary
  28    Off-Site Regional  Carbon Regeneration, Handling and               84
        Transportation, Construction  Cost
  29    Off-Site Regional  Carbon Regeneration, Handling and               87
        Transportation, 0  & M  Summary
                                       IX

-------
                                TABLES (Cont'd)

Number
                                                                         Page
  30    Multiple Hearth Granular Carbon Regeneration,                     91
        Conceptual Design
  31    Multiple Hearth Granular Carbon Regeneration,                     92
        Construction Cost
  32    Multiple Hearth Granular Carbon Regeneration, 0 & M Summary       95
  33    Chlorine Storage and Feed Systems - Cylinder Storage,             103
        Construction Cost
  34    Chlorine Storage and Feed Systems - On-Site Storage Tank         104
        With Rail Delivery,  Construction Cost
  35    Chlorine Storage and Feed Systems - Direct Feed From Rail        105
        Car, Construction Cost
  36    Chlorine Feed Systems, 0 & M Summary                             108
  37    Ozone Generation Systems, Construction Cost                      114
  38    Ozone Contact Chamber, Construction Cost                          116
  39    Ozone Generation Systems, 0 & M Summary                          118
  40    On-Site Hypochlorite Generation, Construction Cost               123
  41    On-Site Hypochlorite Generation, 0 & M Summary                   125
  42    Chlorine Dioxide Generating and Feed Systems,                    129
        Construction Cost
  43    Chlorine Dioxide Generating and Feed Systems,                    131
        0 &  M Summary
  44    Anhydrous Ammonia Feed Facilities,  Construction Cost             135
  45    Aqua Ammonia Feed Facilities,  Construction Cost                  138
  46    Anhydrous Ammonia Feed Facilities,  0 & M  Summary                 139
  47    Aqua Ammonia Feed Facilities,  0 & M Summary                      142
  48    Liquid Alum Feed Systems, Construction Cost                      146
  49    Dry  Alum Feed Systems,  Construction Cost                          147
  50    Alum Feed Systems, 0 & M Summary                                 150
  51    Polymer Feed Systems,  Construction Cost                          156
  52    Polymer Feed Systems,  0 & M Summary                              158
  53    Rapid Mix G = 300, Construction Cost                             162
  54    Rapid Mix G = 600, Construction Cost                             163
  55    Rapid Mix G = 900, Construction Cost                             164
  56    Rapid Mix,  0 & M Summary                                         166
  57    Flocculation - Horizontal Paddle G = 20,  Construction  Cost        170
  58    Flocculation - Horizontal Paddle G = 50,  Construction  Cost        171
  59    Flocculation - Horizontal Paddle G = 80,  Construction  Cost        172
  60    Flocculation - Vertical Turbine, Construction Cost               174
  61    Flocculation,  0 & M  Summary                                      176
  62    Gravity Filtration Structures,  Conceptual Design                 180
  63    Gravity Filtration Structure,  Construction Cost                  181
  64    Gravity Filtration Structure,  0 & M Summary                      184
  65    Filter Media and Gravel Underdrain Characteristics               188
  66    Filtration  Media, Construction Cost                               189
  67    Hydraulic Surface Wash Systems,  Construction  Cost                 192
  68    Hydraulic Surface Wash Systems,  0 &  M Summary                    194
                                      x

-------
                                TABLES (Cont'-d)

Number                                                                   Page

  69    Backwash Pumping Facilities, Construction Cost                   198
  70    Backwash Pumping Facilities, 0 & M Summary                       200
  71    Reverse Osmosis, Construction Cost                               204
  72    Reverse Osmosis, 0 & M Summary                                   208
  73    Pressure Ion Exchange Softening, Conceptual Design               214
  74    Pressure Ion Exchange Softening, .Construction Cost               215
  75    Gravity Ion Exchange Softening, Conceptual Design                218
  76    Gravity Ion Exchange Softening, Construction Cost                219
  77    Pressure Ion Exchange Softening, 0 & M Summary                   220
  78    Gravity Ion Exchange Softening, 0 & M Summary                    223
  79    Pressure Ion Exchange - Nitrate Removal, Conceptual Design       227
  80    Pressure Ion Exchange - Nitrate Removal, Construction Cost       228
  81    Pressure Ion Exchange - Nitrate Removal, 0 & M Summary           230
  82    Activated Alumina for Fluoride Removal, Conceptual Design        234
  83    Activated Alumina for Fluoride Removal, Construction Cost        235
  84    Activated Alumina for Fluoride Removal, 0 & M Summary            237
  85    Powdered Activated Carbon Feed Systems, Construction Cost        241
  86    Powdered Activated Carbon Feed Systems, 0 & M Summary            243
  87    Pressure Filtration Plants, Conceptual Design                    247
  88    Pressure Filtration Plants, Construction Cost                    248
  89    Pressure Filtration Plants, 0 & M Summary                        251
  90    Continuous Automatic Backwash Filter, Conceptual Design          255
  91    Continuous Automatic Backwash Filter, Construction Cost          256
  92    Continuous Automatic Backwash Filter, 0 & M Summary              258
  93    Design Criteria - 10 mgd Direct Filtration Plant                 261
  94    Direct Filtration Cost Calculation                               262
  95    Annual Cost for Direct Filtration Example                        264
  96    Design Criteria - 15 mgd Pressure Granular Activated             270
        Carbon Plant
  97    Pressure Granular Activated Carbon Cost Calculation              262
  98    Annual Cost for Pressure Granular Activated Carbon Example       273
                                      XI

-------
I.  SCOPE

     This report is an Interim Report for the Project entitled,  "Estimating
Costs for Water Treatment as a Function of Size and Treatment Efficiency".
This Interim Report describes the methods used to develop cost curves,
describes methods of updating the cost curves, and presents construction
and operation and maintenance curves: for 30 unit processes: useful for
removal of contaminants which are included in the National Interim Primary
Drinking Water Regulations.  The Final Report will include cost  curves for
approximately 100 unit processes.

-------
II.  INTRODUCTION

     The Safe Drinking Water Act (PL 93-523)  enacted on December 16,  1974
empowered the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
to control the quality of the drinking water  in public water systems  by regu-
lation and other means.  The Act specified a  three stage mechanism for the
establishment of comprehensive regulations for drinking water quality.

     1.  Promulgation of National Interim Primary Drinking Water
         Regulations.
     2.  A study to be conducted by the National Academy of Sciences
         (NAS) within two years of enactment  on the human health effects
         of exposure to contaminants In drinking water.
     3.  Promulgation of Revised National Primary Drinking Water
         Regulations based upon the NAS report.

     National Interim Primary Drinking Water  Regulations were promulgated
on December 24, 1975 and July 9, 1976, and became effective on June 24, 1977.
These Regulations were based on the Public Health Service Drinking Water
Standards of 1962, as revised by the EPA Advisory Committee on the Revisions
and Application of the Drinking Water Standards, and are intended to  protect
health to the maximum extent feasible using treatment methods which are
generally available and take cost Into consideration.  The National Interim
Primary Drinking Water Regulations contain maximum contaminant levels (MCL)
and monitoring requirements for 10 inorganic  chemicals, 6 organic pesticides,
two categories of radionuclides, coliform organisms and turbidity.  An Amend-
ment to the National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations was proposed
on February 9, 1978.  This amendment would establish regulations for total
trihalomethanes and establish treatment technique requirements for the control
of synthetic organic chemicals for community  water systems serving a population
of more than 75,000.  Secondary Drinking Water Regulations were proposed
by EPA on March 31, 1977.

     A listing of the contaminants presently  included in the National Interim
Primary Drinking Water Standards,, along with, the MCL for each contaminant,
is shown In Tables 1 and 2, with the exception of coliform organisms.  The
MCL for coliform organisms is dependent upon whether the membrane filter
technique or the fermentation tube technique  is utilized, and the sample
size if the latter is utilized.  Table 3 presents the MCL for coliform
organisms.

     The Primary Regulations are devoted to contaminants affecting the health
of consumers, while secondary regulations include those contaminants which
primarily deal with aesthetic qualities of drinking water.  The Interim
Primary Regulations are applicable to all public water systems and are

-------
                                   TABLE 1
                        CONTAMINANTS INCLUDED IN THE
                      NATIONAL INTERIM PRIMARY DRINKING

                       WATER REGULATION AND THE MCL'S

Contaminant                                           MCL
Arsenic                                               0.05  mg/1
Barium                                                1.0   mg/1
Cadmium                                               0.01  mg/1
Chromium                                              0.05  mg/1
Lead                                                  0.05  mg/1
Mercury                                               0.002 mg/1
Nitrate (as N)                                       10.0   mg/1
Selenium                                              0.01  mg/1
Silver                                                0.05  mg/1
Endrin                                                0.002 mg/1
Lindane                                               0.004 mg/1
Toxaphene                                             0.005 mg/1
2, 4-D                                                0.1   mg/1
2, 4, 5 - TP (Silvex)                                 0.01  mg/1
Methoxychlor                                          0.1   mg/1
Alpha Emitters
  Radium - 226                                        5 pCi/1
  Radium - 228                                        5 pCi/1
  Gross Alpha Activity (Excluding radon and uranium) 15 pCi/1
Beta and Photon Emitters*
  Tritium                                            20 pCi/1
  Strontium                                           8 pCi/1
Turbidity                                             1 turbidity unit**

*Based upon a water intake of 2 liters/day.  If gross beta particle activity
exceeds 50 pCi/1, other nucleides should be identified and quantified on the
basis of 2 liters/day intake.

**0ne turbidity unit based on a monthly average.  Up to 5 turbidity units may
be allowed for the monthly average if it can be demonstrated that no interference
occurs with disinfection or microbiological determinations.


                                   TABLE 2
                   MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVEL FOR FLUORIDE

                     Temperature
                 OF                 PC	      MCL, mg/1
          53.7. and below       12.0 and below         2.4
          53.8 to 58.3         12.1 to 14.6           2.2
          58-.4 to 63.8         14.7 to 17.6           2.0
          63.9 to 70.6         17.7 to 21.4           1.8
          70.7 to 79.2         21.5 to 26.2           1.6
          79.2 to 90.5         26.3 to 32.5           1.4

-------
                                   TABLE 3

                         MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVELS
                           FOR COLIFORM ORGANISMS

  I.  When the membrane filter technique is used the number of coliform
      bacteria shall not exceed any of the following:

      A.  One per 100 milliliters as the arithmetic mean of all samples
          examined per month;
      B.  Four per 100 milliliters in more than one sample when less than
          20 are examined per month; or
      C.  Four per 100 milliliters in more than five percent of the samples
          when 20 or  more are examined per month.

 II.  When the fermentation tube method and 10 milliliter standard portions
      are used, coliform bacteria shall not be present in any of the following:

      A.  More than 10 percent of the portions in any month;
      B.  Three or more portions in more than one sample when less than 20
          samples are examined per month;  or
      C.  Three or more portions in more than five  percent of the samples
          when 20 or  more samples are examined per month.

III.  When the fermentation tube method and 100 milliliter standard portions
      are used, coliform bacteria shall not be present in any of the following:

      A.  More than 60 percent of the portions in any month;
      B.  Five portions in more than one sample when less than five samples
          are examined per month; or
      C.  Five portions in more than 20 percent of  the samples when five
          or more samples are examined per month.

-------
enforceable by EPA or the States which have accepted primacy.   Secondary
regulations are not Federally enforceable and are intended as  guidelines
for the States.

     The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) Summary Report was delivered
to Congress on May 26, 1977, and, the full report, "Drinking Water and  Health",
was delivered on June 20, 1977.  The NAS Summary Report was also published
in the Federal Register, Monday, July 11, 1977.   Based on the  completed
National Academy of Sciences Report and the findings of the Administrator,
EPA will publish:

     1.  Recommended MCL's (health goals) for substances in drinking water
         which may have adverse effects on humans.  These recommended levels
         will be selected so that no known or anticipated adverse effects
         would occur, allowing an adequate margin of-safety.  A list of
         contaminants which may have adverse effects, but which cannot  be
         accurately measured in water, will also be published.
     2.  Revised National Primary Drinking Water Regulations.   These will
         specify MCL's or require the use of treatment techniques.  MCL's
         will be as close to the recommended levels for each contaminant
         as is feasible.  Required treatment techniques for those substances
         which cannot be measured, will reduce their concentrations to a
         level as  close to the recommended level as is feasible.  Feasibility
         is defined in the Act as use of the best technology,  treatment
         techniques and other means which  the Administrator finds are
         generally available (taking costs into  consideration).

     On February 9,  1978, the  EPA proposed to amend the National Interim
Primary Drinking Water Regulations by adding regulations  for organic chemical
contaminants  in drinking water.  The proposed amendment consisted of two
parts:

     1.  A Maximum Contaminant Level  (MCL) of 0.10 mg/1  (100 parts per
         billion)  for total  trihalomethanes  (TTHM'S),  including  chloroform.
     2.  A treatment  technique requiring  the use of granular activated
         carbon  for  the  control  of  synthetic organic  chemicals.   Three
         criteria  which  the  granular  activated  carbon must achieve are:
         an effluent  limitation of  0.5  yg/1  for  low molecular weight
         halogenated organics  (excluding trihalomethanes); a  limit of
         0.5  mg/1  for effluent total  organic  carbon concentration when
         fresh, activated carbon is  used;  and  the removal  of at  least 50
         percent  of  influent total  organic carbon when fresh  activated
         carbon is used.

      These proposed amendments are initially applicable to community water
 systems, serving a population of more than 75,000.

-------
 III.  PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES

      The principal purpose of this Project is to delineate water treatment
 processes, or process combinations, which can remove one or more of the
 contaminants included in the Interim Regulations,  and then to  develop con-
 struction and operation and maintenance cost curves  for  the required unit
 processes   To facilitate the usefulness of the curves,  separate curves
 are being developed for flows ranging between 2,500  gpd  and 1  mgd,  and
 between 1 mgd and 200 mgd.   This  separation was made because many processes
 applicable to one range are not.applicable to the  other  range,  and  often
 when a process is applicable to both ranges,  the conceptual design  of the
 toTrea^nrTl  Slgnl!fcantly•   Additionally,  the  economy of  scale inherent
 to treatment of larger flows often causes  a dramatic change in  the  slope
 ot cost curves, commonly in the 1  to 5  mgd range.

      Other objectives of the Project include  a  literature  search  on  the
 effectiveness of  virus and  asbestos  removal by various unit  processes,  and
 the development of  cost curves  for the  identified  processes.  The Project
 will also develop a computer program which can be  used to  update  costs  and
 to determine the  cost of various combinations: of unit process.

      This  Interim Report is  being  published to present a portion of  the
 information  which has  been  developed to  the present  time.   Cost curves for
 30 unit processes are  included in  this;  Interim Report, while the Final Report
 will include cost curves  for  approximately  100 unit processes.   The decision
 ^LTPrCTnCf an  Interim  Report was made by the EPA Water Supply Research Division,
 MERL, following numerous  requests  from the EPA Regional Offices, State agencies
 and  consulting  engineers  for advance Information.  The information presented   '
 in  this Interim Report Is intended to be useful to the EPA, State and local
 agencies, consulting engineers, and local elected officials.  The cost curves
were developed  to a high level of accuracy, and are Intended to allow cost
 comparisons between alternative processes and combinations of processes.
They will also be useful for long range budget planning by utility managers.

     This Interim Report includes  a detailed discussion on a contaminant
by contaminant basis, of treatment processes: whicfi. can be usBd  for the removal
of each.  Following this discussion are the cost curves for 30 unit  processes,
along with a description of the basic conceptual designs: used to develop
the curves.

-------
     The processes were selected for inclusion in the Interim Report based
upon applicability to one or more of the following criteria:

     1.  Processes especially suitable for small water systems.
     2.  Processes which provide soluble organic removal.
     3.  Processes which provide disinfection.
     4.  Processes required for direct filtration.
     5.  Reverse osmosis and ion exchange processes.
     6.  Other curves completed to date.

The unit processes which are included in this Interim Report are:

     1.  Package Pressure 'Filtration Plants
     2.  Package Gravity Filtration Plants
     3.  Package Complete Treatment Plants
     4.  Conversion of Sand Filter to Carbon  Contactor
     5.  Pressure Carbon Contactors
     6.  Gravity Carbon Contactors - Concrete Construction
     7.  Gravity Carbon Contactors — Steel Construction
     8.  Off-Site Regional Carbon Regeneration
     9.  Multiple Hearth Granular Carbon Regeneration
    10..  Granular Activated Carbon - Material Cost
    11.  Chlorine Feed Systems
    12.  Ozone Generating Systems
    13.  On-Site Chlorine Generation Systems
    14.  Chlorine Dioxide Feed  Systems
    15.  Ammonia Feed Facilities
    16.  Alum Feed  Systems
    17.  Polymer Feed Systems
    18.  Rapid Mix
    19.  Flocculation
    20.  Gravity  Filtration  Structure
    21.  Filter Media
    22.  Hydraulic  Surface Wash
    23.  Backwash. Pumping
    24.  Reverse  Osmosis
    25.   Ion Exchange  -  Softening
    26.   Ion Exchange  - Nitrate Removal
    27.  Activated Alumina  - Fluoride Removal
     28.   Powdered Activated Carbon Feed Systems
     29.   Pressure Filtration - flows greater than 1 mgd
     30.   Continuous Automatic Backwash Filter

-------
 IV.   TREATMENT TECHNIQUES FOR CONTAMINANT  REMOVAL

 Basic Water Treatment Techniques

      A variety of  conventional water  treatment  techniques may be utilized
 for  the  removal of contaminants considered within this Report.  The techniques
 which are applicable  for  each of the  various  contaminants are listed in Table
 4, on a  contaminant by contaminant basis.  A  detailed listing of unit processes
 comprising each of these  techniques is shown  in Table 5.  Also shown in
 Table 5  are the MCL values for each contaminant as well as the highest initial
 concentration  (Ci)  of the contaminant which can be reduced to the MCL by
 a single pass  through the particular  treatment technique.  If a single pass
 will  not reduce the contaminant concentration to less than the MCL, then
 multiple steps  of  the same process, or two  or more different processes in
 series may be  utilized.   The  techniques were selected based upon their ability
 to reduce the  initial contaminant concentration from a maximum of 10 times
 the MCL,  to less than the MCL.

      As  may be  observed in Tables 4 and 5, the majority of the slightly
 soluble  inorganic  constituents may be removed by conventional coagulation,
 while highly soluble  inorganics are generally removed by reverse osmosis
 or ion exchange, and  soluble organics are  generally removed by adsorptive
 interaction with, activated carbon.   Although, these are generalizations,  it
 is important to  recognize that there is a  great degree of commonality between
 many  contaminants, and that most treatment techniques are applicable to
 the removal  of more than one contaminant.  Following is a detailed discussion
 on a  contaminant by contaminant basis, of  treatment techniques-and process
 combinations which are listed in Tables 4 and 5.

 ARSENIC - MCL =0.05 mg/1

     Arseaic in water may be in either the trivalent (+3)  form known as
 arsenite  (As02-) or the pentavalent (+5)  form known as arsenate (AsOiT3).
 Conversion of the trivalent form to the pentavalent form may be by biological
 or chemical oxidation.  Reduction of the oxidized form generally occurs  by
 anaerobic biological action.   The trivalent form is more toxic than the
 pentavalent form.  Elemental arsenic is essentially insoluble in water,  and
 organic arsenic forms are rarely found.   Arsenic contributions from natural
 sources,  generally only in certain  portions of the western United States,
 are due to leaching of native arsenic from rock formations and leaching  of
mine tailings from copper, gold,  and lead refining operations.   Industrial
 related contributors are from the afore mentioned refining operations,
 pesticides, herbicides, and insecticides, and  fossil fuel  combustion.

-------
    Contaminant
Arsenic:
Barium:

Cadmium:


Chromium:



Coliform Organisms:

Fluoride:

Lead:


Manganese:


Mercury:


Nitrate:

Organic  Contaminants;

Radium:

Selenium:



 Silver:


 Sodium:

 Sulfate:

 Turbidity:
             TABLE 4
MOST EFFECTIVE TREATMENT METHODS
     FOR CONTAMINANT REMOVAL

        Most Effective Treatment Methods

 As+5 - Ferric sulfate coagulation,  pH 6-8;  Alum
 coagulation, pH 6-7;  Excess lime softening.
 As+3 - Ferric sulfate coagulation,  pH 6-8;  Alum
 coagulation, pH 6-7;  Excess lime softening.
 NOTE:  Oxidation required before treatment for As+

 Lime softening, pH 10-11; Ion exchange softening.

 Ferric sulfate coagulation, above pH 8;  Lime softening;
 Excess lime softening.

 Cr+3 - Ferric sulfate coagulation,  pH 6-9;  Alum
 coagulation, pH 7-9;  Excess lime softening.
 Cr+° - Ferrous sulfate coagulation, pH 7-9.5.

 Disinfection; Coagulation plus disinfection.

 Ion exchange with activated alumina; Lime softening.

 Ferric sulfate coagulation, pH 6-9; Alum coagulation,
 pH 6-9; Lime softening; Excess lime softening.

 Inorganic -  Sedimentation/Filtration.
 Organic - Alum coagulation, pH 9-9.6.

 Inorganic - Ferric sulfate coagulation, pH  7-8.
 Organic - Granular Activated Carbon.

 Ion  exchange.

 Powdered activated carbon; granular activated  carbon.

 Lime softening.

 Se+'t  - Ferric  sulfate coagulation, pH 6-7;  Ion exchange;
 Reverse osmosis.
 Se+6  - Ion exchange;  Reverse osmosis.

 Ferric sulfate coagulation, pH 7-9; Alum coagulation,
 pH  6-8; Lime softening;  Excess lime  softening.

 Ion exchange;  Reverse osmosis.

 Ion exchange;  Reverse osmosis.

 Alum coagulation, filtration.

                   9

-------
TABLE  5
MATRIX OF WATER TREATMENT PROCESSES USEFUL IN MEETING THE NATIONAL  INTERIM PRIMARY DRINKING  WATER REGULATION
MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVELS, WITH  MAXIMUM RAW WATER CONCENTRATIONS (Ci) SHOWN
1 Item No
IA
IB
1C

HA

DB



THAI

|_1DA2

me
EVA

BTB
BC
YA

TB
vc
7IA1


WAI
WA3
HB

zic
ZDA
Substance
To Be Removed
Low Coliform Waters
Mod. Coliform Wafers
High Coliform Waters
Excessively High
Low Turbidity Waters
(Ci S 1 to 25 To)
Mod. Turbidity Waters
_{C! = 25 to 1,000 Tu)
High Turbidity Waters
{Ci = 1,000 Tu)
Arsenic, pentavolent
( Ci = 1.0 mg/l)
As 5(Ci = 1.0ma/l)
,P o n
Arsenic, trivalent
(Ci = 1.0 mg/l)
Arsenic, trivalent
Arsenic, trivalent

Barium
Barium
Cadmium

Cadmium (CirO.l ma/I)
Cadmium (CirO.l mg/l)
Cadmium di as a






r X
Ferrous
Sulfate



3proved b;







1
Removed ceincldentally in processes sho




(Ci limited by




Removed coinc






aw-fi




dental




shed wo



X
y in pro
K.5-9.3
pH
6.7-8.51




ter blend i




esses sho



Removed eoincidentally In processes sh













CiiS
mg/l

Lime
Softening



Sto*e








wn under
mg/t

CislO.O
mg/l
g, so as n

Cl = 0i
mg/l

wn under



wn under
Ci:2.5
mo/I


Clsl.7
mg/l
pr
Adiu
Lower










<7.5

ms 1C,


X

ot to ex

X


ems 1C,



tmcnt
Raise












HB, or
>10.8

10-11

eed ba

8.5-11

8.0
UB. or



ems 1C, HB, or
X t>106
(X or X)

X

8.5-
11.3
Mixing


X



X

X

X

Flocculation


X



X

X

X

K atpH<7.5 and with


X

urn MCL

X

X
HC at pr
X
X

x

X



X

X
= 8 for ferric
X
X

Sedimentation


X



X

X

X

alum or ferric s
X

X



X

X
X
sulfate and 9,0
X
X

DC at pH 6.7 to 8. 5 for alum and pH
X
X

X
X
X

X
X
X

X


X
X





X

X

ilfote dosac
X

X



X

X
x
or alum
X
X

Post
CI -1-100
MPN/lOOm
Ci=< 5,000
MPN/lOOm
Ci=<20,000
MPN/lOOm
Ci = >20,OOC
MPN/lOOml







e =20-30 mo
X

X



X

X
X ' —
X
X

6.5 to 9.3 for ferric sulfat
X
X

X
X
X

X
a,














X
















Oxldatio
Ozone














or X
















n
KMn04














>r X -
















Reverse
Osmosis














fallowed
IIIA1, III
CiSO.33
mg/l


Ci=45
ma/I










ma/I
Ion














Activated Carbon














>y treatment shown unde
42, or IIIA3 above
Act. Alumina
or bone cha


Softening











































r Items




j












-------
TABLE 5 (CONT'D)

MATRIX OF WATER TREATMENT PROCESSES USEFUL IN MEETING THE NATIONAL INTERIM PRIMARY DRINKING WATER REGULATION
MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVELS, WITH  MAXIMUM RAW WATER  CONCENTRATIONS (Ci) SHOWN

VITA
SUB
1QDA1
YHIA2
•ZnTA2

TCHA3
nnA4

nnBi

THTB3

QA
3TAI
3A2

XA2

XB
XB
XTA
EC
EC
ED
EDA


EDB
XUC
nn
DSA
ZDTB
13
Substance
Leod
Lead
norganic Mercury
( Ci S 0. 1 m g/0 	 (
norganic Mercury
norganic Mercury

norganic Mercury
norganic Mercury

Jrgonic Mercury
(CirO.l mg/t)
Organic Mercury 	
Organic Mercury '

Nitrate
Selenium, quadravalent
S.'4

Se 4

>elenium( hexavalent
Se*6
Silver (Ci«0.17 mg/l)
Silver (Ci = 0.17 mg/l)
Silver (Ci = O.SO mg/1)
Silver
Fluoride


Fluoride (hard waters)
Fluoride (soft waters)
Organic chemicals
Asbestos
Asbestos
Virus
mg/l i Disinfection
0.05
0.05
0.002
I1.UU2
0.002

0.002
0.002

0.002
0 002
0.002 1














10 :
0.01
0.01

0.01

0.01
0.01
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
Varies
w air
Temp.
1.4 to
2.4














j
-
Pre-





















17 emoved CO








With the err
Alum




Ci 0.006
mg/l




X










( X o
ncidenta





200-50
mg/l


ployment
Coagu
Ferric
Sulfate



Ci 0.07
mg/l










:i=0.05
ma/I






r X)
ly in p*





0

a lion
Ferrous
Sulfote





























Lime
Softening






Cl= 0.007
mg/l














.n under It





X

pH
Adius
Lower






X














ems 1C,
X




X


of proper operating strategies, virus







10.7














DB, or!
9.0
11.5




10.6


-ill be




X
X

X



X



X






X
1C if fer
X




X
X






X
X

X



X



X






X
ic sulfatc or a
X




X
X


emoved by the process




X
X

X



X



X






X
urn dosage is oc
X




X
X






X
X

X



X



X






X
equate
X




X
X
er Items IB
1
Post



X
X

X



X



X






X
X




X
X
ic, HA. us.
i
0
CI,




























orHC
1
xidotion





























s shown under Items IA. IB,' 1C, ID, HA, BB, or'lTC
1































Reverse
C,= tt4
ma/I













cA°n!°r






Anion


Ci=115 N03
mg/l . Selective
J

Ci=0.33
mg/l


mg/l

Ci=0.83
mg/l






Cl:225 mg/
Ci = 0.33
mg/l


CU0.33
mo/1




Alumina
or
Bone eha



Activated




X





X



)















Carbon







mg/l



mg/l



















-------
TABLE  5  (CONT'D)

MATRIX  OF WATER  TREATMENT PROCESSES USEFUL IN MEETING THE NATIONAL INTERIM PRIMARY DRINKING WATER  REGULATION
MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVELS, WITH MAXIMUM RAW  WATER CONCENTRATIONS (Ci) SHOWN
H"
NJ

ll._ K
XVI A
XVIB
XVIC
XVI IA
XVIIB
XVIIIA
XVIIIB
XIXB
XIXC

T 	
S.kllo»c.
T. B. R.«,o..d
Radium (low hardness
waters)
Radium (medium
hardness waters)
Radium (high
hardness wafers)
Radium
Radium
Sodium
Sodium
Sulfot.
Sulfote
unoxidized
Manganese,
inorganic
Manganese, organic

MCL
1 -"
5.0 pCM
5.0 pCi.l
5.0 pCi/l
5.0 pCi/l
SOpCi/I
20
20
250
250
0.05
0.05


P..-
01. Inf. c, |on






P,«-
S>dlm.ntal!»






*l™



Xor X

Coo,.
F..MC
Sulhi.





lollon
F.froui
Svll.t.





Llm.
Soll.nln
Ci r30
pCi/1
Ci;70
pCi/l
Ci: 165
pCi/1


X


ph
Adlv
Lo..,









.0-9.6






X






X





X
X





X
X


Pml



X





X
X

Oildotlc





n



X
X

R*v«rB«
Oimoi •

100 pCT/
Ci=285
mg/l
Cir3570
mg/l


Ion
E .change
100 pCi/1
Ci=133
mg/l
Ci-8300
mo/I
X

Acll«t,d Corb.n







-------
Pentavalent (+5) Arsenic - Initial concentration to 1.0 mg/1

     Pentavalent arsenic can be treated by pH adjustment (if required)  to
pH 6 - 7 or pH 6 - 8 for alum or ferric sulfate addition,  respectively.
To meet the MCL of 0.05 mg/li coagulant dosages up to 20 - 30 mg/1 may  be
required, followed by rapid mixing, 30 minutes of flocculation,  settling
at a basin overflow rate of 24,450 Lpd/sq.M (600 gpd/sf) and filtration at
81.4 to 203.4 Lpd/sq.M (2 to 5 gpm/sf).

     Pentavalent arsenic may also be removed coincidently during the  treatment
of moderate to high coliform concentrations, or high turbidity,  by chemical
clarification, provided that proper attention is given to pH and alum or
ferric sulfate dosage (20 to 30 mg/1).

     Pentavalent arsenic can also be removed by lime softening at pH  above
10.8.  Treatment would consist of lime addition and mixing,  30 minutes  of
flocculation, settling at a basin overflow rate of 24,450 Lpd/sq.M (600 gpd/sf)
with 2 hours detention, pH adjustment, and filtration at 81.4 to 203.4  Lpd/sq.M
(2 to 5 gpm/sf).

Trivalent (+3) Arsenic - Initial concentration to 1.0 mg/1

     Trivalent arsenic can be oxidized to the pentavalent form by the use
of chlorine, ozone, or potassium permanganate and then removed by the treat-
ment processes previously described for the pentavalent form.

Pentavalent (+5) and Trivalent Arsenic

     Both valences of arsenic may be removed b.y ion exchange using activated
alumina or commercial anion resins.  Insufficient data is available at  the
present time to determine the maximum concentration which, can be reduced
to the 0.05 mg/1 MCL.  Arsenic may also be reduced by about  85 percent  using
reverse osmosis, making such treatment applicable to raw waters containing
up to 0.33 mg/1 of arsenic.

BARIUM - MCL =1.0 mg/1

     Barium is only present in trace amounts in most surface water and  ground
water supplies.  The most common occuring natural form of barium is barite
(barium sulfate) which has a low solubility, especially in waters containing
sulfate.  Soluble forms of barium are very toxic, whereas insoluble forms
are considered non-toxic.  Barite is used principally as a drilling mud in
oil and gas well drilling, while other barium compounds are  used in the
production of glass, paint, rubber, ceramics, and the chemical industry.

     Lime softening in the pH range 10 to 11 may be used to  treat waters
containing 1.0 to 10.9 mg/1 of barium.  Treatment consists of lime addition
and mixing, 30 minutes of flocculation, settling at a basin  overflow  rate
of 24,450 Lpd/sq.M (600 gpd/sf) with 2 hours detention, pH adjustment,  and
filtration at 81.4 to 203.4 Lpd/sq.M (2 to 5 gpm/sf).
                                     13

-------
     Ion exchange systems similar to those used for softening (calcium and
magnesium removal) may be used for barium concentrations exceeding the 1.0
mg/1 MCL.  The maximum concentration of barium in the raw: water is limited
if the usual method of blending raw and treated water is to be practiced
for hardness concentration control and stabilization of the treated water.
The amount of raw water used for blending must necessarily be controlled
to insure that the 1.0 mg/1 MCL for barium is not exceeded in the blended
mixture.

     Barium concentrations up to 45 mg/1 may be reduced below the 1.0 mg/1
MCL using reverse osmosis operating at about 98 percent removal.  Depending
upon water composition, however, there may be difficulties with membrane
fouling in treatment of high barium waters.

CADMIUM - MCL = 0.01 mg/1

     Cadmium generally does not present a water quality problem from naturally
occurring sources, although it may occur in leachates from iron and other
ore mining and smelting operations.  Carbonate and hydroxide forms found
at higher pH are relatively insoluble, while other forms are soluble.   Water
supply contamination from industries: may occur from electroplating industry
wastes, sludges resulting from paint manufacture;, battery manufacturing,
metallurgical alloying, ceramic manufacturing, and textile printing.

     Lime softening in the pH range of 8.5 to 1-1.3 may be used to treat
waters containing 0.010 to 0.50 mg/1 of cadmium.   The'amount of lime which
must be added increases, with increasing concentrations of cadmium in the
raw water.   Treatment would consist of lime addition and mixing, 30 minutes
of flocculation, settling at a basin overflow rate of 24,450 Lpd/sq.M C600
gpd/sf) with 2 hours detention, pH adjustment, and filtration at 81.4 to
203.4 Lpd/sq.M (2 to 5 gpm/sf).

     Raw water containing 0.010 to 0.10 mg/1 of cadmium can be treated by
pH adjustment to 8.0 for ferric sulfate coagulation and 9.0. for alum coagula-
tion at dosages of 30 mg/1, followed by mixing, 30 minutes; of flocculation,
settling at a basin overflow rate of 24,450 Lpd/sq.M (600 gpd/sf), and
filtration at 81.4 to 203.4 Lpd/sq.M (2 to 5 gpm/sf).

     Cadmium at initial concentrations of 0.0.10. to Q. 10 mg/1 is removed
coincidentally in the treatment of high coliform waters and moderate or high
turbidity waters, provided proper pH conditions are maintained (8.0 for
ferric sulfate and 9.0 for alum), and sufficient  coagulant is used.

CHROMIUM - MCL = 0.05 mg/1

     Chromium in water supplies may be present in either the trivalent (+3)
form or the hexavalent (+6) form.  Unless pH is very low, the hexavalent
form predominates.  The hexavalent form is the more toxic form, and is also
the more difficult form to remove.  Most forms of hexavalent chromium treat'
ment incorporate reduction of hexavalent chromium to trivalent chromium
prior to removal.
                                     14

-------
     Chromium occurs naturally as chromite (CrOs)  or chrome iron ore
     C^Os).  The major source of chromium in water supplies is not from
natural sources, but rather from industrial operations.   Operations involving
metal plating, alloy preparation, tanning, wood preservation, corrosion
inhibition, and pigments for inks, dyes and paints are all potential sources.

Trivalent (+3) Chromium

     Trivalent chromium can be reduced to the MCL of 0.05 mg/1 by coagulation:
(a) with 30 mg/1 ferric sulfate in the pH range of 6.5 to 9.3 and raw water
concentrations up to 2.5 mg/1, or (b)  with 30 mg/1 of alum in the pH range
of 6.7 to 8.5 and raw water concentrations up to 0.5 mg/1.  The chemical
treatment should be followed by mixing, 30 minutes flocculation, settling
at basin overflow rates of 24,450 Lpd/sq.M (600 gpd/sf),  and filtration at
81.4 to 203.4 Lpd/sq.M (2 to 5 gpm/sf).  This type of treatment is similar
to the treatment required for high coliform and moderate  or high turbidity,
and trivalent chromium is removed along with these contaminants, provided
proper attention is given to pH and coagulant dose.

     Waters containing up to 2.5 mg/1 of trivalent chromium can be treated
by lime softening at pH >10.6.  Treatment would include lime addition and
mixing, 30 minutes of flocculation, settling at a basin overflow rate of
24,450 Lpd/sq.M with 2 hours detention, pH adjustment, and filtration at
81.4 to 203.4 Lpd/sq.M (2 to 5 gpm/sf).

     Pre-oxidation of raw water containing trivalent chromium is normally
not practiced, since the trivalent form would be converted to hexavalent
chromium, making removal more difficult.

Hexavalent  (+6) Chromium

     Raw water concentrations up to 5.0 mg/1 of hexavalent chromium can be
treated using a special ferrous sulfate coagulation process in which pH
adjustment  to the 6.5 to 9.3 range is made several minutes after coagulation.
Chemical treatment should be followed by mixing, 30 minutes flocculation,
settling at b.asin overflow rates of 24,450 Lpd/s:q.M (600 gpd/sf), and
filtration  at 81.4 to 203.4 Lpd/sq.M (2 to 5 gpm/sf).  Pre-chlorination will
Interfere with this process, as the ferrous ion is oxidized by chlorine and
is then unavailable for reduction of hexavalent chromium.  Pre-chlorination
would necessitate a higher ferrous sulfate dose.

Trivalent (+3) and Hexavalent (+6) Chromium

     Chromium concentrations, trivalent or hexavalent, up to 0.4 mg/1 can
b.e reduced  to the 0.05 mg/1 MCL by reverse osmosis-.

COLIFORM BACTERIA

     Coliform bacteria are not pathogens:, but are indicators of the presence
of contamination from the intestinal tract of humans and warm blooded animals.
The advantage of measuring for coliform organisms is the testing procedures
are much simpler and more sensitive than for pathogenic bacteria and virus.


                                      15

-------
The disadvantage of coliform organisms as an indicator is that they may
survive longer than some pathogenic organisms and shorter than others.

Low Coliform Waters

     Underground waters (only) containing more than one but less than 100
coliform bacteria (M.P.N.) per 100 ml as measured by the monthly arithmetic
mean, and having a standard plate count limit of 500 organisms per ml, a
fecal coliform density of less than 20 per 100 ml as measured by a monthly
arithmetic mean, can b.e treated using only continuous disinfection.  Thirty
minutes contact should be utilized prior to discharge of the water into the
distribution system.

Moderate Coliform Waters

     Water containing not more than 5,000 coliform bacteria (M.P.N.) per
100 ml, should be treated by pre-disinfection with 30 minutes contact, coagu-
lation (with or without settling), filtration at 41.4 to 203.5 Lpm/sq.M
(2 to 5 gpm/sf), and continuous post-disinfection with 30 minutes, or more
contact prior to use.

Excessively High, Coliform Waters.

     Water containing more than 20,000 coliform bacteria per 100 ml or having
a fecal coliform count exceeding 2,000 per 100 ml monthly geometric mean
are considered undesirable as a source of supply.  In the absence of an
adequate supply of better bacteriological quality, special methods of treat-
ment may b.e considered.  Proposed special methods of treatment for highly
polluted waters should be approved by the State, prior to the preparation
of plans.

FLUORIDE - MCL = 1.4 to 2.4, depending upon average annual air temperature

     Fluoride can be contributed to water from fluoride bearing minerals,
although the majority of naturally occuring fluoride compounds are only
moderately soluble.   Generally, natural sources do not cause excessively
high concentrations, although well water supplies in several states do have
naturally high concentrations.  There are also soluble fluorides from indus-
trial wastewaters in some supply sources.  Industries which may discharge
significant amounts  of fluoride include glass production, fertilizer manufac-
turing, and aluminum processing.

     Water containing excessive fluoride ion may be treated by ion exchange
methods using either activated alumina or bone char.  Removals by both are
pH dependent, with the best removals occuring between pH 5.5 and 7.0.
Exchange capacity varies widely among water supplies, and laboratory testing
should b.e utilized to develop design criteria.

     Fluoride may also be removed from hard waters- by lime softening, followed
by filtration.  The amount of the fluoride reduction accomplished by lime
softening is dependent upon both the initial fluoride concentration and the
                                     16

-------
amount of magnesium removed in the softening process,.   The fluoride reduction
is generally proportional to the square root of the magnesium removed.

     For very soft waters (only), flocculation with massive alum dosages
of 200 to 500 mg/1 is an effective means of fluoride reduction when followed
by clarification and filtration as described for moderate turbidity waters.

LEAD - MCL =0.05 mg/1

     Lead in water supplies may result from naturally occuring lead sulfide
and lead oxide mineral compounds.  The lead solubility may approach 0.4 to
0.8 mg/1, although the solubility limit is lower for alkaline and mineralized
sources.  Major industrial sources of lead include storage battery manufacture,
and gasoline additives, although photographic materials, explosives and lead
mining and smelting may also contribute significant amounts.

     Naturally occurring carbonates and hydroxides of lead are very insoluble,
and treatment of a somewhat turbid surface water by plain sedimentation will
reduce 0.5 mg/1 of lead to below the 0.05 mg/1 MCL.

     Coincidental reduction of 2.5 mg to the MCL will also occur during lime
soda softening in the pH range of 8.5 to 11.3.  Also, initial concentrations
up to 1.7 mg/1 are reduced to the MCL coincidently, during the treatment
of high coliform waters and moderate or high turbidity waters with alum and
ferric sulfate.

     Reverse osmosis may he used to remove soluble lead concentrations  up
to 0.4 mg/1.  Precautions are necessary, however, to prevent membrane fouling
by insoluble lead carbonates and lead hydroxides.

MANGANESE - Secondary Drinking Water Regulation MCL =0.05 mg/1

     Manganese solution from mineral forms: is primarily the result of bacterial
action or complexation by organic material.  Reduced forms of manganese (+2)
in water are soluble, while oxidized forms (+4) are insoluble.  Acid mine
drainage is a principal natural source of manganese in water supplies.
Industrial contributions of manganese generally are not significant.

     Manganese is included in the Secondary Drinking Water Regulations, and
not the Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations..  There is no presently
known health- danger from manganese, in the oxidized, unoxidized, or organic
states, in water supplies.  The principal problems, with manganese are brown-
black stains which. It may impart on laundered goods, and taste which it may
impart to drinking water.

Unoxidized and Oxidized Inorganic Hanganesre

     Manganese, in the absence of iron and organic matter can be oxidized
at low pH (7.2 to 8.0) values with chlorine., potassium, permanganate, or
previously precipitated manganese.  An alternative approach, would Be aeration
at pH. 9.4 to 9.6, to oxidize all manganese.  The insoluble oxidized form
may then b,e. removed by settling and filtration.


                                      17

-------
Organic Manganese

     Manganese present in water as a complex of organic matter or iron must
be treated with lime to pH values of 9.0 to 9.6 before oxidation of manganese
will occur.  Ferric sulfate coagulation is also especially suitable for waters
containing organic manganese.

     With these modifications and with oxidation by chlorine or potassium
permanganate, manganese, complexed with organic matter or iron can be removed
by the conventional treatment processes of mixing,  flocculation,, settling
and filtration.

MERCURY - MCL = 0.002 mg/1

     Organic forms of mercury are significantly more toxic than inorganic
forms, and can result from utilization of inorganic forms by bacteria and
higher level organisms.  Elemental mercury is soluble in aerobic situations,
and may form mercuric oxide salts.  Generally, such mercuric oxide salts
adsorb on sediment and are naturally removed by sedimentation.  Mercury in
water supplies from natural sources is rare.  Industrial sources of mercury
include electrical and electronics industries, pulp and paper production,
Pharmaceuticals, paint manufacture, and agricultural herbicides and fungicides,

Inorganic Mercury

     Chemical coagulation, at pH = 8 with ferric sulfate will treat raw
waters containing up to 0.07 mg/1 inorganic mercury, and at pH = 7 alum will
treat raw waters containing up to 0.006 mg/1 inorganic mercury, when followed
by the clarification treatment described for moderate turbidity waters.
Powdered activated carbon may be used in conjunction with coagulation to
increase removals above those obtained by coagulation alone, although dosages
significantly above those used for taste and odor control are necessary to
provide increased removal.

     Lime softening in the pH range of 10.7 to 11.4, followed by filtration
can reduce concentrations up to 0.007 mg/1 to the MCL.

     Cation and anion exchange resins, operated in series can reduce inorganic
mercury from concentrations up to 0.1 mg/1, to the MCL of 0.002 mg/1.
Experiments on such removal are only preliminary, and the removal mechanism
is uncertain.

     Granular activated carbon at a contact time of only 3.5 minutes can
remove 80 percent of the applied inorganic mercury, making this process
applicable for treatment of raw water concentrations up to 0.01 mg/1.

Organic Mercury

     Powdered activated carbon can b.e used in the clarification process.
described for moderate turbidity waters to remove organic mercury.  About
1 milligram per liter of powdered activated carbon is needed for each. 0.1
microgram per liter or organic mercury to be removed down to the MCL of
0.002 mg/1.
                                      18

-------
     Similarly to inorganic mercury, granular activated carB.on at a contact
time of only 3.5 minutes can be used to remove 80 percent of the organic
mercury applied, making the process applicable for raw water concentrations
up to 0.01 mg/1.

     Cation and anion exchange resins operated in series can reduce organic
mercury from concentrations up to 0.1 mg/1 to the 0.002 mg/1 MCL.


NITRATE - MCL = 45 mg/1 as.N03~

     Naturally occurring high nitrate concentrations: are very rare.  High
nitrate concentrations in ground water or surface water are generally the
result of direct or indirect contamination by was±ewater, animal excrement,
or by agricultural fertilization.  Industrial discharges: from fertilizer
manufacturing also represent a potential source of contamination.  Nitrate
is a relatively stable form of nitrogen, but nitrate may be produced by the
biological oxidation of ammonia.

     Anion ion exchange resins: can be used to reduce nitrates from as high
as 221 mg/1 to as low as 2.2 mg/1 (as N03~).  Since the MCL is 45 mg/1 (as
N03~), the use of blending can result in a considerable savings in capacity
and operational cost.

     Reverse osmosis can achieve up to 85 percent removal of nitrate.  Thus,
concentrations as high as 300 mg/1 (as: NOs"). could be reduced to the MCL,
or concentrations less than 300 mg/1 could be treated to below the MCL and
utilized for blending purposes.
ORGANIC CONTAMINANTS

     The six organic pesticides presently included in the Interim Primary
Drinking Water Standards are not naturally occurring.  Four of these organics
(endrin, lindane, toxaphene, methoxychlorj are chlorinated hydrocarbon
insecticides.  These synthetic organic insecticides- may be contributed to
water supplies by industrial discharge during manufacture or runoff following
use.  The remaining two organics (2,4-D and 2,4,5-TP (Silvex)) are chloro-
phenoxy herbicides, which are generally used for the control of aquatic
vegetation.  Contamination of water supplies: may occur by manufacturing
operation and/or use.

     Proposed as an amendment to the Primary Standards are total trihalo—
methanes CTTHM's).  Trihalomethanes (chloroform, bromodichloromethane,
dibromochloromethane, and tribromomethane) are not naturally occurring, but
are  reaction by-products: resulting from chlorinatlon of water containing
naturally occurring humic and fulvic compounds.  Bromide and iodide ions
may  also be reactants: in the process.  The criteria for volatile halogenated
compounds in the proposed amendment was established as a measure of analysis
for  a broad range of organic chemicals- which are difficult to measure
individually and/or are unknown.
                                      19

-------
     For the six organic pesticides of concern, information on removal is
only available for four:  endrin - MCL =0.0002 mg/1; lindane - MCL = 0.004
mg/1; toxaphene - MCL = 0.005 mg/1; and 2,4-D - MCL =0.1 mg/1.  No informa-
tion is available for methoxychlor - MCL =0.1 mg/1; or 2,4,5-TP (Silvex) -
MCL = 0.01 mg/1.  In general, granular activated carbon or powdered activated
carbon used in conjunction with coagulation and filtration, are the only
treatment methods capable of significant removals.  Other treatment methods
such as coagulation/filtration, chlorination, ozonation, and addition of
potassium permanganate remove, in general, less than 10 percent of the
organics.  The percentage removals which, various, treatment methods achieve,
are shown in Table 6.  Where blanks occur in this table, information is not
presently available.

     For total trihalomethanes, removal of the pre-cursor organic compounds
b.y use of granular activated carbon has been determined to he the best treat-
ment technique.  Other techniques which will partially remove some of the
naturally occurring pre-cursors are precipitation, oxidation, aeration, and
adsorption on synthetic resins.

RADIUM - MCL = 5 pCi./l

     Radium may occur naturally in water either as radium - 226 or radium -
228, and is generally found in ground water rather than surface water.  Radium
exists in radium-bearing rock strata, particularly in Iowa and Illinois,
and in phosphate-rock deposits, found in parts of Florida.   Leaching from
such deposits has resulted in high ground water concentrations.

     The lime-soda softening process removes radium as well as hardness.
Operationally, the total hardness removal necessary is equal to the fraction
of radium removed, raised to the 2.86 power.  In equation form:
     Hardness Removal Fraction = (Radium Removal Fraction)2-86
                           or       	________™
     Radium Removal Fraction =\-8yHardnes:s Removal Fraction
     Therefore, to reduce 25 pCi/1 to the 5 pCi/1 MCL, requires: a radium
removal fraction of 0.82-85 = 0.528, meaning that 52.8 percent of the hardness
must be removed.  If desired hardness, levels: are met by blending, considera-
tion must also be given to the influence of this; blending on the radium
concentration in the final blend.  In situations: with a relatively low hard-
ness and high radium concentration, radium may control the blending ratio.
Radium removal increases as pH increases.

     Ion exchange and reverse osmosis are each, capable of removing up to
95 percent of the input radium.  Therefore the limiting concentration which
can be treated to meet the MCL is 100 pCi./l.

SELENIUM - MCL = 0.01 mg/1

     Selenium is chemically similar to sulfur, and commonly occurs, with
sulfur in mineral veins.  Selenium in water may be in either the quadravalent
(+4) form known as selenite (Se03~2) or the hexavalent (+6) form known as

                                      20

-------
                                                     TABLE 6

                                          PERCENT REMOVAL OF PESTICIDES

                                          BY WATER TREATMENT PROCESSES
                                                                                         2,4-D
      Treatment                                                        Sodium    Isopropyl    Butyl   Isooctyl
       Method                         Endrin   Lindane    Toxaphene     Salt       ester      ester    ester

      Coagulation,  filtration           35       <10         <10        <10        <10        <10       <10
      Coagulation,  filtration and
        adsorption  with:
          Powdered  activated carbon, mg/1
            5-9                         85        30          93
           10-19                        80        55                                90         90        90
           20-29                        94      80-90
           30- 9                                                         90
           40-49                                                                    97         97
M          50-59                        98                                                               97
           70-79                                  99                                98
      Granular activated  carbon, 5-7 -
        minute full bed contact time   >99       >99
      Oxidation:
        Chlorine, mg/1
            5                         <10       <10
            8                                   <10
            50                                   <10

        Ozone, mg/1
            11                                   <10
            38                                    55
        Potassium permanganate, mg/1
            10                                   < 10                    < 10        < 10        < 10       <10
            40                                   <10


      Note:  Treatment information not available for methoxychlor and 2,4,5-TP (Silvex)

-------
selenate (SeO^"2),.   The quadravalent form may be found in ground water,  while
the hexavalent form may occur in either ground water or surface water.
Selenium contributions from natural sources are from selenium containing
soils and runoff from these soils.   Industrial related contributions may
result from paint,  rubber, dye, insecticide, glass, and electronic manufacturing.

Quadravalent (+4) Selenium

     Adjustment of  pH to 6.0 and coagulation with 30 mg/1 ferric sulfate
will treat raw waters containing up to 0.05 mg/1 of Se+I+ to meet the 0.01
mg/1 MCL, when followed by the clarification treatment described for moderate
turbidity waters.

     Raw waters containing up to 0.33 mg/1 of Se+k can be treated by ion
exchange or reverse osmosis.  Lower concentrations may be treated to less
than the MCL .and then be utilized for blending purposes.

Hexavalent (+6) Selenium

     Raw waters containing up to 0.33 mg/1 of Se+6 can be treated by ion
exchange or reverse osmosis.  As for the quadravalent form, lower concentra-
tions may be reduced to less than the MCL, and then be utilized for blending.

SILVER - MCL = 0.05 mg/1

     Silver rarely  occurs in water  supplies, from natural sources:, and many
silver salts such as the chloride and sulfide forms: are relatively insoluble.
Generally speaking, silver contamination of water supplies is  industrial
in origin,  from photographic and electroplating industries.

     Coagulation in the pH range of 6 to 8 with 30 mg/1 of alum or ferric
sulfate will treat  raw waters containing up to 0.17 mg/1 of silver to meet
the MCL of  0.05 mg/1, when followed by the clarification treatment described
for moderate turbidity waters.

     Coincidental removal occurs: during the treatment of high  coliform waters
and moderate or high turbidity waters, provided that the dosage of ferric
chloride or alum is adequate.  In the pH range of 6 to 8, concentrations
of 0. 17 mg/1 can be reduced to the  MCL.

     Lime softening followed by chemical clarification and filtration will
also remove salver.  Raw water silver concentrations- of 0.17 mg/1 can be
treated at  pH 9 while values as high as 0.5 mg/1 can be reduced to the MCL
of 0.05 at  pH = 11.5.

     Reverse osmosis may be used to remove silver, and concentrations up
to 0.83 mg/1 can be reduced to the  MCL.
                                      22

-------
SODIUM - No- Primary or Secondary Regulation MCL

     Sodium occurs naturally in water supplies as. a result of leaching from
rock formations or naturally occurring salt deposits.   Sea water intrusion
may represent a sodium source in coastal areas.  Sodium is extremely soluble,
and rarely forms a precipitate.

     Although there is presently no established sodium standard, a concentra-
tion of 20 mg/1 of sodium in drinking water is. considered compatible with
a restricted sodium diet of 500 mg per day.  Being a very soluble ion, removal
is best accomplished by ion exchange or reverse osmosis.  Ion exchange can
remove up to 85 percent, restricting use to supplies with an Initial sodium
concentration of 133 mg/1.  Reverse osmosis can offer somewhat larger removals,
up to 93 percent, and thus could treat initial sodium concentrations up to
285 mg/1.

SULFATE - Secondary Regulation MCL = 250 mg/1

     Sulfate Is an extremely soluble anion which occurs In water supplies
from both natural and Industrial sources.  Sulfate represents the principal
form of sulfur in nature.  Natural sources include leaching from soils and
mineral deposits containing sulfate, and from the biological oxidation of
sulfides.  Rainfall In many areas Is a major contributor of sulfate.  Key
industrial sources Include sulfurlc acid and sulfate manufacture and Indus-
tries using sulfates and sulfuric acid, such as sulfate pulp mills and
tanneries.

     Research Indicates that a limit of 250 mg/1 of sulfate in drinking water
affords a reasonable factor of safety against water causing laxative effects.
As with sodium, Ion exchange and reverse osmosis are the only practical
treatment methods.  Ion exchange can give removals up to 97 percent, and
is therefore useful to concentrations as high as 8,330 mg/1.  Reverse osmosis,
however, will only remove 93 percent of the sulfate, and is therefore useful
only up to 3,570 mg/1 of sodium.

TURBIDITY - MCL = 1 to 5 TU, depending on several circumstances:

     Turbidity is produced by suspended and colloidal matter In water and
Is generally only a problem In surface water supplies:.  The principal
Importance of turbidity is the possible interference with disinfection, due
to shielding of mlcroblal contaminants:, and the Inability to maintain a
disinfectant residual In the water supply.  Aesthetic considerations are
also important at high turbidity levels.

Low Turbidity Waters

     Waters containing more than one TU (turbidity unit) but less than 25
TU should be treated by coagulation without settling, filtration at 41.4
to 2Q3.5 Lpd/sq.M (2 to 5 gpm/sf), and post-disinfection with 30 minutes
contact prior to use.
                                      23

-------
Moderate Turbidity Waters

     Water containing more than 25 but less than 1,000 TU should be treated
by chemical addition, mixing, coagulation, 30 minutes flocculation, settling
at basin overflow rates of 24,450 Lpd/sq.M (.600 gpd/sf), filtration at 81.4
to 203.4 Lpd/sq.M (2 to 5 gpm/sf), and post-chlorination with 30 minutes
contact prior to use.

High Turbidity Waters

     Waters containing more than 1,000 TU and meeting the Interim Regulations
in other respects should be subjected to 2 hours pre-sedimentation at basin
overflow rates of 142,600 Lpd/sq.M (3,500 gpd/sf),  followed by the treatment
provided for moderate turbidity waters, above.
                                     24

-------
V.  COST CURVES

A.  •Construction Cost Curves


     The construction cost curves were developed using equipment cost data
supplied by manufacturers, cost data from actual plant construction, unit
takeoffs from actual and conceptual designs, and published data.  The cost
curves were then checked and verified by a second consulting engineering
firm, using an approach similar to that which would be utilized by a general
contractor in determining his construction bid.  Every attempt has been made
to present the conceptual designs and assumptions which were incorporated
into the curves.  Adjustment of the curves may be necessary to reflect site
specific conditions, geographic or local conditions:, or the need for standby
power.  The curves should be particularly useful for estimating the relative
economics of alternative treatment systems and in the preliminary evaluation
of general cost level to be expected for a proposed project.  The curves
contained in this Interim Report are based on January, 1978, costs.

     The construction cost was developed by determining and then aggregating
the cost of the following eight principal components:  (1) Excavation and
Site Work; (2) Manufactured Equipment; (3) Concrete; (A) Steel; (5) Labor;
(6) Pipe and Valves; (7) Electrical and Instrumentation; and (8) Housing.
These eight categories were utilized primarily to facilitate accurate cost
updating, which is discussed in a subsequent section of this Interim Report.
The division will also be helpful where costs are being adjusted for site
specific, geographic and other special conditions.  The eight categories
include the following general items:

     Excavation and Site Work.  This category includes work related only
     to the applicable process and does not include any general site work
     such as sidewalks, roads, driveways, or landscaping.

     Manufactured Equipment.  This category includes, estimated purchase cost
     of pumps, drives, process equipment, specific purpose controls and
     other items which are factory made and sold with equipment.

     Concrete.  This category includes the delivered cost of ready mix
     concrete and concrete forming materials:.

     Steel.  This category includes reinforcing steel for concrete and
     miscellaneous steel not included within the Manufactured Equipment
     category.
                                      25

-------
     Labor.  The labor associated with installing manufactured equipment,
     piping and valves, constructing concrete forms and placing concrete
     and reinforcing steel, are included in this category.

     Pipe and Valves.  Cast iron pipe, steel pipe, valves, and fittings have
     been combined into a single category.  The purchase price of pipe, valves,
     fittings, and associated support devices are included within this
     category.

     Electrical and Instrumentation.  The cost of process electrical equipment,
     wiring and general instrumentation associated with the process, equipment
     is included in this category.

     Housing.  In lieu of segregating building costs into several components
     this category represents all material and labor costs associated with
     the building, including heating, ventilating, air conditioning, lighting,
     normal convenience outlets, and the slab and foundation.

     The subtotal of the costs of these eight categories includes the cost
of material and equipment purchase and installation,, and subcontractor * s
overhead and profit.  To this subtotal, a 15 percent allowance has been
added to cover miscellaneous items not included in the cost takeoff as
well as contingency items.  Experience at many water treatment facilities
has indicated that this 15 percent allowance is reasonable.  Although
blanket application of this 15 percent allowance may result in some minor
inequity between processes, during the combination of costs- for individual
processes into a treatment system, the inequities are generally balanced
out.

     The construction cost for each unit process: is presented as a function
of the most applicable design parameter for the process.   For example,
clarifier construction costs are presented versus square feet of surface
area, whereas chlorine feed system costs are presented versus daily chlorine
feed capacity.   Use of such key design parameters allows  the curves to
be utilized with greater flexibility than if costs were simply plotted
versus flow.   For example, the clarifier curve la applicable to a 5 mgd
flow regardless of whether regulatory agencies require, or designer prefer-
ence indicates, use of a surface overflow rate of 700 gpd/ft2 or 900 gpd/ft2.
For some processes, however, flow rate is the most applicable design
parameter,  a situation which: is true for package plants.

     The construction costs shown in the curves are not the final capital
cost for the unit process.  The construction cost curves  do not include
costs for special sitework,  general contractor overhead and profit,
engineering,  land,  legal,  fiscal,  and administrative and  interest during
construction.   These cost  items are all more directly related to the total
cost of a project,  rather  than the cost of the individual unit processes.
They therefore are most appropriately added following summation of the
cost of the individual unit processes:,  if more than one unit process is
required.   Example calculations are included following the individual unit
process cost curves to illustrate the recommended method  for the addition
of these costs.


                                      26

-------
B.  Operation and Maintenance Cost Curves

     Operation and maintenance curves were developed for:   (1)  energy
requirements, (2) maintenance material requirements, (3)  labor  requirements,
and (4) total operation and maintenance cost.   The requirements were deter-
mined from operating data at existing plants,  at least to  the extent
possible.  Where such information was not available, assumptions were made
based both upon the author's and equipment manufacturer's  experience, and
such assumptions are stated in the description of the cost curve.

     Energy requirements were developed for both process  energy and building
related energy, and are presented in terms of  kilowatt-hours per year.
This approach was used to allow ready adjustment for geographical influence
upon building related energy.  For example, while lighting requirements
average about 17.5 kw-hr/ft2/yr throughout the United States; heating,
cooling, and ventilating requirements vary from a low of  about  8 kw-hr/ft /yr
in Miami, Florida to a high of about 202 kw-hr/ft2/yr in  Minneapolis,
Minnesota.  The electrical energy cost curves  presented for each process
are In terms of kw-hr/yr, and include an average building related demand
of 102.6 kw-hr/ft2/yr.  This Is an average for the 21 cities included in
the Engineering News Record Indexes.  An explanation of the derivation
of this number Is Included in Appendix A.  The computer program to be
developed by the Final Report will allow other building related energy
demands than 102.6 kw-hr/ft2/yr.  Process electrical energy Is  also included
in the electrical energy curve, and was. calculated using manufacturer's
data for required components.  Where required, separate energy curves for
natural gas and diesel fuel are also presented.

     Maintenance material costs Include the cost of periodic replacement
of component parts necessary to keep the process operable and functioning.
Examples of maintenance material items included are valves, motors, instrumen-
tation, and other process items of similar nature.  The maintenance material
requirements d£ not Include the cost o_f chemicals required for process
operation.  Chemical costs must be added separately, as will be shown in
the examples presented following the individual unit process cost curves.

     The labor requirement curve Includes both operation and maintenance
.labor, and Is presented in terms of hours per year.

     The total operation and maintenance cost curve Is a composite of the
energy, maintenance material, and labor curves.  To determine annual  energy
costs, unit  costs of $0.03/kw-hr of electricity, $0,0013/cubic foot  of
natural  gas, and  $0.45/gallon of diesel fuel were utilized.  The labor
requirements were converted  to an annual cost using an hourly labor  rate
of  $10.00/hour, which Includes salary  and fringe benefits.   The computer
program  to be developed by the Final Report will allow utilization of other
unit costs for energy and  labor.

C.  £pdating Costs  to Time of Construction

     Continued usefulness  of  the  curves  developed as  a portion  of  this
Project  depends  upon the ability  of  the  curves  to Be  updated to  reflect


                                      27

-------
 inflationary increases in the prices  of the various components.  Most
 engineers and planners are accustomed to updating  costs  using  one  all
 encompassing index,  which tracks  the  cost of specific  items  and  then
 proportions the costs  according to  a   predetermined ratio.   The  key
 advantage of a single  index is the  simplicity with which  it  can  be applied.
 Although use of a single index is an  uncomplicated approach, there is much
 evidence to indicate that these time  honored indices are  not understood
 by many  users and/or are inadequate for application to water works construction.

      The most frequently utilized single indexes in the construction industry
 are the  Engineering  News Record's Construction Cost  Index (CGI)  and Building
 Cost Index (3d).  These ENR indices  were started  in 1921 and were intended
 for general construction cost monitoring.   The ENR Construction  Cost Index
 consists of 200 hours  of common labor,  2,500  pounds  of structural  steel
 shapes,  1.128 tons of  Portland Cement and 1,008 board feet of 2 x  4 lumber.
 The ENR  Building Cost  Index consists  of  68.38 hours  of skilled labor plus
 the same materials included in the  Construction Cost Index.  The large
 amount of labor included in the Construction  Cost  Index was appropriate
 prior to World  War II; however, on most  contemporary construction, the
 index labor component  is  far  in excess of  actual labor used.

     Although key advantages  of the ENR  indices include their availability,
 their simplicity and their  geographical  specificity, many engineers and
 planners  believe that  these indices: are  not applicable to water treatment
 plant construction.  The  rationale for this belief is that the index does
 not  include mechanical equipment,  pipes, and valves: which, are normally
 associated with such construction, and the proportional mix of materials
 and  labor is  not specific to water treatment plant construction.

     An  approach which may be utilized to overcome the shortcomings of
 the^ENR  indices relative to water works  construction, is to apply specific
 indices  to  the major cost components of  the construction cost curves.
 This approach allows the curve to be updated using indexes specific to
 each category and weighted according to  the dollar significance of the
 category.  For the eight major categories of construction cost, the
 following Bureau of Labor Statistics  (BLS) and Engineering News Record
 (ENR) indices, were utilized as a basis for the cost curves included in
 this Interim Report.
                                                          January,  1978
 Cost Component                      Index                 Value of  Index

 Excavation and Sitework    ENR Skilled Labor Wage Index        235
                            Q967  Base)

Manufactured Equipment      BLS General Purpose Machinery       208.6
                           and Equipment - Code 114

Concrete                   BLS Concrete Ingredients -          208.6
                           Code 132

Steel                      BLS Steel Mill Products  -           237.5
                           Code 1013

                                      28

-------
                                                            January,  1978
Cost Component                      Index                  Value of Index

Labor                     ENR Skilled Labor Wage Index          235
                          (.1967 Base)

Pipe and Valves           BLS Valves and Fittings               222.4
                          Code 114901

Electrical and Instru-    B.LS Electrical Machinery and
mentation                 Equipment - Code 117                  160.0

Housing                   ENR Building Cost Index               237.88
                          (1967 Base)

     The principal disadvantages: of this approach are the lack of geographical
specificity of the BLS indices, and the use of seven indices rather than
a single index.

     To accomodate these two different approaches to cost updating, the
cost curves were derived by developing the cost of the eight component
areas, and then aggregating the eight components.  This approach allows
costs to be updated by using indices specific to the eight cost component
categories, or by applying the ENR Construction Cost Index to the sum cost.

     Updating of total operation and maintenance costs may be accomplished
by updating the three individual components:  energy, labor, and maintenance
material.  Energy and labor are updated by applying the current^unit cost
to the energy and labor curves.  Maintenance material costs, which are
presented in terms of dollars per year, can be updated using the Producer
Price Index, which replaces the old Wholesale Price. Index.  The maintenance
material costs in this Interim Report are for January, 1978, a Producer
Price Index of 186.8
                                       29

-------
 CONSTRUCTION COST

 Package Pressure Filtration Plants

      Package pressure filters can be used for iron and manganese removal
 from well waters, and in some States as a final treatment process following
 chemical coagulation and clarification of surface waters.   Pressure filters
 are available from many manufacturers with either rapid sand,  dual media
 or mixed media filter beds.   Units can be either totally automatic or
 manual in operation.

      Construction costs were developed for package pressure filtration
 plants of capacities  ranging between 1,000 gpd and 0.5 mgd,  for  filtration
 rates of 2 and 5 gpm/square  foot  and a media  depth of  30 inches.   Conceptual
 designs for the plants are shown  in Table 7.   Vessel sizes  selected are
 those generally available in the  industry.  Costs  are  based  upon  completely
 housed filtration plants.

      All units  are skid mounted,  completely self-contained  and include
 a  single vertical pressure vessel with internals;,  automatic  control  valves
 filter supply pump, filter media  (mixed), backwash, pump  and  control  panel
 Included with each unit are  two chemical  feed  units including tank,  mixer
 and chemical feed pump.   Finished water is  discharged  to an  at grade storage
 tank/  clearwell which  is  not  included  in  the cost  estimate.

     Backwash water is  pumped from the storage  tank by an end suction
 centrifugal pump.   The  filter supply pump is also  an end suction centrifugal
 pump and requires  a flooded suction.  The filter units, are designed  for
 automatic  operation.  Backwash is initiated by  excessive headless or by
 elapsed  operating  time.   Surface wash is obtained  from a separate pump
 or  from  a  pressure distribution system through a backflow preventer.

     Estimated  construction costs are presented in Table 8 and illustrated
 in  Figure  1.

 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS

 Package Pressure Filtration Plants

     Operating and maintenance costs have been developed from estimates
 of  energy, labor and maintenance material requirements  for the conceptual
 designs presented in Table 7.  Building energy requirements are for heating,
 cooling, ventilation and lighting.  Process energy, which is not  nearly
 as large as building related energy, is for backwash and filter supply
pumping and the chemical feeders.

     Maintenance material requirements are related primarily to replacement
of pump seals,  application of lubricants,  replacement of parts; for chemical
feed pumps, instrumentation repair and general facility maintenance supplies.
The maintenance material costs do  not include  the cost  of treatment chemicals.
                                     30

-------
u>
                                                      Table  7
                                                 Conceptual Design
                                        Package Pressure Filtration Plants
PI
2







ant Capacity
J5jWft
1,000

10,000
40,000
100,000

200,000

gpm/rt
2,500

25,000
100,000
250,000

500,000
Number
of Units
i







Filter
Area, ft2
0 34

0 1 /,
Uf.
1/i 9



Diameter
ft
0.67

2
4
6 5



Total Filter
Area, ft2
0.34

3.14
12.6
34.2
64


Housing
Area, ft2
240

300
480
896
1,080



-------
                                                               Table  8
                                                          Construction  Cost
                                                Package Pressure  Filtration  Plants
Co
2 gpm/ft2
. .... 5 epm/ft2
Excavation and Sitework
[anufactured Equipment
loncrete
.abor
'iping and Valves
llectrical and Instrumentation
busing
SUBTOTAL
iscellaneous and Contingency
TOTAL $
1,000
2,500
$ 100
4,380
360
1,310
500
1,700
7,200
15,550
2,330
17,880
10,000
25,000
100
15,250
440
4,570
600
4,040
9,000
34,000
5, 100
39,100
40,000
100,000
125
23,125
650
6,940
850
6,180
14,400
52,270
7,840
60,110
100,000
250,000
200
36,870
1,100
11,060
1,100
10,200
26,880
87,410
13,110
100,520
200,000
500,000
22Q
55,000
1,300
16,500
1,400
14,300
32,400
121,120
18,170
139,290

-------

7
6
5
4
3
2
6
5
4
3
2
100,000
9
87
6
*•
3
0
D 2
3
Z
: 10,000
J 9
c
o ^
2 5
_) <
<


















__^.





1000


















.*•























^**
=*























^
0
-. "^
*M — -





III 1











2(



.^
*'^ ^



















5PM



•^r
^



















'F


X*





















-2



x*





















,x '

^ ••





















^

- ^"


5GPM
























'FT



















•^^
























X
























•












234 5678910,000 234 56789100,0002 3 4 567

























)00,000
  10
     100
CAPACITY -mVdoy
                                  1000
         CONSTRUCTION  COST
PACKAGE  PRESSURE FILTRATION  PLANTS

             FIGURE  I
                 33

-------
     Lahor requirements were developed assuming the treatment plant operates
automatically, and virtually unattended.   Operator attention is only necessary
to prepare the treatment chemicals,  establish proper dosages, carry out
routine quality assurance tasks and  perform necessary maintenance tasks.
No allowance was included for administrative or laboratory labor.

     Operation and maintenance requirements for filtration rates of 2 and
5 gpm/ft  are summarized in Table 9  and illustrated in Figures: 2 and 3.
                                    34

-------
OJ
Ul
                                                     Table 9

                                        Operation and Maintenance Summary

                                       Package Pressure Filtration Plants
J.1 JL-l-Ul. CLfc.-1-v^i.i. ivt-t »- *- — O
Plant Capacity, gpd
1,000
10,000
40,000
100,000
200,000


Building
24,620
30,780
49,250
91,930
110,810

Energy kw-hr/yr
Process

50
450
1,830
4,950
9,270


Total

24,670
31,230
51,080
9 6, i860
120,080
Maintenance
Material
$/yr

50
150
200
350
450

Labor
hr/yr
365
365
425
500
730

Total Cost*
$/yr

4,440
4,740
5,980
8,260
11,350
i'-L.-I-U.LCH--*-'-',







Energy kw-hr/yr
Plant Capacity, gpd
2,
25,
100,
250,
500,
500
000
000
000
000
Building
24,
30,
49,
91,
110,
620
780
250
930
810
Process


1,
5,
9,
24,

120
220
040
820
550
Total

24
32
54
101
135

,740
,000
,290
,750
,360
Maintenance
Material
$/yr

50
150
200
350
450

Labor
hr/yr
365
365
425
500
730


Total Cost*
$/yr


4,440
4,
6,
8,
11,
760
080
400
810
         Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr and $10.00/hr of labor

-------
      1,000,000
  1000


   i
   I
   6
<  2

EC
LU



llOO
<
z
LU
I-  4
Z

<  3
  10
      100
             2  3 4 5 678910,000  2   3456 789100,000 2'  3  4 5 6 789

            ___^	 PLANT CAPACITY- gpd              1,000,000
                                                                        \
               10
                                 100
                                                  1000
                          PLANT  CAPACITY- m3 /day

                  OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE

            PACKAGE   PRESSURE  FILTRATION  PLANTS


                           FIGURE  2
                              36

-------
  9
  6
  5
  4
100,000
 10,000
  9"
>. 8 -
w 5
O 4
o
0 2
1000


  7
  6
  5
1000
   c
   8
ABOR-

CM
      IOC
                                                   C(
                                               GPltl/FT2
                                        TOTAli
                                        2
        1000  234 5678910,000 234 56789100,0002  3 4 56789
                                                       1,000,000
                           PLANT  CAPACITY-gpd
               i'o
                             100
                            CAPACITY-mVday
1000
                  OPERATION  AND   MAINTENANCE
             PACKAGE  PRESSURE   FILTRATION  PLANTS

                            FIGURE  3
                              37

-------
 CONSTRUCTION COST

 Package Gravity Filter Plants

      Cost estimates  were developed  for  package  gravity  filtration plants
 proceeded by a one hour detention basin.   The capacity  range utilized was
 80 to 1,400 gpm,  for filtration rates of  2 and  5  gpm/ft2 and a media depth
 of 30 inches.   Package filtration plants  less; than  80 gpm are not recommended
 because operational  skill and  attention are often severely limited.  At
 flows less than 80 gpm,  package complete  treatment  plants (coagulation,
 flocculation,  settling,  and  filtration) are generally recommended.  At
 flows exceeding 1,400 gpm, package  filtration plants usually are not
 economical.

      Conceptual designs  for  the cos,t estimates: are  presented in Table 10
 These conceptual  designs  are representative of package  gravity filter plants
 currently  in widespread  service,  and much  of the  construction cost data
 utilized was obtained from equipment manufacturers:  and  from actual installa-
 tions.  The  conceptual designs  analyzed in the report include a one hour
 detention  control  basin  prior to  filtration.  The contact basin removes
 rapidly settling materials such as sand and silt which  could hamper operation
 of  the filters  and also provides  additional time  for coagulant dispersion
 and flocculation.  The contact basin serves: to dampen the effects on coagulant
 requirements caused by raw water  quality changes and provides the operator
 with  additional time  to make necessary chemical dosage changes.   The
 efficiency of chlorine disinfection is also enhanced by the detention time
 provided in  the contact basin.

      Cost estimates are for filter vessels which are open top,  cylindrical
 steel tanks sized  to permit shop fabrication andover-the-road shipment.
 The plants are complete including filter vessels, mixed  media,  piping,
valves, controls, electrical system, backwash, system, surface wash system,
 chemical feed systems, (alum, soda ash,  polymer and  chlorine),  raw water
pumps (no intake structure),  one hour detention pre-filter  contact basin,
backwash/clearwell storage basin, building and  other ancillary items required
for a complete and operable installation.

     The estimated construction costs for filtration rates  of 2  and  5  gpm/ft2
are shown in Figure 4 and presented  in Table 11.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

Package Gravity Filter Plants

     Building related electrical energy  for lighting, ventilation, heating
and other uses was projected  for each size facility  based upon floor area
of the structure.   In all cases the  filters, piping, controls, chemical
feed equipment and other mechanical  appurtenances  are entirely enclosed.
Process related energy is for filter supply pumping, filter backwash and
filter surface wash.
                                     38

-------
          Table  10
     Conceptual Design
Package Gravity Filter Plants

        Filter Vessels
Plant Capacity, gpm
2 gpm/ft2
80
140
225
280
560
5 gpm/ft*
200
350
560
700
1,400
Number
of Units
2
2
2
2
3
Filter Area
ft2
20
38
50
79
113
Diameter
ft
5
7
8
10
12
Total Filter
Area, ft2
40
76
100
158
339
Housing
Area, ft2
1,500
1,800
1,800
1,800
3,600

-------
-p-
o
                                                           Table  11


                                                      Construction Cost


                                                Package Gravity Filter Plants
                                                                   Plant Flow Rate -
2 gpm/ft^
5 gpm/ft2
Excavation and Sitework $
Manufactured Equipment
Concrete
Labor
Pipe and Valves
Electrical and Instrumentation
Housing
80
200
790
27,000
14,000
11,230
6,460
19,500
45,000
SUBTOTAL 123,980
Miscellaneous and Contingency
18,600
TOTAL $142,580
140
350
1,080
35,000
19,500
12,690
8,380
24,900
54,000
155,550
23,330
178,880
225
560
1,440
38,000
26,500
13,630
11,110
31,000
54,000
175,680
26,350
202,030
	 "tar-
700
1,580
50,000
29,000
16,450
11,650
46,400
54,000
209,080
31,360
240,440
560
1,400
2,660
90,000
47,500
25,730
25,280
81,000
108,000
380,170
57,030
437,200

-------
1,000,000
CONSTRUCTION COSTS
 100.000
   9
    10    2  3 4 56789 100   2  3 4 567891000   2   3456789
                                                      10,000
                        CAPACITY-gpm
                         -h
                         10
-H	
 100
                       CAPACITY- liters/sec
                    CONSTRUCTION  COST
            PACKAGE  GRAVITY  FILTER  PLANTS
                        FIGURE  4
                            41

-------
     The cost of maintenance material was estimated from background informa-
tion obtained from several operating facilities.   This item includes the
cost of anthracite coal to replace that which is  backwashed out of the
filters, miscellaneous small parts for controls and instrumentation, recorder
ink and charts and other general supplies related only to actual operation
of the filters.  These costs do not include those related to administrative
activities, laboratory chemicals or supplies, general facility maintenance
nor do they include treatment chemicals.

     Man hour requirements were developed assuming that the treatment
facilities would be only partially attended over  a 24 hour period.  This
mode of operation is typical for modern package treatment plants which
are designed to perform unattended, and to backwash automatically on the
basis of headloss or excessive filtered water turbidity and then return
to service.

     Operation and maintenance requirements for filtration rates of 2 and
5 gpm/ft  are presented in Figures 5 and 6, and are summarized in Table 12.
                                    42

-------
                                                       Table  12
                                         Operation and Maintenance  Summary
                                           Package Gravity Filter Plants
          Filtration Rate = 2  gpm/ft2
GO




Energy kw-hr/yr
Plant Capacity
80
140
225
280
560
Filtration Rate


Plant Capacity
200
350
560
700
1,400
- gpm Building
153,900
184,680
184,680
184,680
360,000
= 5 gpm/ft2


- gpm Building
153,900
184,680
184,680
184,680
360,000
Process
3,950
6,920
11,064
13,830
27,660


Energy kw-hr/yr
Process
9,470
16,580
26,250
33,150
66,300
Total
157,850
191,600
195,740
198,510
387,660



Total
163,370
201,260
210,930
217,830
426,300
Maintenance
Material
$/yr
1,000
1,200
1,300
1,500
2,500

Maintenance
Material
$/yr
1,000
1,200
1,300
1,500
2,500

Labor
hr/yr
2,920
2,920
3,650
3,650
4,380


Labor
hr/yr
2,920
2,920
3,650
3,650
4,380

Total Cost*
$/yr
34,940
36,150
43,670
43,960
57,930


Total Cost*
$/yr
35,100
36,440
44,130
44,530
59,090
         Calculated using  $0.03/kw-hr and $10.00/hr of labor

-------
1
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
6
5
4
3
b_
>*
^ 2
1
_i
<
cc
LJ 9'
lu 5
2 4
2 3
LJ
(-
Z 2
< *
2
10,000
9
8
6
5
4
3
2
1000
: I
7
g
5
4
3
2
1,000
: 1
6
5
4
3
2
100,0
>> f
~ £ 6
— l 5
- * 4
1
- >- 3
CC
UJ
10,00
9
7
6
5
4
3
2
1000






,000







00







0

















































































































































































,«












4


*











BUILD
2 GPM
_j+
-^.








1 	 -jjj
./^
S^
.f
/


.^±:











NG
'FT'
X1
X















X*
•— •











Eh
9
X
X*







^







X
*-






















EIRC
Jf
j*















X
»*•
x















X
,**











Y

^







/








x













.'






S









^'












^^X
5 (



S
Jr
.^ROC
r






MAINT
MATER
.XM
^•^ M/!
5 (













LDH
PM





FR?







ENA
AL
AIN'
TEF
PM













JG
'F'





1







NC
20
"EK
IAI
'F













-I





N








Pf
Al
•2













N














4>
sl(














El





?(








F
E














>l I





\ t








T'















1 /
f

















10 234 56789100 234 567891000 234 56789
PLANT CAPACITY - gpm 10,000
	 1— 	 1 	 — 	 1 	
             10               100
          PLANT  CAPACITY-liters/sec

   OPERATION AND  MAINTENANCE

PACKAGE  GRAVITY FILTER  PLANTS


            FIGURE 5
             44

-------
 100,000
   9'
 -  8
 ">  7
o
O
1-
10,000 10,000
     1000
                                             LABOF
                                              LABCR
        10    2   3456789100    2   3456 7891000

                            PLANT  CAPACITY -gpm
 [Rif/FT2"
 GFM
tfT
3 456 789
      10,000
                              H-
                              10                  100
                           PLANT CAPACITY- liters /sec

                   OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE

                PACKAGE  GRAVITY  FILTER PLANTS
                             FIGURE   6
                              45

-------
CONSTRUCTION COST

Package Complete Treatment Plants

     The use of package complete treatment plants (coagulation, flocculation,
sedimentation and filtration) has grown substantially during the last 10
years.  These plants which are available either as factory preassembled
units or field assembled modules, significantly reduce the cost of small
facilities (10,000 gpd to 2 mgd).  The units are automatically controlled
and require only minimal operator attention.

Cost estimates were developed for standard manufactured units: Incorporating
20 minutes of flocculation, tube settlers rated at 150. gpd/ft2, mixed media
filters rated at 2 and 5 gpm/ft2, and a media depth of 30 inches.   The costs
include premanufactured treatment plant components, chemical feed  facilities
(storage tanks and feed pumps), flow measurement and control devices, pneumatic
air supply (for plants of 200 gpm and larger) for valve and Instrument
operation, effluent and backwash pumps and all necessary controls  for a
complete and operable unit.  The three smaller plants: utilize low  head
filter effluent transfer pumps and are to he used with an above grade
clearwell.  The larger plants gravity discharge to a below grade clearwell.

     Raw water intake and pumping facilities, clearwell storage, high service
pumping and site work, exclusive of foundation preparations, are not included
in the costs.

     Construction costs are presented In Figure 7 and Table 13.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

Package Complete Treatment Plants

     Complete treatment package plants (coagulation, flocculation, sedimenta-
tion, and filtration) are designed for essentially unattended operation,
i.e., they backwash automatically on the basis of headloss: or excessive
filtered water turbidity and return to service.

     The principal use of energy Is for building heating, cooling, and
ventilation, and these requirements have been based on a completely housed
plant.  Process energy is required for flocculators:t rapid mix, chemical
pumping and filter backwash.'

     The cost of maintenance material was based upon Information obtained
from typical operating Installations.  Included are the costs of anthracite
coal to replace that lost during backwash, miscellaneous small replacement
parts for controls and Instrumentation and other general supplies  related
to the operation of the treatment plant proper.  Excluded are those costs:
related to treatment plant administrative activities., laboratory services,
chemicals or other related supplies, and general facility maintenance.
                                      46

-------
                                             Table 13
                                        Construction Cost
                                Package Complete Treatment Plants
                                                          Plant  Capacity  — gpm
                      2 gpm/ft2
                      5 gpm/ft2
 4
10
 8
20
 40
10Q
 80
200
140
350
225
560
280
700
 560
1.400
Excavation and Sitework        $   200
Manufactured Equipment          12,300
Concrete                           350
Labor                            5,100 ;
Pipe and Valves                  1,000
Electrical and Instrumentation  15,630
Housing                         14.900
          SUBTOTAL              49,480
Miscellaneous and Contingency    7,420
          TOTAL                $56,900
        260
     15,400
        430
      6,000
      1,100
     16,780
     16,300
     56,270
      8.440
     64,710
        370
     29,000
        650
      7,000
      1,500
     20,610
     20.300
     79,430
     11,910
     91,340
          520
       50,000
        1,040
       10,200
        2,800
       20,610
       27.300
      112,470
       16,870
          770
       68,000
        1,840
       13,600
        3,400
       25,780
       45.600
      158,990
       23,850
          800
       84,000
        1,950
       16,800
        4,100
       28,790
       47,700
      184,440
       27,620
      129,340 !  182,840    211,760
        1,250
      100,000
        2,930
       24,000
        5,600
       46,900
       68,300
      248,980
       37.350
      286,330
       2,100
      175,000
       4,330
      37,500
       8,700
      64,200
      97,000
      388,830
      58,320
      447,150

-------
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
6
5
4
3
2
1,000,000
9
8
6
5
4
1
H 2
to *
O
o
§ 100,000
CONSTRUCTI
0
"b
o
O ro ex * 01 o>-jo>u:


























^=^
— — •*"






























<-^
.— =:






























==•





























^
«—






























X
^.






























+
«•






























x
>•































^
«































^
e




























2 GPM

-j
/
|f.^
^*





























'FT'

X
^-
































^
X*































/

X






























/


X

































x
































^

































/

































*
































>X
^
5 (

































5PM

































'F

































-2



















































































































































































10 2 3456789 100 2 34 567891000 2 3 456789
10,000
CAPACITY- gpm '
1 10 100

         CAPACITY- liters/sec
         CONSTRUCTION  COST
PACKAGE  COMPLETE TREATMENT  PLANTS

            FIGURE 7
               48

-------
     Operator attention is required to replenish treatment chemicals,  make
proper chemical dosage requirements, perform routine laboratory quality
assurance tests and carryout necessary daily maintenance and other house
keeping tasks.  Labor estimates were based on performance of these tasks.

     Operation and maintenance requirements: for plant filtration rates
of 2 and 5 gpm/ft2 are presented in Figures 8 and 9 and summarized in
Table 14.
                                   49

-------
                                                    Table 14
                                       Operation and Maintenance  Summary
                                       Package Complete  Treatment Plants
       Filtration Rate = 2 gpm/ft2
Ui
o




Energy kw-hr/yr
Plant Capacity -
4
8
40
80
140
225
280
560
Filtration Rate =

Plant Capacity -
10
20
100
200
350
560
700
1,400
Calculated using
gpm Building
30,780
38,480
61,560
98,500
174,420
184,680
277,020
410,400
5 gpm/ft
Energy
gpm Building
30,780
38,480
61,560
98,500
174,420
184,680
277,020
410,400
$0.03/kw-hr and $10.
Process
320
390
3,210
3,950
6,920
11,060
13,830
27,660

kw-hr/yr
Process
780
1,560
7,810
9,470
16,580
26,520
33,150
66,300
Total
31,100
38,870
64,770
102,450
181,340
195,740
290,850
438,060


Total
31,560
40,040
69,370
107,970
191,000
201,260
310,170
476,700
Maintenance
Material
$/yr
300
550
800
1,500
1,800
2,000
2,400
3,000
Maintenance
Material
$/yr
300
550
800
1,500
1,800
2,000
2,400
3,000

Labor
hr/yr
1,460
1,460
1,750
3,200
3,600
3,600
3,600
5,400

Labor
hr/yr
1,460
1,460
1,750
3,200
3,600
3,600
3,600
5,400

Total Cost*
$/yr
15,830
16,320
20,240
36,570
43,240
43,870
47,130
70,140

Total Cost*
$/yr
15,840
16,350
20,380
36,740
43,530
44,040
47,710
71,300
00/hr of labor

-------
I0,0(
§
7
6
5
4
3
2
IOOC
, f
_*ja C
NTENANCE MATER
8
a o -j CD to o ro o
5 4
3
2
100
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
DO
7
6
5
4
3
2
) I.OOC
t *
6
5
4
3
2
100,0
- \ 7
- ^ 6
" T 4
~ t9 3
tr
LU
^S 2
10,0 C
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
IOOC








),000



,^
^^"^
X^
**"

00




^^^f'
	

0








X











_^^

s*


BU
2



x^

*^^










X










r^^

^



ILl
GP


X

j^rf"










x










gX1


j^



IN
M

^


^










X









^


^




G
'F

^












^










^

^






T
5


^










/










••

'





C
2
-


|X





















X
^






l\














X











^







E



^



















MAIN1


^







RGY


^^T
J^






_J
S
s
S









EN/

x*
r-
^








/






















,N(

X*
x'







X
X







/














;E

X*
r^






/

/
























**






f




















1 1 1 1




dAr
1
X








/







/










x^
M>







/**






/














ERIAL-
^
1 MAIN1
AERIAL






/BUI
5 G



*
f
7
PROCI
















2 G

'EN
5C





i
1



PM

\Nl
p^






LOIIJJG



/

*
I/






El
kJFf2






tss

















E

















Nf











i



1.










JE







:R











^









F







G


























c







Y


























> ^



















10 234 56789100 2 34 567891000 2-34 56789
CAPACITY - gpm l0'000
-r— ., _.l , » •

1 10 100
         CAPACITY -liters/sec
    OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
PACKAGE  COMPLETE  TREATMENT PLANTS
             FIGURE 8
             51

-------
I
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
6
5
4
3
2
too,
9'
.. 8
>* -f
T 5
8 3
H 2
g
10,00
9
8
6
5
4
3
2
: I
7
5
4
3
2


6

3
2
000
9
8
5
4
3
2
0 I0,0(
r- 9
8
7
- \ 5
1
m
~ _i 2
IOOC























s=
)0







— _-^























»-^
.— -







,*•—
,— —























.*--
^»







**•
*— '























,x
9»






•^
»*























)•>•
id






•e
^»























^
,0






^
•»























••






<•
?






















^
0






«
*






















*
0






*
^





















,-X
x^^
^
x^"


i An/



^

















TO



^
^^
^



in '
in i


-X-
, — '

















TA



[x

X



' G


-^
?x




















^

^


—
















m,
k/'




X
T


	

fTnT

^
*H



X
























J



r
1


X


















,



^'

7,1



jlfi
i

^



















-2GPM/


^^^


. COST





^^
• ^
LABOR


















FT:





5 G







-5G


















\





3M







PIV
























'F







/F
























T







T
























2







2




































































10 234 56789100 234 567891000 21 3 4 56789
CAPACITY -gpm I0'°°0
— ,1 	 .,„, • i

1 10 100
          CAPACITY- liters /sec
    OPERATION  AND MAINTENANCE
PACKAGE  COMPLETE  TREATMENT  PLANTS
             FIGURE 9
               52

-------
CONSTRUCTION COST

Conversion of Sand Filter to Carbon Contactor

     Existing rapid sand or dual media filters can be converted  to  carbon
contactors by removing filter media and replacing it with granular  activated
carbon.  Filter box dimensions will generally permit installation of a
30-36 inch deep carbon bed which will provide 9-11 minutes of empty bed
contact time at 2 gpm/ft2.   The existing underdrain and support gravel
design can be retained unmodified.  The only required modifications are
installation of spent carbon collector and transport system and  a similar
system for return of reactivated carbon to the contactors.   Continued
operation at the original design filtration rate of 2 gpm/ft2 will  require
no modification of existing filter rate controls or instrumentation*
The backwash rate will be reduced from 15 gpm/ft2 to 10 gpm/ft2  for activated
carbon.

     Cost curves were developed for modifying existing filters with total
bed areas ranging from 350 to .70,000 square feet.  The cos:ts include those
related to removing and disposing of existing sand (or coal-sand) and gravel,
installing carbon collection troughs and related piping and valving outside
of filter, installing slurry pumps and related controls for transport and
spent carbon to dewatering and regenerating facilities, reactivated carbon
storage tank, reactivated carbon return eductors and distribution piping
systems to contactors.  Carbon transport piping was sized on the basis of
3 pounds of carbon per gallon of water.  The costs also include  a 30 inch
deep bed of granular carbon placed over a 12-inch deep graded gravel
underdrain.

     The costs for accomplishing these modifications are presented  in
Table 15 and in Figure 10.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

Conversion of Sand Filter to Carbon Contactor

     Following conversion, operation and maintenance costs should be virtually
the same as prior to conversion.  Experience at the existing plant, prior
to conversion, is therefore the best guide to operation and maintenance costs.
                                     53

-------
Ul
.p-
                                                         Table 15
                                                     Construction  Cost
                                       Conversion of Sand Filter to  Carbon Contactor
•I ry
Contactor Area, ft
2Contactor Volume, ft3
Labor
Manufactured Equipment
Piping and Valves
Electrical and Instrumentation
SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
TOTAL COST
350
875
8,200
11,000
9,850
1,650
30,700
4,600
35,300
1,750
4,375
26,900
21,000
49,150
3,150
100,200
15,030
115,230
3,500
8,750
45,700
22,500
79,750
3,380
151,330
22,700
174,030
17,500
43,750
166,400
80,500
417,500
12,000
676,400
101,460
777,860
35,000
87,500
322,500
142,000
840,500
21,300
1,326,300
198,950
1,525,250
70,000
175,000
615,000
278,000
1,547,000
42,000
2,482,000
372,300
2,854,300
        •'•Area of existing filters
        2Assumes bed depth of 30"

-------
•HI
7
6
5
4
3
2
10,000,0
1
6
5
4
3
2
I.OOO.C
9
87
6
5
4
7 •



j^































/


































X

































/


































X

































A
r

































s

































f
w





























A
f
J^
Jr





























x
r

































/


































'

































f


































'

























































































100   234 567891000  234 56789IOOOO  2  34 56789

                 FILTER  AREA-FT*   '            I00'°00
                 -4-
 10
 100
FILTER AREA-m2
                                 1000
              CONSTRUCTION  COST
         CONVERSION OF  SAND  FILTER
            TO  CARBON  CONTACTOR

                  FIGURE  10
                     55

-------
CONSTRUCTION COST

Pressure Carbon Contactors

     Construction costs were developed for pressure granular activated
carbon contactors constructed of shop fabricated steel tankage.  Bed depths
of 5, 10, and 20 feet were used, which- provide empty bed contact times of 7.5,
15, and 30 minutes at a hydraulic loading rate of 5 gpm/ft2.  Conceptual
design information is shown in Table 16.  The practical upper limit for
pressure carbon contactors is generally in the range of 20 to 25 mgd, but
the cost curves are presented up to 50 mgd.

     The cost for the steel contactors was. based upon pressurized downflow
operation using cylindrical ASME code pressure vessels with a design working
pressure of 50 psl.  Vessels used were either 10 foot or 12 foot diameter
by 14, 23, and 33 feet overall height.  Carbon contactors are furnished
with a nozzle style underdrain and are designed for rapid removal of spent
carbon and recharge of virgin carbon.

     The costs presented are for a complete carbon contacting facility
including vessels, cylinder operated butterfly valves, liquid and carbon
handling face piping with headers within the carbon contactor building,
flow measurement and other instrumentation, master operations control panel
and building.   Not included in the cost estimate are carbon contactor supply
and backwash pumping, initial activated carbon charge, spent or regenerated
activated carbon handling and carbon regeneration and preparation facilities.
Separate curves are provided for these facilities

     Housing requirements were developed assuming that the carbon columns
are totally enclosed.  Additional space for pipe galleries and operating
and maintenance service areas are also included in the area requirements.

     Estimated construction costs are presented in Table 17, 18, 19 and
in Figure 11.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

Pressure Carbon Contactors

     Electrical energy requirements were computed assuming that the carbon
contactors serve as both filters and carbon contactors:;  thus periodic
backwashing is required.  Backwash pumping requirements- are based upon
one backwash, per day for 10 minutes duration at a rate of 12 gptn/ft2.
Energy requirements are for backwash pumping, for pumping of spent carbon
to regeneration facilities and for return of regenerated,carbon.  Carbon
was assumed to be removed and replaced every two months.   Energy for
supply pumping to contactors is not included.  Building energy requirements
are for heating, lighting, ventilating, instrumentation and other general
building purposes.  It was assumed that the contactors were completely
housed.
                                      56

-------
t_n
                                                      Table 16

                                                 Conceptual Designs

                                             Pressure Carbon Contactors
                                                                 Total Carbon Volume-
Plant Flow
tngd
1
10
50
Number of
Contactors
2
12
60
Diameter
Contactors, ft
10
122
12
Total Contactor^
Area, ft2

1
6
157
,357
,786
Ft
7.5

6,
33,
3 @
min
680
790
930
Detention
15 min
1,57.0
13,570
67,860
Times
30
3,
27,
135,

min
140
140
720
Plant Area^
Requirements ,
1,750
4,800
21,000
ft2



    iCarbon contactors sized for 5 gpm/ft2 application rate
    ry
    -Maximum sized contactor for shop fabrication and over-the^road shipment

    ^Volumes determined at bed depth of 5, 10 and 20 feet

    -Assumes carbon contactors are totally enclosed

-------
Ui
oo
                                                           Table  17

                                                       Construction  Cost

                                                  Pressure Carbon Contactors


                                       (7.5 min empty bed contact  time - 5 ft bed depth)
Contactor Volume - f t 3
Contactor Area - f t 2
Excavation and Sitework
Manufactured Equipment
Concrete
Steel
Labor
Pipe and Valves
Electrical and Instrumentation
Housing
SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
TOTAL
680
157
500
46,200
2,070
1,020
17,500
14,350
14,930
61,250
157,820
23,670
181,490
6,790
1,357
1,330
385,800
5,330
2,560
99,430
127,300
79,200
158,400
859,350
128,900
988,250
33,930
6.786
5,880
1,832,600
23,330
11,200
446,000
639,620
410,420
630,000
3,999,050
599,860-
4,598,910

-------
                                                           Table 18
                                                       Construction Cost
                                                  Pressure Carbon Contactors
                                      (15 min.  empty bed contact time - 10 ft bed depth)
Ul
Contactor Volume - ftd
Contactor Area - ft2
Excavation & sitework
Manufactured Equipment
Concrete
Steel
Labor
Pipe and Valves
Electrical and Instrumentation
Housing
SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
TOTAL
1,570
157
500
52,280
2,070
1,020
18,500
15,790
14,980
78,750
183,890
27,580
211,470
13,570
1,357
1,330
426,740
5,330
2,560
105,430
138,760
79,200
206,400
965,750
144,860
1,110,610
67,860
6,786,
5,880
2,037,320
23,330
11,200
476,000
685,390
410,420
861,000
4,510,540
676,580
5,187,120

-------
                   Table 19
               Construction Cost
          Pressure Carbon Contactors
(30 min.  empty bed contact time - 20 ft bed depth)
Contactor Volume - ft
Carbon Area - ft2
Excavation and Site Work
Manufactured Equipment
Concrete
Steel
Labor
Pipe and Valves
Electrical and Instrumentation
Housing
SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
TOTAL
3,140
157
500
72,860
2,480
1,120
21,280
17,400
15,680
148,750
280,070
42,010
322,080
27,140
1,357
1,330
706,540
6,400
2,820
121,250
208,600
83,200
384,000
1,514,140
227,120
1,741,260
135,720
6,786
5,880
3,356,050
28,000
12,320
547,400
1,054,000
431,000
1,638,000
7,072,650
1,060,950
8,133,550

-------
                                                   CONSTRUCTION   COST — $
O
c
3)
m



o-
TJ o
33
m
CO
CO O
S Z o
rn co £
H r
35
O <— o
s 3
O «
H
0
CO 3
0
o
0


o
o
o
ro
01
-(*
Ol
CT)
89IOPOO
TOTAL
o f
o
Z
>
0
-i *
o
73 Ol
< H
o -^
c to
7!
1 0
-^ o

Ol
*
j-oi
8-
0-^
°s
rv

















o

















4>

















o

















i -
~O
O
0















UJ 	
0
\
\
\
^














4
\

s
\
s












o

s


\












J






4
*

\
^^






cn^ia






,
*


	 	
^





KO 0 ^
O
o
















Ol

















•fc


















-------
     Maintenance material costs reflect estimated annual requirements: for
general supplies, pump seals, instrumentation repair, valve replacement
or repair and other miscellaneous work items:.  Costs for replacement of
carbon lost during contactor operation and carbon regeneration are not
included.  A separate curve is provided for makeup carbon, and this cost
must be added separately.

    ^Labor costs are related to operation of the facility and include those
required to maintain equipment and supervise operation.

     Operation and maintenance requirements; for pressure carbon contactors
are summarized in Table 20 and Figures 12 and 13.
                                   62

-------
U)
                                                      Table 20
                                           Operation and Maintenance Summary
                                             Pressure Carbon  Contacfcors
Total
Surface
Area-ft2
157
1,357
6,786



Energy - kw-hr/yr
Process
916
7,967
39,746
Building
179,550
492,480
2,154,600
Total
180,470
500,450
2,194,350
Maintenance
Material
$/yr
1,500
7,500
35,000

Labor
hr/yr
2,000
3,500
7,500

Total Cost*
$/yr
26,910
57,510
175,830
                    *Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr and $10.00/hour of labor

-------
•w-
 I
cc
UJ
UJ
o
LU

h-
2

<
1
6
5
4
3
2
100,0
9
f
6
5
4
3
2
10,00
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
IOC
9"
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
|
7
6
5
4
3
2
00 I,OC
9
8
6
5
4
3
2
0 100, (
• 9
r ,. 8
"- <^ 7

w
- 1 4
i
- >- 3
CD
cc
- z 2
UJ
)0 10,0
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1000






>0,000





300






+*
DO



























^



















+*















/











'














/











X
_ 4 _
^





/
^






^^
^









-X

^


y
X
/



	 	 y
	 _/l

f
f











r




,






/




















/





j















/





f-





/















/




/





/
















r ~



{





J
















BUILD




MAINT1
MATEI




^ROCE











100 234 567891000 234 56789KJOOO 2
TOTAL CONTACTOR AREA -ft 2






ING




ENA
?IAI




SS











3





F




NO





Fl
















N




p





^JF
















•R










R
















GY










V







































456 789
'0 100 1000
                        TOTAL  CONTACTOR AREA -m2


                  OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE

                 PRESSURE  CARBON CONTACTORS



                          FIGURE  12
                           64

-------
-,
7
6
5
4
3
2
1,000
6
5
4
3
-\ 2
1
fe 100,0
0 9
0 8
oB 5
0 4
l-
H 2
10,00
9"
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1000
-
- rf
7
6
5
4
3
2
,000
7
6
5
4
3
00 100
I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 'O 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 '
o 6 LABOR -hr/yr
3 ro OJ * 01 
-------
 CONSTRUCTION COST

 Gravity Carbon Contactors  -  Concrete  Construction

      Concrete gravity  carbon contactors are  essentially identical  to gravity
 filtration structures,  and the  same conceptual layout was used.  Costs
 were developed for  carbon  bed depths  of 5 feet and 8.3 feet, which provide
 empty bed contact times of 7.5  and 12.5 minutes, respectively, at  an
 application rate  of 5  gpm/ft2.

      Carbon removal from the contactor is accomplished using a series of
 troughs located at  the  carbon/support gravel interface.  The carbon slurry
 is  then pumped to dewatering and regeneration facilities.  Carbon  removal
 troughs and piping  were sized to maintain a velocity of 3 ft/second with
 a carbon slurry of  3 Ibs carbon per gallon.  The troughs, each of which
 have plug style valves,  are  manifolded into a spent carbon transfer system.
 Regenerated carbon  is transported through a similar piping system.

      The costs presented are for a complete carbon contacting facility
 including the  contactor structure, cylinder operated butterfly valves,
 liquid  and carbon handling piping with headers in a pipe gallery, flow
 measurement and other instrumentation, master operations control panel
 and  building.  Housing  requirements were developed assuming that the entire
 carbon  contactor  structure is enclosed.
     ^    included in the cost estimate for the carbon contactor are backwash
pumping, the initial activated carbon charge, spent or regenerated activated
carbon handling outside of -the contactor pipe gallery and carbon regeneration
and preparation facilities.  Separate curves are presented for these costs.
In developing construction costs it was assumed that all carbon in a
contactor would be removed and replaced with regenerated carbon in a single
operation.  This handling method requires that regeneration facilities
be designed to store both spent and regenerated carbon in quantities
equivalent to the amount in one contactor.

     Estimated construction costs are presented in Tables 21 and 22 and
in Figure 14.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

Gravity Carbon Contactors -Concrete Construction

     Building energy requirements are for building heating,  ventilation,  and
lighting.  Process energy is: required for backwash, pumping and carbon slurry
pumping during carbon removal and replacement.   The backwash frequency was
assumed to be once per day, for 10 minutes at 12 gpm/ft2.  For carbon removal,
a regeneration frequency of every two months, and a slurry concentration
of 3 pounds of carbon per gallon of water were utilized.   Process energy
requirements are virtually identical for the two different carbon bed depths.
                                      66

-------
                      Table 21
                  Construction  Cost
 Gravity Carbon Contactors  - Concrete Construction
(7.5 min.  empty bed contact time - 5 foot  bed depth)
Total Contactor Volume - ft3
Total Contactor Area - ft2
Excavation and Sitework
Manufactured Equipment
Concrete
Steel
Labor
Pipe and Valves
Electrical and Instrumentation
Housing
SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
TOTAL
700
140
1,580
25,770
6,210
4,790
19,560
31,580
6,350
16,250
112,090
16,810
128,900
3,500
700
2,900
50,800
15,730
9,000
52,160
102,260
10,400
37,800
280,330
42,050
322,380
7,000
1,400
4,430
67,450
22,030
12,810
95,980
193,920
10,510
65,910
473,040
70,960
544,000
35,,000
7,000
13,010
240,800
82,880
61,300
311,940
562,000
42,440
272,600
1,586,370
237,960
1,824,330
70,000
14,000
20,550
410,780
134,360
102,670
445,510
812,800
58,800
480,250
2,465,720
369,860
2,835,580
140,000
28,000
34,850
760,800
239,190
175,030
875,890
1,376,500
92,730
904,350
4,459,340
668,900
5,128,240

-------
ON
00
                                                      Table 22

                                                  Construction Cost

                                  Gravity Carbon Contactors - Concrete Construction

                               (12.5 min.  empty bed contact time - 8.2 foot bed depth)
Total Contactor Volume - ft3
Total Contactor Area - ft2
Excavation and Sitework
Manufactured Equipment
Concrete
Steel
Labor
Pipe and Valves
Electrical and Instrumentation
Housing
SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
TOTAL
700
140
2,110
25,770
7,560
5,840
23,810
31,580
6,350
16,250
119,270
17,890
137,160
3,500
700
3,880
50,080
19,150
10,140
63,540
102,260
10,400
37,800
297,250
44,590
341,840
7,000
1,400
5,910
67,450
29,420
17,940
116,850
193,920
10,510
65,910
507,910
76,190
584,100
35,000
7,000
17,350
240,800
104,810
74,630
379,760
562,000
42,440
272,600
1,694,120
254,120
1,948,240
70,000
14.000
27,400
410,780
170,300
124,990
542,360
812,800
58,800
480,250
2,627,680
394,150
3,021,830
140,000
28,000
46,400
760,800
291,190
213,080
1,103,630
1,376,500
92,730
904,350
4,788,680
718,300
5,506,980

-------
8
B
7
6
5
4
3
2
io,ooo,r
|
8
6
5
4
»- 3
2
0
D
J
1,000,1
5 1
3 8
7
= 1
n 5
a 4
§ 3
2
100,
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2





)00




300



^X
X^x
000



















X
_^s


















	 —
^p
^r S
r ~
X
















_ - . 	 — ^
	 jr 4
.. t* s\
' *
4 r
i^

















/
x^




















,/
/



















>

















C.D.C
	 -^ —
X >
, /
4
E.B.C
















^-Sr
^




















^



2i
















HM



N1































1000
5 o / o a iu,uuu  «•   ^  -T - - • --iw«,wu^ -  -     I 000 000
    TOTAL CONTACTOR VOLUME-ft3
                                    	
         100              1000            10,000
               TOTAL CONTACTOR VOLUME- m3
              CONSTRUCTION   COST
          GRAVITY  CARBON  CONTACTORS
            CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION

                   FIGURE  14
                      69

-------
     Maintenance material costs include the cost of general supplies, backwash
and carbon transport pump maintenance, instrumentation repair and other
miscellaneous items.  The cost for replacement of carbon lost during contactor
operation and carbon regeneration is not included in the maintenance material
costs.

     Labor costs include the cost of operating the contactors,  the backwash
pumps and the carbon slurry pumps, as well as the cost of instrument and
equipment repairs, and supervision.
  A TFJfUroo 15 and 16 Present the operation and maintenance requirements,
and lable Z3 is a summary of these requirements.
                                    70

-------
                        Table 23
            Operation and Maintenance Summary
    Gravity Carbon Contactors - Concrete Construction

  7.5 minute empty bed contact time - 5 foot bed depth
Total
Contactor
Volume - .ft3
700
3,500
7,000
35,000
70,000
140,000
Electrical
Building
44;. 120
151,850
279,070
1,190,160
2,165,890
4,123,490
Energy - kw-hr/yr
Process Total
1,370 45,490
6,820 158,670
13,630 292,700
68,150 1,258,310
136,300 2,302,190
273,070 4,396,560
Maintenance
Material
$/yr
1,400
4,800
8,500
31,000
50,600
90,000
Labor
hr/yr
1,850
2,220
2,600
6,670
13,150
25,700
Total O&M
Costs - $
21,260
31,760
43,280
135,450
251,170
478,900
12.5 minute empty bed contact time - 8.3  foot  bed depth
Total
Contactor
Volume - ft3
1,160
5,810
11,620
58,100
116,200
232,400
Electrical
Building
44,120
151,850
279,070
1,190,160
2,165,890
4,123,490
Energy - kw-hr/yr
Process Total
1,380 45,500
6,900 158,750
13,790 292,860
68,790 1,259,130
137,940 2,303,830
276,350 4,399,840
Maintenance
Material
$/yr
1,400
4,800
8,500
31,000
50,600
90,000
Labor
hr/yr
1,850
2,220
2,600
6,670
13,150
25,700
Total O&M
Costs - $
21,270
31,760
43,290
135,470
251,210
479,000

-------
100,000
       1000  234 5678910,000 234 56789100,0002  3  4 567  9
       _	TOTAL CONTACTOR VOLUME-FT3         tpO 0,000
               100
                                1000              10,000
                     TOTAL  CONTACTOR VOLUME -m3
                OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE
                GRAVITY  CARBON  CONTACTORS-
                  CONCRETE   CONSTRUCTION
                         FIGURE 15
                           72

-------
3
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1,000,
6
5
4
3
2
><
\
*f*
| IOO
l- 9
I/) ft
8 I
_: 5
£ 4
O
<- 3
2
IO.OC
9
8
6
5
4
3
2
o
7
6
5
4
3
2
DOO
- 9
— Q
7
6
5
4
3
2
000 IOC
9
8
6
5
4
3
2
)0 IO,C
9
8
7
6
- 1 3
QL
O
< *•
1000

	









),000


^
00



^
1000













^




==
2













x*
^*




^












""" ^ '
^





s==











:;-^
( X"*^





^x^
J -^^











X
^>




-^
^
X












„/
^





^
x1












(/
/





~pf--\










.. — £§_|
S
* /
' /I2J
P
t
>_
7.5 W
/
//.











UN-
/

Ml

8-<

IN.
/
.5










sV
-t


N.

R-

™

UN










t--
-B-t


L. J.



.( .
















• "•




....

T




3 4 5 6789IOPOO 234 56789100,0002 3 456789
TOTAL CONTACTOR VOLUME - ff3 l,000,00<
. 	 ^ 	 — 4 	 	
100             1000            10,000
   TOTAL CONTACTOR VOLUME -m3

 OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE

 GRAVITY   CARBON  CONTACTORS -

  CONCRETE  CONSTRUCTION


          FIGURE 16
           73

-------
 CONSTRUCTION COST

 Gravity Carbon Contactors - Steel Construction

      For carbon treatment facilities requiring in excess of about 30 000
 cubic feet of carbon contact volume, the use of large diameter, field
 erected, steel gravity contactors may offer an economic advantage over
 smaller diameter, factory-built, pressure carbon columns.  Costs were
 developed for 20 foot and 30 foot diameter steel, gravity contactors using
 the conceptual design information listed in Table 24.  A carbon bed depth
 of 20 feet with an overall vessel height of 35 feet was used in the cost
 analysis.   The units are designed for down flow operation and the system
 hydraulics were sized using an application rate of 5 gpm/ft2, which provides
 a JU minute empty bed contact time.

     _The_vessels are constructed of  factory formed steel plates erected at
 the jobsite.   Units are provided with a nozzle style underdrain eliminating
 the need for a supporting gravel layer.   Carbon is removed from each con-
 tactor as  required for  regeneration  through multiple carbon drawoff pipes
 in the underdrain support plate.   Regenerated carbon is returned through a
 piping system to the top of  each contactor.

 _     The costs  presented are for a complete carbon contacting facility
 including vessels,  face and  interconnecting piping,  access walkways,  cylinder
 operated butterfly valves, on all hydraulic  piping  with  manually operated
 ball  or  knife  type valves on carbon  handling system,  flow control  and other
 instrumentation,  master operations control  panel,  and a building completely
 housing  the  contactors.

     Not included  in the construction  costs: are  carbon  contactor supply
 pumping, surface wash and backwash pumping,  the  initial  activated  carbon
 charge,  spent or  regenerated  carbon  handling facilities  (exclusive of
 piping within the  contactor building) or carbon  regeneration  or preparation
 facilities.  Curves  for  estimating the costs  for these  facilities:  are
 presented separately.

     Estimated construction costs  are presented  in Tables  25  and 26 for
 20-foot and 30-foot  diameter units respectively.  Figure  17 shows  the
 construction cost curves  for systems using the two different  diameter
 contactors..

 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

 Gravity Carbon Contactors - Steel Construction

     Building energy requirements are for building heating, ventilation,
 and lighting.  Process energy is required for the backwash pumping and carbon
 slurry pumping during carbon removal and replacement.  The backwash frequency
was assumed to be once per day, for 10 minutes at 12 gpm/ft2.  For carbon
 removal, a regeneration frequency of every two months, and a slurry concentra-
 tion of 3 pounds of carbon per gallon of water were utilized.  Process
 energy requirements are virtually identical for the two different carbon
bed depths.

                                      74

-------
                   Table 24
               Conceptual Design
Gravity Carbon Contactors - Steel Construction
          (20 foot carbon bed depth)
Plant
Flow
ingd
10
50
100
200
Total Contactor
Bed Area, Ft2
20' diam.
1,570
7,850
15,700
31,400
30' diam.
7,065
14,130
28,260
Number
Contactors
20' diam.
5
25
50
100
ju aiam.
10
20
40
Total C
Volume ,
on 1 J-f „.-
zu aiam.
31,400
157,000
314,000
628,000
arbon
ft3
*3H ' rH ATTI

141,300
282,600
565,200
rj-a.ii u &.LCO.
r\
Requirements, ft
20' diam. 30' diam.
6,500
33,000
66,000
126,000
—
26,000
50,000
95,000

-------
                  Table 25
              Construction Cost
Gravity Carbon Contactors - Steel Construction
              (20' diam. tanks)
Total Contactor Volume - ft3
Excavation and Sitework
Manufactured Equipment
Concrete
Steel
Labor
Pipe and Valves
Electrical and Instrumentation
Housing
SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
TOTAL
31,400
1,950
321,400
7,220
3,450
63,000
132,400
48,200
585,000
1,162,620
174,390
1,337,010
157,000
6,240
1,526,800
25,920
12,720
299,000
635,500
198,500
2,706,000
5,410,680
811,600
6,222,280
314,000
11,040
2,989,000
44,620
22,080
556,000
1,352,000
388,600
5,346,000
10,709,340
1,606,400
12,315,740
628,000
20,700
5,785,560
86,400
41,400
1,023,300
2,488,000
752,000
10,080,000
20,277,360
3,041,600
23,318,960

-------
                   Table 26
               Construction Cost
Gravity Carbon Contactors - Steel Construction
               (30' diam. tanks)
Total Contactor Volume, ft3
Excavation and Sitework
Manufactured Equipment
Concrete
Steel
Labor
Pipe and Valves
Electrical and Instrumentation
Housing
SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
TOTAL
141,300
6,800
1,251,000
28,000
13,800
251,000
532,000
163,000
2,132,000
4,378,000
656,700
5,034,700
282,600
12,500
2,447,000
53,000
26,000
465,000
1,028,000
318,000
4,050,000
8,400,000
1,260,000
9,660,000
565,200
23,800
4,845,000
105,000
50,000
897,000
1,986,000
630,000
7,695,000
16,232,000
2,434,800
18,666,800

-------
•*«-
 i
89
7
6
5
4
3
2
100,000,
89
6
5
4
3
2
I0,000,(
9
8
6
5
4
3
2
l,000,<
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2






000







)00







300






































•






















X






























/





























/





























x
/






















20' DL


/
X.
yy^
<<
,r s























\ME
^-X
vV
/



























TE
^





























^
^





























y
r
/
3






























X
0'





























t
[>l






























^ METEF

































































-








































































































































      10,000 234 56789100,0002  3  4 56789(000,000   3  4 56789
                       TOTAL CONTACTOR VOLUME -'ft3
               1000               10,000
                       TOTAL  CONTACTOR VOLUME-m3
—I	
 100,000
                     CONSTRUCTION  COST
    GRAVITY  CARBON  CONTACTORS-STEEL  CONSTRUCTION
                         FIGURE   17
                            78

-------
     Maintenance material costs include the cost of general supplies, backwash
and carbon transport pump maintenance, instrumentation repair and other
miscellaneous items.  The cost for replacement of carbon lost during contactor
operation and carbon regeneration is not included in the maintenance material
costs.  A separate curve is provided for makeup carbon and this cost must
be added separately.

     Labor costs include the cost of operating the contactors, the backwash
pumps, and the carbon slurry pumps, as well as the cost of instrument and
equipment repairs, and supervision.

     Figures 18 and 19 present the operation and maintenance requirements,
and Table 27 is a summary of these requirements.
                                      79

-------
oo
o
                                                    Table 27
                                        Operation and Maintenance Summary
                                 Gravity Carbon Contactors - Steel Construction
Maintenance
Contactor
Diameter - ft
20
20
20
20
30
30
30
Carbon
Volume - ft3
31,400
157,100
314,000
628,000
141,300
282,600
565,200
Electrical
Building
666,900
3,385,800
6,771,600
12,927,600
2,668,000
5,130,000
9,750,000
Energy -
Process
12,030
60,170
120,340
240,680
54,150
108,300
216,600
kw-hr/yr
Total
678,930
3,445,970
6,891,940
13,168,280
2,722,150
5,238,300
9,966,600
Material
$/yr
5,000
20,000
35,000
65,000
15,000
25,000
40,000
Labor
hr/yr
3,000
7,000
14,000
27,000
6,800
13,500
26,000
Total Cost*
$/yr
55,370
193,380
381,760
730,050
164,660
317,150
600,000
        Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr and $10.00/hour of labor

-------
UJ
UJ
o
100,000
7
6
5
4
3
2
10,000
1
6
5
4
3
2
10 OC
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
7
6
5
4
3
2
7
6
5
4
3
2
IO.OC
7
6
r 5
4
3
2
1,00
• 1 6
- * 5
- l 4
V
. o »
cc 3
UJ
- u 2
I00,(
9
8
6

3
10,0







10,000








D.OOO







DOO







?o














































X





/















































/

















x















/

















/















/








/








/
/














/








/







/
/












f
f
/
f



MAI



y

f




j
y











— -^
f








NT



/
4!




>













/









— r
Li

A

/


















/










ft
t

*






























N
/


3

/















/












r, (


j




























KJt AT
IVIATI
' DIAM


tIAMET

BUILDI















PROC










^^^
Rl»'
TF


ER

NG















•SS











L





El















El

















E















IE

















R















*<

















*<















•^

















.



























































          10,000 2  345 6789100,0002   3  4  5 6 7 89lpOO,000   345 6789
                         TOTAL CONTACTOR  VOLUME - ff3
1000              10,000
       TOTAL CONTACTOR  VOLUME - m3
                                                     100,000
                     OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE
        GRAVITY  CARBON  CONTACTORS -STEEL  CONSTRUCTION

                            FIGURE  18
                              81

-------
H
W
O
o
1
7
6
5
4
3
2
1,000.
1
6
5
4
3
2
IOO.C
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
IO.OC
I
6
5
4
3
2
: 1
7
6
5
4
3
2
000
9
F *
6
5
4
3
2
)00 IOC
9
, 87
6
5
4
i- 9
0 IO,C
i- 9
8
M'
- f 4
u. S 3
O °
00
<
i y
1000















jOOO







00


























































rfrf
r









&



















^[











X



















w











^






























^































/


















/






























>









J
jS
S1
,r

















4
/








/




















A
/









/



















/
/










/


















J
r










/































f





















































































TOTAL









LABOf





















c































OS































T



















































































































































         10,000 2  34 56789100,0002  3  4 5 6 7 891000,0002   3  4 56789

                       TOTAL CONTACTOR  VOLUME -ff3
                                  -»-
1000             10,000

      TOTAL CONTACTOR VOLUME -
100,
                                                     000
                   OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE

       GRAVITY  CARBON  CONTACTORS - STEEL CONSTRUCTION

                         FIGURE  19
                             82

-------
CONSTRUCTION COST

Off-Site Regional Carbon Regeneration - Handling and Transportation

     Construction costs were developed for combination granular activated
carbon dewatering/storage bins.   These facilities would be required for
storage and dewatering of carbon removed from pressure or gravity
contactors, prior to transport to off-site regeneration facilities.  Such
storage provisions are generally provided where spent carbon must be
accumulated before it can be economically handled, transported and
regenerated at a regional facility.

     Two different design configurations were used to develop the cost
curves.  Storage bins of 2,000 cubic feet and less are elevated, 12 foot
diameter, cylindrical tanks with conical bottoms.  The 5,000 cubic foot
bin is an elevated, three hopper, rectangular tank.   For larger storage
requirements, multiple units would be used.

     Tanks are elevated for gravity loading to dump  trucks.   The overall
height of the storage bins was limited to 30 feet.  All designs include
stainless steel dewatering. screens and associated piping and valving to
conduct water to waste drains.  Tanks are field fabricated of braced,
1/4 inch, shop formed steel plate protected by a suitable coating system.
The tanks are not housed.  No costs are included for trucks necessary to
haul dewatered carbon to the regional regeneration facility.  These costs
must be added separately.

     Construction costs are summarized in Table 28 and illustrated in
Figure 20.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

Off-Site Regional Carbon Regeneration - Handling and Transportation

     Granular activated carbon may be removed from the contactor, dewatered,
and hauled to a regionally located regeneration facility serving a number
of treatment plants within a distance of up to 100 miles.  Included In
the costs are the fuel, labor and maintenance requirements to load spent
carbon from dewatered carbon storage tanks: to 30 cubic yard, semi-dump
trailers, haul to the regeneration facility, unload, reload reactivated
carbon from bulk storage, return to the treatment plant, and discharge
either to on-site storage tanks or directly to the carbon contactors.
For all travel distances it was assumed that the entire operation would
he accomplished in an 8—hour day.

     The annual fuel requirements are based upon a diesel fuel consumption
of 3.5 mpg.

     Maintenance materials are only for the trucks, and were computed
assuming a unit cost of $0.30 per mile.
                                    83

-------
oo
.p-
                                                             Table  28
                                                        Construction  Cost
                               Off-Site Regional Carbon Regeneration  - Handling  and Transportation
                On Site Carbon
Storage Capacity - Ftd
Excavation and Sitework
Manufactured Equipment
Concrete
Labor
Pipe and Valves
SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
TOTAL
1,000
200
18,150
740
12,290
1,300
32,680
4,900
37,580
5,000
350
19,760
1,650
31,240
3,600
56,600
8,490
65,090
20,000
1,400
77,460
6,000
117,630
14,100
216,590
32,490
249,080

-------
X
7
6
5
4
3
2
1,000,00
7
6
5
4
-w- 3
i
*~ 2
O
o
z IOO.C
° 9
" 7
i 6
0 3
2
IO.OC
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
3






0






00





/

)0


























X1



























>
,/
























































x


























































^


























































/























































































































































































































































































































































































































1000  234  5678910,000  234 56789100,0002  3 4 56789
             ON-SITE CARBON STORAGE CAPACITY -ff3
	1               	1	1
         1000             10,000             100,000
               ON-SITE CARBON STORAGE CAPACITY-m3

              CONSTRUCTION  COST
   OFF-SITE REGIONAL  CARBON  REGENERATION

        HANDLING  AND TRANSPORTATION

                 FIGURE  20
                      85

-------
     A summary of the operation and maintenance requirements is presented
in Table 29, and they are also shown In Figures: 21 and 22.  The total cost
represent the labor, energy, and maintenance requirements; related only
to the handling and transportation of activated carbon.  The costs do not
include the cost of regeneration at the regional regeneration facility.
                                    86

-------
                                             Table  29

                                Operation and Maintenance Summary

                              Off-Site Regional Carbon Regeneration

                                   Handling and Transportation
Carbon
Regenerat<
Ibs/yr
30,000
150,000
500,000
1,000,000
3,000,000
2d
10 mi
5.7
28.6
97
194
582
Diesel Fuel1
gals/yr
25 mi
14.3
71.4
243
486
1,430
100 mi
57
286
971
1,943
5,829
10
6
30
100
200
610
Maintenance
Matls-$/yr
mi 25 mi 100 mi
20 60
80 300
260 1,020
510 2,040
1,530 6,120
10 mi
6.8
34
116
232
780 1,
Labor
hrs/yr
25 mi
11
55
187
374
200 1,
Total
$
100 mi
14
70
238
476
428
10 mi
80
380
1,310
2,610
8,670
Cost3
/yr
25 mi
130
660
2,230
4,470
14,170

100 mi
230
1,130
3,840
7,670
23,020
NOTE;  All distances are one way

1Based on 3.5 mpg for 30 yd3 semi-dump
o
 Labor for loading and unloading carbon and for hauling

Calculated using diesel fuel at $0.45/gallon and labor at $10.00/hour

-------
  1000
E  2
u
<
2 100
o
UJ
2  3-

   Z -
  10
   9"F
   8 -
   7 -
   6 -
   5 -
   4 -

   3 -

   2 -
   7 -
   6 -
   5 -
   4 -

   3 -

   2 -
     Z  345 6789     2  3 456789
10,000            100,000           1,000,000
               CARBON REGENERATED-Ib/yr
1
7
6
5
4
3
2
10,0
I
6
5
4
3
2
100
.. 9
£.8
\ 7
r.
-i 4
UJ
£ 3
_i
UJ 9
en 2
UJ
Q
100
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
10







00







D

























































y








f






/
4













/

/







/






f
/













/

/
/







/
/





+- j
{

*
s









s\ £5
/
s
i
/
/ M






/
/
r
/
	 y
/
/
/
j
/
/
+








/
/

MN1
MAI




/
r
1
/



/
/












•


10

EN
ER




Dl
n~fr
ILp
1

M

M
IA




•S
FUE
00
f
25





10










I
1 1






L,

C
L




E
L
11
41





MLI





















r-


E

E







-






-c














c









.' i
. )
















                                                234 56789
                                                       10,000,000
            10,000
                               -f-
1,000,000
                      100,000
               CARBON REGENERATED-kg/yr
          OPERATION   AND  MAINTENANCE
   OFF-SITE  REGIONAL  CARBON  REGENERATION
         HANDLING  AND TRANSPORTATION

                   FIGURE   21
                              88

-------
100,000
1
6
5
4
3
2
10,00
* f
-^ 6
^ 5
co 4
° 3
_i
!* 2
O
1,000
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
100
9
8
6
5
4
3
2
7
6
5
4
3
2
0 10,0
; l
6
5
4
3
l i i i i i i i • i i i i i i i i *
- LABOR -hr/yr
O ro CM * ui o> -sjoxo ° r» u ^ ui o> ^Ou) § r>







00








0













































































X
X








*























^

/







.
/
/























/
^
/







/
^
/






















^

'
'






J
/
x





















J

.

r






/
/
A






















/

/
/







w
A
,





















j



f






f
/
^

















y

x <
X /
s
/ A
f S
/
r


j
/,
//
SS A
//
/


















/
Jr

y
y^
f



X


r X
y^
r



















/
r

f






i.























4
t
/
/







y
r
/























S
/
'







/
/






















/

/
'







/
/





















^

^








/
/





















.
'

^
/







,


















/
_f
s y
r S
r ^^
/ y
/" /"
/
i


j
f
y^y
y^yV
' ./'y^
•y
x















TOT

^
J
A
J
f




/

^r
/ j
s
f


















AL
I0(
2J

I^N
IV




L/
25


in




















<





*





s
)|/iL
Nil

Mill
|IL







B
) r
iv
0
11
II


Mil



























.

F





R
























T

Tl

1






(


c
"




















>
k








5
i


















234 56789 234 56789 234 56789
10,000 100,000 1,000,000 IO,000,OC
CARBON REGENERATED - Ib/yr
i i i
           10,000
     100,000           1,000,000
CARBON  REGENERATED - kg/yr
                OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE
          OFF-SITE  REGIONAL  CARBON  REGENERATION
               HANDLING  AND TRANSPORTATION

                         FIGURE  22
                           89

-------
CONSTRUCTION COST

Multiple Hearth Granular Carbon Regeneration

     Granular activated carbon is effectively regenerated in multiple hearth
furnaces by exposure to properly and closely-controlled conditions of tempera-
ture, oxygen, and moisture content of the atmosphere within the furnace.
During the process, adsorbed organics are oxidized and driven off, restoring
the adsorptive properties of the activated carbon.  The multiple hearth
furnace is a cylindrical refractory lined shell carrying a series of fired
refractory hearths located one above the other.  A revolving insulated
central shaft and attached radial rabble arms move the material across
the hearth directing material alternately outward or inward as material
drops from one level to the next.

     The required size of a multiple hearth furnace is a function of the
required frequency of regeneration, the carbon dosage used (which is a
function of the nature of the organics adsorbed), the allowable hearth
loading of the furnace, and anticipated downtime.  These factors must be
considered in selecting the required furnace size.

     Construction costs were developed for a series, of single furnaces with
various hearth areas.  Conceptual designs for multiple hearth furnaces
used in the cost estimates are shown in Table 30.  The costs include the
basic furnace, center shaft drive, furnace and cooling fans, spent carbon
storage and dewatering equipment, auxiliary fuel system, exhaust scrubbing
system, regenerated carbon handling system, quench tank, steam boiler,
control panel, and instrumentation.  The equipment costs which are on a
furnished and installed basis, were obtained from equipment manufacturers.
Housing requirements were developed from manufacturer's recommendations.

     Construction costs for a complete carbon regeneration furnace
and supporting equipment are presented in Table 31 and illustrated in
Figure 23.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

Multiple Hearth Granular Carbon Regeneration

     Operation and maintenance costs were developed for single furnace
multiple hearth carbon regeneration systems, with effective hearth areas
between 27 and 1,509 square feet.  The costs presented are for operation
100 percent of the time, and correction must be made once the actual
percentage of time in operation has been determined.

     Process, electrical energy requirements were developed from manufac-
turer's information listing connected and operating horsepower requirements
for furnaces of various sizes, and assuming tha furnace operates 100
percent of the time.  Appropriate correction must be made for the actual
percentage of the time, that the furnace is operated.  Building energy
requirements are only for lighting and ventilation.
                                      90

-------
                           Table 30
Multiple Hearth Granular Carbon Regeneration Conceptual Design

         Furnace Configuration
Effective Hearth
Area - Sq. Ft.
27
37
147
359
732
1,509
I.D.
30"
30"
39"
10'-6"
14'-6"
20'-0"
No . Hearths
6
6
6
5
6
6
Building Ai
Requirement!
750
750
900
1,200
1,800
2,400

-------
                                                 Table 31
                                           Construction Cost
                              Multiple Hearth  Granular Carbon Regeneration
Furnace Hearth Area -                  27           37         147          359          732        1,509
Square Feet
Manufactured Equipment
Labor
Pipe and Valves
Electrical and Instrumentation
Housing
SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and
$208,000
112,000
7,840
7,920
102,400
438,160
65,720
$260,000
140,000
7,840
7,970
102,400
518,210
77,730
$490,000
260,000
7,840
7,970
116,000
881,810
132,270
$610,000
330,000
13,620
8,780
163.500
1,125,900
168,890
$980,000
530,000
22,060
14,260
229.500
1,775,620
226,340
$1,230,000
670,000
45,910
25,770
312,300
2,283,980
342,600
Contingency
          TOTAL                   $503,880    $595,940 $1,014,080  $1,294,790  $2,041,960    $2,626,580

-------

i
7
6
5
4
3
10,000,000
f
6
5
•w-
1 3
I-
w
O 2
o
z
2 1,000,000
S 89
a: 7
w 6
Z 5
0
O 4
3
2
100,000
i
7
6
^
4

2








































































^


























^



























X


























* *






















































^



























^



























*



























+



























+



























+ '


























,^



























































































































































  10
4 56789100   234  567891000
 SINGLE FURNACE HEARTH ARE A-ft2
                        •+•
456 789
    10,000
   I                10                100
             SINGLE FURNACE HEARTH AREA -m2

                CONSTRUCTION  COST
MULTIPLE HEARTH  GRANULAR  CARBON REGENERATION


                     FIGURE  23
                      93

-------
      Natural  gas: requirements were  calculated  from manufacturer's recommenda-
 tions,  assuming  that  the  feed activated  carbon has a moisture content of  50
 percent  and that the  furnace.operates continuously.  The natural gas
 requirement must be adjusted to account  for the percentage of downtime.
 A heat value  of  1,000 Btu/standard  cu ft of natural gas was assumed in
 determining energy requirements.  Where  an alternate fuel, such as No. 2
 Fuel  Oil is. utilized  in place of natural gas,  the appropriate gallonage
 requirements  can be calculated using an  overall fuel Btu value equal to
 that  of natural  gas.

      Maintenance material costs were developed from Information furnished
 by equipment  suppliers and are related to maintenance and repair of
 electrical drive machinery, replacement of rabble arms, and damaged
 refractory materials.

      Operating labor is related principally to operation of the equipment.
Estimates were developed from information furnished by equipment suppliers
and operating installations.

     Table 32 presents the operation and maintenance requirements,  which
are also shown In Figures 24,  25,  and 26.
                                    94

-------
                                           Table 32
                              Operation and Maintenance Summary
                        Multiple Hearth Granular Carbon Regeneration
Effective
Hearth Area
<5f1 ft
27
37
147
359
732
1,509
Electrical Energy
kw-hr/yr 1
Building Process
14,630 261,400
14,630
17,550
23,400
35,100
46,800
326,750
424,770
588,150
849,550
1,307,000
Total £
276,030
341,380
442,320
611,550
884,650
1,353,800
latural Gasg
jcf/yr x 10
5.80
7.72
26.2
48.26
108.40
207.75
Maintenance
Material
$/yr
2,800
3,500
6,000
8,000
11,000
15,000
Labor
hrs/yr
900
950
3,400
6,200
10,500
17,000
Total Cost
$/yr*
27,620
32,840
87,330
151,080
283,460
495,690
Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr,  $0.0013/scf  and  $10.00/hr of  labor
NOTE:  Makeup carbon costs are  not included

-------
100,000
*
7
6
5
4
. 3
><
^ 2
1
< IO.OC
£ |
£ f
2 6
LU
o 4
1 3
in
1-
Z 2
<
5
1000
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
10
I I
7
6
5
4
3
2
)0
9
8
6
5
4
3
2
1,000
: 9
8
- 5,'
\ 6
£ 5
-.5*
1 3
e>
_ DC 2
z
111
I00,(
- , 9
- < 8
-07
E;
- ^ 4
LU
3
2
I0,0(













,000




300






30











^





•**







••••











^




^








••Mi











^




+*








^










+ '*





+•*








--•








- ~—^





,**










^








-&*





^









4*








p^






5**









x-








^






^«









X








^-'





-*•
^








^
x^








^•^^M
M





PR
EN








^S
'^UILl


IU 234 56789100 234 567891000 2
SINGLE FURNACE HEARTH AREA -ft 2







MN
ATF





)CE
:RR









INC


3







'Eh
Rl





JS
Y









F


4







A
U















N!


5







J















F









:E















(!'

























/


6789
10,000
       1                10                100
                SINGLE FURNACE HEARTH AREA-m2

                OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

     MULTIPLE  HEARTH GRANULAR  CARBON REGENERATION


                      FIGURE   24
                         96

-------
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
100
o
8
6
5
4
o
O
X
u.
o
en
co 9
< 8
o 7
< 5
o:
r> 4
< 3
z J
i
*







































— X








































































^






















ji























f























^























~?























^
























NAT I

















_LJ 	






RAl
























C
























A!
























•











































  10   2345 6789100   2   3456 7891000 .2  3 4 5 6 i ay
              SINGLE FURNACE HEARTH AREA - ft2        10,000
  _j                4-                100
              SINGLE FURNACE HEARTH AREA-m2

           OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE
MULTIPLE HEARTH GRANULAR  CARBON  REGENERATION

                    FIGURE  25
                         97

-------
*
7
6
5
4
3
2
l,000,(
5
f
6
5
4
3
2
100,000
9
_ 8
\ 7
-«- 6
1 5
O
 (M
100













)0




















































































^

/






















/
/


/''





















--^—


/
f
























/























/

*
























X
^
























/

^
























/
























^s


•' LA
























TO'

30F
























AL


























I


























;c


























1C "
Vi










































10    234 56789100   2  34 567891000   2
         SINGLE FURNACE HEARTH AREA -ft2
—f-
                                          3456 789
                                               10,000
                   10
                                    100
          SINGLE  FURNACE  HEARTH AREA -
           OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE
MULTIPLE  HEARTH  GRANULAR  CARBON  REGENERATION

                    FIGURE  2&
                     98

-------
MATERIAL COST

Granular Activated Carbon

     Virgin carbon is generally purchased in two cubic foot bags for quanti-
ties of 40,000 pounds and less, with larger quantities generally transported
in bulk by rail.  Costs were developed for purchase and placement of virgin
carbon in a contactor.  These costs may be used for either pressure or
gravity carbon contactors to obtain the complete cost of the carbon contactor.
The curve may also be used to determine the cost of makeup carbon to replace
carbon lost during contactor operation and carbon regeneration.  Figure 27
presents a cost curve for purchase, delivery and placement of virgin carbon.
                                       99

-------
i
7
6
5
4
3
2
1,000,
6
5
4
3
-w-
CO
o
0
100,
o 9
m 8
JLAR ACTIVATED CAR
O
 01 * 01 en-*

a: 6

4
3
2
1000





000




DOO




00 /
^ 	





















/





















/





















-^





















— 4 -
/



















,
r





















^












































/





















/




















: y/L
j




















/






















/





















/


















fTT


i +
s





















*



















,.-„„ 2  3 4 56789      234 56789     2   3  4 56789
I0.°00            100,000            1,000,000          10,000,000
                   CARBON QUANTITY- Ib
•	1-
    10,000
    100,000
CARBON  QUANTITY-kg
	1	
 1,000,000
                  MATERIAL  COST
           GRANULAR  ACTIVATED  CARBON

                    FIGURE   27
                       100

-------
CONSTRUCTION COST

Chlorine Storage and Feed Systems

     The costs for chlorine feed facilities have been based  upon use  of
150 pound cylinders for feed rates up to 100 pounds per  day  and  ton cylinders
for feed rates up to 2,000 pounds per day.   For rates of 2,000 pounds per
day and greater, three options were considered:  (1)  ton cylinders; (2)
on-site storage with bulk rail delivery; and (3) direct  feed from a rail
car.

Cylinder Storage

     The maximum chlorinator capacity utilized was 8,000 pounds  per day
and one standby chlorinator was included for each installation.   The  costs
include cylinder scales for all installations, and evaporators are included
for delivery rates of 2,000 pounds per day and greater.   Residual analyzers
with flow proportioning controls were included for flow rates greater than
1,000 pounds per day.  Costs were also included for injector pumps capable
of delivering sufficient water at 25 psi to allow production of a 3,500
mg/1 high strength solution.  Housing cost includes both the chlorinator
room and the cylinder storage room.  All cylinders were assumed to be stored
Indoors, and the number of days of storage ranged from 15 for the smallest
installation to 7 for the largest.  The larger the chlorine usage, presumably
the closer the plant would be to chlorine distribution centers,  and less
chlorine would have to be maintained at the plant.  For feed rates greater
than 100 pounds per day, electrically operated, monorail trolley hoists
were included.

On-SIte Storage Tank with Rail Delivery

     Use of an on-site storage tank would  eliminate the housing requirement
for cylinder storage, the monorail and hoist,  the  cylinder scale,  cylinder
trunnions and the  cylinder manifold piping.  However, additive costs are
incurred for the tank and its supports, a  tank sun shield, load cells for
the tank, a railhead connection  and associated track, unloading platform,
an air padding system, expansion tanks, and miscellaneous gauges,  switches
and piping.  All considerations  relating to  the chlorinators, evaporators,
and other feed equipment remain  the same as  for the  ton cylinder  curve.
The amount of chlorine storage provided with, the on-site tank is  15  days,
which Is. greater than feeding from ton  cylinders at  the same  flow rate,
principally because space is  not a problem and delivery of a  tank car by
rail Is  often less reliable than delivery  of ton cylinders by truck.

     The rail siding costs  Include the  cost of a turnout from the main
 line,  500 feet  of  on-site track, and  the unloading platform.  Piping costs
would be strongly  influenced  by  the  location of the  storage  tank relative
 to the  chlorinators.  Normally  the storage tank Is located  near the  plant
boundary.   Valvlng is more complex than with ton cylinders,  mainly due
 to the  unloading system,  the  use of  duplicate heads  for gas  or  liquid feed,
 and the air padding system.
                                      101

-------
      This curve may be adapted to bulk truck delivery by removing the cost
 of the rail siding.

 Direct Feed from Rail Car

   _   Chlorine may be fed directly from the rail car to the evaporator
 eliminating the requirement for an on-site storage tank.   Ownership  of
 the rail car may be by the utility or the chlorine manufacturer.   In the
 later case, a higher cost per ton of chlorine must be paid to  account for
 amortization and maintenance costs of the car.   Chlorinator, evaporator
 and  other feed equipment costs are the same as  for feed from ton  cylinders.
 Rail siding costs are the same as for on-site storage with rail delivery.

      Estimated construction costs are shown in  Tables 33,  34   and  35 for
 feed systems between 10 and 10,000 pounds per days  and the costs are shown
 graphically in Figure 28.   As  .may be seen,  construction costs  for  on-site
 storage are not significantly  greater than costs for  use of ton cylinders.
 However,  the chlorine cost would  be significantly  less when it is  delivered
 in bulk.

 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE  COST

 Chlorine  Storage  and Feed  Systems

      Power  requirements  include heating,  lighting,  and ventilation of the
 chlorination building and  the  cylinder storage area,  the electrical hoist
 when  ton  cylinders are used, evaporators when feed  is  2,000 pounds/day
 or greater and  the injector pump for  the high strength chlorine solution.
 This  pump was sized  to deliver sufficient flow for  a maximum chlorine
 concentration of  3,500 mg/1 in the high strength solution.  Where on-site
 storage tanks were utilized, the electrical hoist power requirements are
 eliminated and  heating, ventilating, and lighting power are significantly
 reduced due  to  elimination of indoor storage facilities.

     Maintenance material requirements were b.as.ed upon experience at operating
 plants, and are essentially the same for use of cylinders on-site storage
 or rail car storage and feed.  Cost of chlorine is not included in the
maintenance material estimates.

     Labor requirements for cylinders were based upon loading  and unloading
cylinders from a delivery truck, time to connect and disconnect cylinders
from the chlorine headers, and the time for routine daily checking of the
cylinders.  For on-site tank storage, labor consists of time to unload a
bulk delivery truck or rail tanker.  The rail car storage concept  requires
labor only to move the rail car into place, and to  connect and  disconnect
the cars from the feed system.   Common to all installations would  be  the
time  required for daily checking and periodic maintenance of the chlorine
handling system.
                                     102

-------
                                                              Table 33
                                                          Construction Cost
                                        Chlorine Storage and Feed Systems - Cylinder Storage
                                                         Chlorine Feed  Capacity  -  Pounds/day	
                                                 ' jo	5001.000    2,000    5,00010.000
                          j  T,   .    *.          <5  7 nn   10  630    19,880   31,500   36,500     54,130
M              Manufactured  Equipment          ?  3,13U   iu,oju    i3,oou   -. ,
g              Labor                             2,500   2,500    3,800    6,700    6,700      7,600
               Pipe and Valves                     320    1,060     1,750    2,540    5,190      9,020
               Electrical and instrumentation    1,000    2,400    2,800    5,000    7,200      9,500
               Housing        -                  3,900   12,300    15,700   18.400   25,900    ,45^00
                    SUBTOTAL                    10,850   28,890    43,930   64,140   81,490    125,950
               Miscellaneous and Contingency     1.630   ^330    _6^590   ^620   JL2.220    _i^890
                    TOTAL                     $12,480   33,220    50,520   73,760   93,710    144,840

-------
                                 Table  34
                             Construction  Cost
                     Chlorine Storage and Feed Systems
                  On-Site Storage Tank With Rail Delivery
Manufactured Equipment
  Equipment
  Rail Siding
Steel
Labor
Pipe and Valves
Electrical and Instrumentation
Housing
         SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
         TOTAL
Chlorine Feed Capacity
Pounds /day
$





$
2,000
46,400
48,410
1,380
8,560
5,080
12,400
7,410
129,640
19,450
149,090
5,000
58,540
48,410
2,200
10,250
10,380
16,710
7,410
153,900
23,090
176,990
10,000
80,590
48,410
3,080
12,560
18,040
21,130
8,580
192,390
28,860
221,260

-------
                                                           Table  35
                                                       Construction  Cost
                                               Chlorine  Storage and  Feed  Systems
                                                   Direct Feed From  Rail  Car
                                                             Chlorine Feed Capacity
                                                                  Pounds/day	
                                                           2,000      5,000     10,000
                         Manufactured Equipment
                           Equipment                    $   31,500     36,500    54,130
g                          Rail Siding                     48,410     48,410    48,410
                         Labor                              7,000      8,000     9,000
                         Pipe and Valves                    4,810     10,100    17,040
                         Electrical and Instrumentation     5,000      7,200     9,500
                         Housing                            7,410      7,410     8,580
                                   SUBTOTAL               104,130    117,620   146,660
                         Miscellaneous and Contingency     15,620     17.640    22,000
                                   TOTAL                $  119,750    135,260   168,660

-------
                                                     CONSTRUCTION  COST - $
O
c
ro
m

ro
oo
     O
     IE
     m

     »8
               o
o
     m
     m
     o

     CO

     O)
     H
     m
     2
     O)
   o
   O
   o
   CO
        Q.
        a

-------
     Figures 29 and 30 present operation and maintenance curves  for  chlorine
feed systems using cylinder storage.   For feed rates  greater  than  2,000
pounds per day, and use of a on-site  storage tank with rail delivery or
the rail car storage and feed, operation and maintenance requirements are
shown in Figures 31 and 32.  Table 36 presents a summary of operation and
maintenance requirements for all three storage concepts.
                                     107

-------
O
00
                                                           Table 36

                                             Operation  and Maintenance  Summary

                                                   Chlorine Feed  Systems
Energy kw-hr/yr
Feed Rate
10
500
1,000

2,000

5,000
10,000
2,000

5,000

10,000


2,000

5,000

10,000
- Ib/day


0) 0)
T3 00
S cfl
•H l-i
rH O
>> 4J
O CO

Q) Q) £*>
•U 00 V-i
•H CO rH CU
CO !-( -H >
1 O CO -H
£3 4J f£i rH
O co (U
Q
3
O f-i
•U VJ CO
O fin C-3
0)
>-l 13 r-t
•H 0) -H
O 0) CO
fa M
Building
6,160
22,570
25,650

41,040

65,660
123,120
10,260

10,260

15,390


10,260

10,260

10,260
Process
570
1,120
2,230

6,210

15,530
30,990
1,740

4,340

8,690


1,740

4,340

8,690
Total
6,730
23,690
27,880

47,250

81,190
154,110
12,000

14,600

24,080


12,000

14,600

24,080
Maintenance
Material $/yr
1,430
2,860
3,300

4,400

5,500
7,700
4,400

5,500

7,700


4,400

5,500

7,700
Labor
hr/yr
437
663
1,267

2,043

3,140
5,443
926

1,100

1,144


754

790

796
Total Cost*
$/yr
6,000
10,200
16,810

26,250

39,340
66,750
14,020

16,940

19,860


12,300

13,840

16,380
         Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr and $10.00/hr of labor

-------
2 -
             345 6789100
  3456 7891000
                    CHLORINE FEED CAPACITY- Ib/doy
           10
100
30003  456 789
         10,000
 •4-
                                             10.00
                   CHLORINE FEED CAPACITY -
               OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE
          CHLORINE  STORAGE AND FEED SYSTEMS
                    CYLINDER  STORAGE
                         FIGURE  29
                          109

-------
  I
  7
  6
  5
  4
100,000
1000

  9
  8
  7
  6

  5

  4


  3
10,000  10,000

  9
w 8
>> 7
     100
             2   3456789100   2  3456 7891000   2   3  456789
              	    CHLORINE  FEED CAPACITY - Ib/doy 	10,000

             10                100               1000
                        CHLORINE  FEED CAPACITY - kg/day

                  OPERATION AND  MAINTENANCE

             CHLORINE  STORAGE  AND  FEED  SYSTEMS

                        CYLINDER STORAGE




                            FIGURE 30
                              110

-------
 10,000
   9'
   8
 ,  7
   6
   5

   4
o
LU
H
•1000  10
  9
  8

  6
  5
    - o
     cc
*l
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
6
5
4
3
2
9
8
6
5
4
3
2
OC
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
)0
























)0
















































































































































































































































































































































.— -


«•»







/
/




















^*


—






y
/





















^



•0






/






















^



^





/






















^




*




/























^




M



/
























^




•



























ri





•


F






















MAIN
MATE

»





BUILDI
•

'




PROCI


















'EN
RIA
















«
— - —






NG






:ss








Eh






E


















DE







El






NE


























?(






•F


























\






G

































Y




































        100   234 567891000  234 56789IOpOO 234 56789

                       CHLORINE FEED CAPACITY- Ib/day
              100
                               1000              10,000
                      CHLORINE  FEED  CAPACITY - kg/day
                  OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE
              CHLORINE STORAGE AND FEED SYSTEMS
          ON-SITE  STORAGE TANK AND RAIL  CAR FEED

                           FIGURE  31
                            111

-------
V)
o
o
I
7
6
5
4
3
2
IOO.C
1
6
5
4
3
2
r 10,0
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1000
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
2!
7
6
5
4
3
2
)00
: 1
6
5
3
2
00
9
8

4
2
1000
i- 9
h 8
7
- w 6
-< 5
i.
- •= 4
1
-s 3
ED
< 2
100

























































































































































































































































































































*—-
.- —







_••
^BMM






















— •
— •







^•^
^•^






















«*•
^«







^•v
























^
••







p^
























•*
••







^























= •
» •







•• •






















TOTAL
STORA
TOT
CAR






LABOR
STOR/
•



LABOR


















C(
GE
\L (
TAN






-or
GE



"-TV*
Fl

















1ST
TA
;o<
K






S
T


• i














-(
N>
T
F






T!
Ah



UL v.
:ti




















)h

-1
_E







K



A


















1

?/
c











K


















II

,l






























r:

i
















        100
                  4 567891000  234 56789IQOOO
                    CHLORINE  FEED CAPACITY - Ib/day
456 789
                                                -f-
              100               1000              10,000
                     CHLORINE  FEED CAPACITY- kg/day
                  OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE
             CHLORINE  STORAGE  AND  FEED  SYSTEMS
          ON-SITE STORAGE TANK AND  RAIL CAR  FEED
                            FIGURE  32
                             112

-------
CONSTRUCTION COST

Ozone Generation Systems and Contact Chambers

     Ozone may be generated on—site using either air or pure oxygen.  Costs
were developed for generation rates between 10 and 3,500 pounds per day.
For systems up to 100 pounds per day, air was assumed to be the feed.
At generation rates greater than 100 pounds per day, pure oxygen generated
on-site is the feed for the ozone generator.

     The manufactured equipment cost for ozone generation includes the
gas preparation equipment, oxygen generation equipment (at more than 100
pounds per day), the ozone generator, dissolution equipment, electrical
and instrumentation costs and all required safety and monitoring equipment.
All ozone generating equipment was considered to be housed, but all oxygen
generating equipment is located outside on a concrete slab.  Construction
costs for ozone generating systems are shown in Figure 33 and are presented
in Table 37.

     The ozone contact chamber is a covered reinforced concrete structure
with a depth of 18 feet, and a length to width ratio of approximately 2:1.
Partitions are utilized within the chamber to assure uniform flow distribu-
tion.  Ozone dissolution equipment costs are included within the ozone
generation curve costs, and are not included with the ozone contact chamber.
Construction costs are shown in Figure 34 and in Table 38.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

Ozone Generating Systems and Contact Basins

     For ozone generation systems less than 100 pounds per day,  electrical
energy is required for the ozone generator and building heating, cooling
and lighting requirements.  Ozone generation using air feed requires 11
kw-hr per pound of ozone generated.  For larger, oxygen fed systems, the
power requirements are 7.5 kw-hr per pound of ozone "generated.  These figures
includes oxygen generation, ozone generation, and ozone dissolution.

     Maintenance material requirements are for periodic equipment repair
and replacement of parts.  Based upon manufacturers recommendations, an
annual maintenance material requirement of 1 percent of construction cost
was utilized.

     Labor requirements are for periodic cleaning of the ozone generating
apparatus, maintenance of the oxygen generation equipment, annual maintenance
of the contact basin, and day to day operation of the generation equipment.

     Operation and maintenance requirements are shown in Figures 35 and 36,
and are summarized in Table 39.
                                     113

-------
                                         Table 37
                                    Construction Cost
                                Ozone Generation Systems
                                               Ozone Generation Capacity - Pounds/day
Manufactured Equipment       $
Concrete
Steel
Labor
Housing
        SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
        TOTAL                $
10
32,250
—
—
4,840
6,000
43,090
6,460
49,550
100
143,610
—
—
33,690
8,400
185,700
27,860
213,560
500
511,960
1,540
1,520
114,980
12,700
642,700
96,410
739,110
1,000
685,810
1,540
1,520
143,110
23,400
855,380
128,310
983,690
2,000
1,070,540
2,250
2,210
207,500
35,700
1,318,200
197,730
1,515,930
3,500
1,523,240
2,250
2,210
272,300
41,800
1,841,800
276,270
2,118,070

-------
 10,000,000
       1
       6
       5
       4
1
<2 1,000,000

§      1
o      7
       6
1      5
&      4
i      3
o
   100,000
       9
       8
       7
       6
       5
        10
3 4 56789100   2  34  567891000
        GENERATION RATE-lb/Day
20003  4 5 6 789
           10,000
              10
                                 100
                         GENERATION  RATE - kg/day
                        CONSTRUCTION  COST
                    OZONE  GENERATION SYSTEMS

                            FIGURE   33
                                   1000
                               115

-------
                                       Table 38
                                   Construction Cost
                                 Ozone Contact Chamber
                                        Contact Chamber Volume - Ft3
Excavation and Sitework
Concrete
Steel
Labor
      SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
      TOTAL

$





$



1
2
4

5
460
470
850
,470
,150
,940
740
,680
4,
1,
4,
8,
12,
27,
4,
31,
600
630
950
400
200
180
080
260
23
2
8
13
19
43
6
50
,000
,570
,280
,570
,510
,930
,590
,520
46,
5,
15,
23,
36,
82,
12,
94,
000
150
450
330
120
050
310
360
92
10
29
48
69
157
23
181
,000
,290
,810
,550
,330
,980
,700
,680

-------
4
7
6
5
4
3
2
1,000,
"I
6
5
4
3
2
4»-
I IOO.C
H 1
8 7
o 6
§ 4
t 3
3
o:
i 2
o
o
I0,0<
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1000







000








)00








)0













































































































y

































s




































































s

































4


































9
































/
r

































X

































>
s

































/


































s


































^

































s


































*
































_s
S
i r






























s
X"
































J0r
































4
r^

































X


































X


































/


































^.'


















00 234 567891000 234 5678910000 2 3 4 56789
CONTACT CHAMBER VOLUME -ft3 IOO.OOC
	 1 	 1 	 i__ 	
10               100
   CONTACT  CHAMBER VOLUME- m3

     CONSTRUCTION  COST

    OZONE  CONTACT  BASIN

          FIGURE  34
1000
            117

-------
00
                                                       Table 39
                                          Operation and Maintenance Summary
                                              Ozone Generation Systems
Ozone Generatio
Rate - Ib/day
10
100
500
1,000
2,000
3,500
n Electrical Energy - kw-hr/yr
Building
5,750
9,850
16,420
30,780
71,820
123,120
Process
40,150
401,500
1,368,750
2,737,500
5,475,000
9,581,250
Total
45,900
411,350
1,385,170
2,768,280
5,546,820
9,704,370
Maintenance
Material
$/yr
1,340
2,860
10,070
13,350
20,690
29,140
Labor
hr/yr
550
550
910
1,830
2,190
2,920
Total Cost*
$/yr
8,230
20,700
60,730
114,700
208,990
349,470
              Calculated  using  $0.03/kw-hr and $10.00/hr of labor

-------
 100,000
     9
     8
     7
     6
     5

     4
-W-
 I
UJ 10,000

<
   1000
       10,000,000
8
6
5
4
3
2
,000
1
6
5
4
3
2
IOO.C
9
8
6
5
4
3
2
10,0
9
8

/
X
r










• ^.^
i **^*^

.f
x
• ^









>
_f
f
T












S>



^
/










/
















s


_t^
^











/
















/

x













'
















/















^















/















/
















/
/
^











A
/

y
./
^

/
' PRO









BUILDI
EN ERG



/
/
/

./








CES









NG
Y
J
S
F



/
MAI
MA'








x





s









/






x
NT
EF



















Ef

















IN
IA








JE























F

















4<
L








-1













c

















!!














y


























10 234 56789100 234 567891000 20003 4 56789
                10                100               1000
                         GENERATION RATE - kg/day

                   OPERATION  AND MAINTENANCE
                    OZONE  GENERATION SYSTEMS
                             FIGURE 35
                              119

-------
1,000,
§
7
6
5
4
3
2
100,000
9
6
5
4
3
2
10,000
9
- 8
* I
40- 6
^ 5
co 4
O
0 3
i 2
O
1000
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
000
f *
7

5
4
2
- *

6
5
4
3
_ 0
IO.OOC
: 1
6
4
3
2
1000
9
7
6
- v. 5
>»
- \ 4
x:
- I 3
o:
o
CD 5>
m z
_j
_ 100

















^^
w^^ —
































^^


































/
















.X














/
/
TO'















X

















'AL














v



































L
















C
















Al
















D
















)(
















%• •
















,1








10 234 56789100 234 567891000 20003 4 56789
GENERATION RATE-lb/Doy I0'°


































00
10               100              1000
        GENERATION RATE -kg/day

    OPERATION  AND MAINTENANCE
     OZONE  GENERATION  SYSTEMS


            FIGURE 36
              120

-------
CONSTRUCTION COST

On-Site Hypochlorlte Generation

     Sodium hypochlorite may he produced in an electrolysis  cell using salt,
water and electrical energy.  There are presently available  two basic
types of equipment which generate sodium hypochlorite solution.  Open-cell
systems have an electrolysis cell which includes an anode and cathode,
with the actual cell arrangement varying between manufacturers.  Membrane-
type systems utilize a cell which has a membrane separating  the anode  and
cathode compartments.  A principal difference between the open-cell and
membrane systems is the final sodium hypochlorite concentration.  Manufac-
turers report a hypochlorite concentration of about 80,000 mg/1 for the
membrane cell and only about 5,000 to 8,000 mg/1 for the other electrolysis
cells.  This has a pronounced effect on the required size of the hypochlorite
storage facilities and feed systems.

     A construction cost curve is shown in Figure 37 for systems with  chlorine
producing capacities ranging from 10 to 10,000 pounds per day of chlorine
equivalent (Note:  One pound of C12 is equivalent to 1.05 pounds of sodium
hypochlorite).  For systems with a chlorine producing capacity of up to
2,500 pounds per day, the equipment utilized in the cost curve was based
upon the open-cell systems.  For systems from 2,500 to 10,000 pounds per
day of chlorine, membrane-type systems were utilized due to  their lower
cost.

     Components included in the construction cost estimate include the
electrolysis cells, power rectifier, salt storage tank and brine dissolver,
brine storage tank, water softener, brine transfer and metering pumps,
hypochlorite transfer and metering pumps, hypochlorite storage tank, piping
and valves, flowmeters, electrical control equipment and housing.  It was
assumed that the hypochlorite is pumped by a metering pump to a location
for in-line mixing.  The salt storage tank and brine dissolver was assumed
to be located outside of the housing for systems with chlorine producing
capacities of 500 pounds per day and larger.

     A water softener is normally utilized as cleaning requirements are
minimized when  the total hardness of the water use.d for brine make-up is
less than 30 mg/1.  Use of  purified salt is essential, either purchased
or purified on-site.  Small systems generally use purchased purified salt,
but for systems with a chlorine producing capacity of greater  than 2,000
pounds per day, it becomes  economical to use a brine purification system
and less expensive rock salt.  A brine purification system is  included
in the cost estimate for systems larger than 2,000 pounds per  day.  The
salt storage tank and brine dissolver is assumed to have a storage capacity
of one month, while  the sodium hypochlorite storage tank has a hypochlorite
storage of 24 hours.

     A relatively rapid increase in the cost of hypochlorite generating
equipment occurs as  the chlorine producing capacity increases  from about
 100 to 500 pounds per day.  This increase occurs because systems of 100
                                      121

-------
pounds per day and smaller capacity are pre-deslgned and purchased as pre-
fabricated units, whereas most systems of 500 pounds per day-and larger
capacity are custom-designed for the particular installation.

     A detailed cost breakdown for generation systems is presented in Table
40 and a construction cost curve is shown in Figure 37.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

On-Site Hypochlofite Generation

     Operation and maintenance costs have been developed from information
provided by manufacturers of on-site hypochlorite generation systems and
also from operation and maintenance cost guarantees contained in several
competitive bids.  Operation and maintenance requirements are summarized
in Table 41 and illustrated in Figures: 38 and 39.

     Energy requirements vary from about 2.0 to 4.7 kilowatt-hours per
pound of chlorine equivalent, with the lowes.t energy consumption by the
membrane-type cell.  Energy requirements were developed using an electrolysis
cell and rectifier usage of 2.5 kwh per pound of equivalent chlorine.
Energy is also required for the electrical control system, the brine transfer
and metering pumps, and the sodium hypochlorite transfer and metering pumps
and is included under process energy.   Electrical energy for lighting,
heating, and ventilating is included under building energy.

     The largest maintenance material requirement is for electrode replating
or replacement.  For estimating purposes, it was assumed that the electrodes
were replated, or recoated, every two years.  For the electrolysis cell
utilizing a membrane, the entire electrolysis cell, including the anode,
cathode, membrane, and cell frame,- were assumed to be replaced every three
years.  Other maintenance material requirements are for cell gaskets for
the membrane cell, for other miscellaneous: parts associated with the
electrolysis cells, and for materials needed for periodic repair of pumps,
motors, and electrical control equipment.  Salt requirements of the different
manufactured equipment vary considerably.  The reported salt requirements
vary from about 2.0 to 4.5 pounds of salt per pound of chlorine equivalent,
with the lowest salt consumption by the membrane-type system.   Cost of
salt is not included in the cost curves.
     •
     Labor requirements are for salt delivery and handling, operation of
electrolysis cells, operation and maintenance of pumps, electrode replating
or replacing, occasional cleaning of electrolysis: cells, and for supplying
and mixing brine purification chemicals for the larger systems.  Labor
requirements range from nearly one hour per day for the smallest system
up to about 11 hours per day for the 10,000 pound per day system.  The
reduction in the labor requirement for the range from 100 to 200 pounds
per day of chlorine is attributable to a change in the method of salt delivery,
from a more labor intensive use of salt in bags to bulk salt delivery by
pneumatic truck.  The increase in the range from 1,500 to 2,500 pounds
per day is due to the added labor required for brine purification, which
is. included for systems with a chlorine producing capacity of greater than
2,000 pounds per day.
                                      122

-------
                                         Table 40
                                    Construction Cost
                             On-Site Hypochlorite Generation
Manufactured Equipment
Concrete
steel
Labor
Electrical and Instrumentation
Housing
         SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
         TOTAL
                                   Hypochlorite  Generation  — Pounds/day  of  Equivalent  Chlorine

$







$
10
5,600
—
—
3,000
1,000
6,210
15,810
2,370
18,180
50
12,000
—
—
5,000
2,350
7,160
26,510
3,980
30,490
250
65,
—
—
23,
3,
10,
101,
15,
117,
000


000
580
380
960
290
250
1,000
180


59
14
19
272
40
313
,000
180
240
,000
,000
,280
,700
,910
,610
2,500
290


93
20
22
425
63
489
,000
350
480
,000
,000
,060
,890
,880
,770
5,000
400


120
33
30
584
87
672
,000
350
480
,000
,000
,540
,370
,660
,030
10,000
550,000
530
720
165,000
33,000
34,380
788,630
118,290
906,920

-------
g
7
6
t
4
S
10,000,000
1
6
5
4
3
2
1,000,000
9
?
6
5
4
3
: «
CO
o
o
_ 100,000
~ 9
? 8
1- 7
0 1
cc 5
h-
co 4
z
0 3
0
2
iqooo

























^__^-«


























^^


























^

























S

























4























yj
s

S






















/


























/


























x

























s


























s'
























^
/

























^^

























^*

























>*




















































._*













10 234 56789100 234 567891000 2 3 4 5 6 78
HYPOCHLORITE GENERATION-lb/Day OF EQUIVALENT CHLORINE I0><
	 —f 	 	 	 1 	 • 	 — 	 1 	













i













j
DOO
                  100                1000
HYPOCHLORITE GENERATION - kg/day  of EQUIVALENT CHLORINE


          CONSTRUCTION  COST

 ON-SITE  HYPOCHLORITE GENERATION


              FIGURE  37
                 124

-------
                                        Table 41
                           Operation and Maintenance Summary
                            On-Site Hypochlorite Generation
nypocii-Lut .LUC ueiic.Lai-.njti
Pounds per day of
Equivalent Chlorine
10
50
250
1,000
2,500
5,000
10,000
Energy kwh/yr
Building
5,130
10,260
30,780
87,210
99,960
135,430
158,300
Process
9,120
45,600
228,000
912,000
2,280,000
4,560,000
9,120,000
Total
14,250
55,860
258,780
999,210
2,379,960
4,695,430
9,278,300
Maintenance
Material $/yr
860
1,700
3,700
9,200
19 , 300
35,200
66,300
Labor
hr/yr
330
510
710
1,080
1,920
2,700
3,820
Total Cost*
$/yr
4,590
8,480
18,560
49,980
109,900
203,060
382,850
Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr  and  $10.00/hr  of  labor

-------
100,000

10,000
4
6
I
4
i
1000
c
8
,1
- 5
1 4
_l
< 3
"ENANCE MATER
O
-JOMO O ro
T — i— H 	 1 	
2 6
< 5
5 4
3
2
10.
: §
7
6
5
4
3
2
10,00
: 1
7
6
5
4
3
2
I.OOC
9
8
^ 6
- -
C5
fR ^
z
LlJ
100,0
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
0,000




0,000




)000
F=^



00



/









^"






/










^''




_^
/_

	 _^








^
t ^
MA
MA'



/


X
^'
/
/







x

NTE
•ERI


/


.^


'U 2 3456789 100 2 3






X*


N/^NCE
AL

_/


_ ^
^r






X
— — -




/



BUILDII
	 	 ^p-^
_ - ^^- —








x



/




/•% 1
J




456 7891000 20003


/
s





PI?OC
EIIER



NEiR'S'
^«-




456









i'3o



* -




789
           ^HYPOCHLORITE  GENERATION- Ib/Doy OF EQUIVALENT CHLORINE  I0'°0°
                  ~                  ~~
           HYPOCHLORITE  GENERATION - ke/day OF EQUIVALENT CHLORINE

                 OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE
             ON -SITE  HYPOCHLORITE  GENERATION
                           FIGURE  38
                             126

-------
1,00
1
7
6
5
4
3
2
100,00
i
6
5
4
3
2
10,000
9
8
. 7
^ 6
h- 4
CO
8 3
i 2
o
1,000
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
100
>>00°n
7
6
5
4
3
2
0
7
6
5
4
3
2
10,000
9
7
4

- 2
1,000
6

- 4
1 3

L










/X










xx
AHC F





3 4 56789100 234 567891000 20003 456




/'










/

1





innr
 HYPOCHLORITE  GENERATION -Ib/ Day OF EQUIVALENT CHLORINE
	^	—i	—I	
    10                 too                1000
  HYPOCHLORITE  GENERATION - kg/day OF EQUIVALENT CHLORINE

     OPERATION  AND MAINTENANCE

 ON-SITE HYPOCHLORITE   GENERATION


                  FIGURE  39
                    127

-------
 CONSTRUCTION COST

 Chlorine Dioxide Geriefatirig and Feed Systems

      Chlorine dioxide is most commonly generated  by mixing  a  high strength
 chlorine solution with a high strenth sodium chlorite solution.   Mixing
 takes place in a PVC chamber filled with procelain  Raschig  Rings,  the  chamber
 referred to as the chlorine dioxide generator.  Chlorine  dioxide  may also
 be generated by acidifying with sulfuric acid,  solutions  of sodium chlorite
 and sodium hypochlorite.  This method is only applicable  in very  small
 installations with little operator  time available,  and  is not included
 in this cost curve

      In theory,  1.34 pounds of pure sodium  chlorite and 0.5 pounds  of chlorine
 react to give one pound of chlorine dioxide.  However,  since  sodium chlorite
 is normally purchased with a purity of  80 percent,  1.68 pounds of  sodium
 chlorite are required per pound of  chlorine dioxide generated.  Chlorine
 is normally used at a 1:1 ratio with sodium chlorite,  to  insure completion
 of_the reaction  and to lower the PH to  4.   The  cost  curves  have been developed
 using 1.68 pounds, of chlorine and 1.68  pounds of  sodium chlorite per pound
 of chlorine dioxide generated.

      Costs have  been based upon the addition of costs for a sodium  chlorite
 mixing and metering system,  plus a  chlorine dioxide  generator, to the
 appropriate sized chlorine feed system.   The sodium  chlorite system consists
 of a  polythelene day tank,  a mixer  for  the  day tank, and a dual head metering
 pump.   The chlorine dioxide  generator is  a  PVC tube  filled with porcelain
 Raschig Rings  or other turbulence producing media, and  is sized for a
 detention time of about  0.2  minutes.

      Estimated construction  costs are shown in Table 42 and Figure 40
 presents  the construction costs graphically.

 OPERATION AND  MAINTENANCE COST

 Chlorine  Dioxide Generating  and Feed Systems

     Electrical  requirements include power for the gaseous chlorination
 system, the  sodium  chlorite mixing and metering  system, and building heating
 lighting,  and ventilation.                                                 *"
   *

     Maintenance material requirements are based upon experience with gaseous
 chlorine  systems and liquid metering systems.  Costs for sodium chlorite
 and chlorine are not included.

     Labor requirements consist of labor for gaseous chlorination  systems,
plus the  labor required to mix the sodium chlorite solution, to adjust  its
feed rate, and to maintain the mixing and metering equipment.

     Figure 41 and 42 present operation and  maintenance curves for chlorine
dioxide generation systems.  A summary of operation  and maintenance require-
ments is presented in Table 43.


                                      128

-------
                                         Table 42
                                    Construction Cost
                      Chlorine Dioxide Generating and Feed Systems
                                    Chlorine Dioxide Feed Capacity - Pounds/day
                                    1        10       100       1,000       5.000
Manufactured Equipment         $ 10,310    10,310    20,000     35,690      78,690
Labor                             1,300     1,300     2,500     10,730      32,780
Pipe and Valves                     370       370     1,000      2,300       7,460
Electrical and Instrumentation    2,500     2,500     3,300     10,200      11,300
Housing                           8,750     8,750    13,130     17,060      35,610
         SUBTOTAL                23,230    23,230    39,930     75,980     165,840
Miscellaneous and Contingency     3,480     3,480     5,990     11.400      24,880
         TOTAL                 $ 26,710    26,710    45,920     87,380     190,720

-------

1
1
1
I
t
1,000,000
8
7
6
c
4
•*»• 3
1
1-

-------
                                        Table  43
                           Operation and Maintenance Summary
                     Chlorine Dioxide Generating and Feed Systems
Chlorine Dioxide
Feed Rate Energy kw-hr/yr
Ib/day
1
10
100
1,000
5,000
Building
12,310
12,310
26,680
58,480
136,460
Process
3,290
3,290
3,640
12,740
35,890
Total
15,600
15,600
30,320
71,220
172,350
Maintenance
Material Labor
$/yr hr/yr
1,040
1,730
2,650
4,830
8,050
481
604
873
2,342
5,632
Total Cost*
$/yr
6,320
8,240
12,290
30,390
69,540
Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr  and $10.00/hr  of  labor

-------
1
6
5
4
3
2
w
>.
-69- 10,0
i f
MAINTENANCE MATER
O
o
Nootc O ro w ^ en ai
6
5
4
3
2
,
7
6
5
4
3
2

1 I
6
5
4
3
2
00
: *
6
5
4
3
2
IOO.C
9
- T
6
5
4
3
2
10,0"
9
- _ 8
- ^ 7
C 6
- f 4
- J 4
-5 3
a:
-S ?
LU
1000







— •*
)00



00


— ^M—








— •



—


^HM>








— 	




*** **"


_ — —






"• ~~ •*• ._


^ — • 	




h 	

__-^
. .— ^*^








-**^"


^-,



X^









^^



*^**


^
^









"~^^

MAI
MA

BUILC


X
- 2 e. 	





IU 234 56789100 2 34 567891000 2
CHLORINE DIOXIDE FEED CAPACITY- Ib/Day






~^f^

TE
FER
~^
JG


x
PR(
F





3




f^- 	


ANCE
IAL

E E'R
^
/>
ct:s3
ERGY





4567






...










89
10,00
'0 100 innn
         CHLORINE  DIOXIDE FEED CAPACITY-kg/day
      OPERATION AND  MAINTENANCE
CHLORINE  DIOXIDE GENERATING  AND FEED SYSTEMS

                 FIGURE 41
                   132

-------
10,000.
   9
          I0    2       5^6789100   234 567891000  20003  4 56789|0,000

                CHLORINE DIOXIDE FEED CAPACITY-Ib/Day             	
                10
            100                1000
CHLORINE DIOXIDE FEED CAPACITY - kg/Day
                OPERATION  AND MAINTENANCE COST

        CHLORINE  DIOXIDE GENERATING AND FEED SYSTEMS


                             FIGURE  42
                                133

-------
 CONSTRUCTION COST

 Ammonia Feed Facilities

      A concept which may be used to provide disinfection without producing
 trihalomethanes is the ammonia-chlorine process.   Ammonia is  added to water
 prior to chlorination, and chloramines are formed when chlorine is added
 A chlorine-ammonia ratio of 3:1 is required to produce a combined chlorine
 residual which is mainly monochloramine.

      Ammonia may be fed in either of two  forms, anhydrous ammonia or  aqua
 ammonia.   Anhydrous ammonia is  purchased  as a  pressurized liquid, and is
 ted through evaporators and ammoniators and then  as  a  gas to  the point of
 application.   Aqua ammonia is a solution  of ammonia  and water,  and contains
 /y.4 percent ammonia.   Aqua ammonia is metered as a  liquid directly to the
 point of  application.

      Generally speaking,  aqua ammonia  is  readily  available near  large cities
 and is most commonly found in larger plants.   A technical disadvantage of   '
 anhydrous  ammonia can  result if the gas produced  by  the  ammoniator is  used
 to  produce a high strength solution, to be  fed to the  application point.
 in  certain cases,  magnesium precipitation occurs  due to  PH elevation which
 results from ammonia solution.   In  some cases,, this severely restricts
 effective  ammoniator capacity.

      Construction cost  curves include  only  ammonia storage and feed facilities
 Separate curves  are  included in this Report  for chlorine  feed systems.

 Anhydrous:  Ammonia

      The cost  curves include bulk ammonia storage for all  feed rates  with
 10  days of  storage provided.  The storage tanks include the tank and its
 supports,  a scale, an air padding system, and  all required gauges  and
 switches.   The ammonia  feed  system  consists of evaporator  for flows in excess
 of  2,000 pounds  per  day, an  ammoniator, and flow proportioning equipment
 Dry ammonia gas was  assumed  to be fed directly to the point of application,
 rather than metering a  high  strength ammonia solution to the point of
 application.

     The construction cost curve for anhydrous ammonia feed facilities is
 presented  in Figure 43, and a detailed breakdown of construction cost  is
 shown in Table 44.

 Aqua Ammonia

     Aqua ammonia is stored in a horizontal pressure vessel with a length/
width ratio of approximately 3:1.  Only one tank was used for  each installa-
 tion and the assumed usable storage capacity was 10 days.  Construction
 costs include the tank and Its supports, required  piping and valves for
 filling the tank from a bulk delivery truck and for conveying  from the tank
 to the metering pump, and the metering pump.  A housing cost is  not included,
because only the metering pump is housed,  and it  could  easily  be located in
 a number of other housed areas.
                                     134

-------
                                         Table 44
                                    Construction Cost
                            Anhydrous Ammonia Feed Facilities
Manufactured Equipment
Labor
Pipe and Valves
Electrical and Instrumentation
Housing
        SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
        TOTAL
Feed Capacity - Pounds /day
$




$
250
12,500
3,800
2,250
3,100
4,200
25,850
3,880
29,730
500
18,400
5,400
3,310
3,600
4,200
34,910
5,240
40,150
1,000
28,700
8,800
5,170
5,900
4,200
52,770
7,920
60,690
2,500
36,600
10,100
6,590
8,100
4,200
65,590
9,840
75,430
5,000
55,800
13,200
10,040
10,500
6,000
95,540
14,330
109,870

-------
c
1
6
i
4
C.
I
6
5
4
3
2
1,000,000
9
8
6
5
4
7
g 2
o
z
0 100,000
t- 9
o 8
3 7
£ 6
w 5
Z
0 4
o
3
2
10 000

















































— -

^























**•

, —






















g**


^




















,^



^
• r



















^^



^
s^



















—JP




X




















x



^




















/!NH






AOL


















VDROUS
j • —•-





/ AMMC


















AM






MIA


















V10

























^








100 2345 67891000 234 5678910000 20,000 4 5
FEED RATE- Ib/day

















\


































6 789
100 IO'OQ IO'ODO
FEED RATE -kg/day U'UU°
CONSTRUCTION COST
AMMONIA  FEED  FACILITIES
       FIGURE  43
         136

-------
     The construction cost curve for aqua ammonia  feed  systems; is; presented
in Figure 43 and a detailed breakdown is  contained in Table  45.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

Anhydrous Ammonia Feed Facilities

     Electrical energy requirements are for heating,  lighting, and  ventilating
of the ammoniator building, and operation of the evaporators.   Evaporators
are only included for systems of 2,000 pounds per day or greater, and
evaporator energy requirements were calculated on the basis  of 23.8 kw-hr/ton
of ammonia.

     Maintenance material requirements were based upon  operating experience
at similar size chlorination facilities.   Anhydrous ammonia  costs are  not
included in the maintenance material costs.

     Labor requirements are for transfer of the hulk anhydrous ammonia from
the delivery truck or rail car to the on-aite ammonia storage tank, plus
day to day operation and maintenance requirements.  A bulk unloading time
of 3 hours per shipment was utilized.  Operation and maintenance requirements
varied from roughly one and a half hours per day for the smaller systems
to three hours per day for larger systems.

     Figures 44 and 45 present the operation and maintenance curves, and
Table 46 presents a summary of the operation and maintenance requirements.

Aqua Ammonia Feed Facilities

     Electrical energy costs are only for  operation of  the metering pump.
Due  to  the  small  indoor area required for  the metering  pump and standby
pump no  allowance is  included  for building heating, lighting, and ventilation.
Transfer of aqua  ammonia  from  the bulk truck to the storage tank was assumed
to be by a  pump located on the bulk truck.

     Maintenance  material costs are for  repair parts- for the metering pump,
valve repair,  and painting of  the  storage tank.   Aqua  ammonia  costs: are
not  included  in the maintenance material costs.

     Labor costs  include  15 minutes per  day  for operational labor,  24 hours
 per  year for  maintenance  labor,  and one  hour per  unloading  of  the  bulk
 delivery truck.

      Operation and maintenance requirements  are presented in  Figures  46
 and  47  and summarized in Table 47.
                                      137

-------
Lo
00
                                                         Table  45
                                                   Construction  Cost
                                             Aqua Ammonia Feed Facilities
                                   	Feed Capacity - Pounds/day 	
                                    250       _JOO        1.000       2,500       5,000
Manufactured Equipment          $  7,630      9,830      12,710      18,230      26,710
Labor                                960        970       1,130       1,220       1,360
Pipe and Valves                      630        630        860       1,590       1,590
Electrical and Instrumentation     1,000      2,400       2,800       5,000       7,200
        SUBTOTAL                  10,220     13,830      17,500      26,040      36,860
Miscellaneous and Contingency      1,530      2,070       2,630       3,910       5,530
        TOTAL                   $ 11,750     15,900     20,130      29,950      42,390

-------
                                        Table 46
                           Operation and Maintenance Summary
                           Anhydrous Ammonia Feed Facilities
Ammonia
Feed Rate
Ib/day
250
500
1,000
2,500
5,000

Energy

kw-hr/yr
Building Process
10,260
10,260
10,260
10,260
15,390
	
—
8,690
21,720
43,450


Total
10,260
10,260
18,950
31,980
58,840
Maintenance
Material
$/yr
2,860
3,300
4,400
5,500
7,700

Labor
hr/yr
500
580
630
780
990

Total Cost*
$/yr
8,070
9,310
11,170
14,160
19,220
Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr  and  $10.00/hr  of  labor

-------
    7
    6
    5

    4
  10,000

   1
   7
   6
   5
   4

   3

   2 -
  1000
   9
   8
   7
   6
   5

 •  4
-w-
_l
<
lit
O
z

I
   9
   8
   7
   6

   8-
   2-
I
i
(
1
t
t
c
7
6
K
4
2
100,000
9
87
6
5
4
3
2
X
= 10,000
s 1
ae °
' I
5 5
2 4
z
3
2
1000




































**•























w~























*£























~~*























^^^








^














^








J
**~













•^









/
**













*>--


M/ill





2 1

**
B
















• i : MNCE





no CESS i

JL.DING E
















M;





NEI

NEF






'00 Z 3 4 567891000 234 56789(0(000 20pOO
AMMONIA FEED RATE-ib/Day










TE





G1

GY






4










RIM







































5 6 789
100 1000 10,000
AMMONIA FEED RATE -kg/day
                     OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

                 ANHYDROUS  AMMONIA FEED FACILITIES


                              FIGURE  44
                            140

-------
1"
7
6
5
4
3
2
IOO,C
1
6
5
4
3
2
*'$
** 8
1 7
h- 6
8 5
0 4
_i ,
O
1- 2
1000
7
6
5
4
3
2
-
7
6
5
4
3
2
100
9
I
6
5
— 4
3
2
100
: 9
8
6
4
3
2
1000
9
8
7
6
5
w -
-.CO
1.
ac.
m
inn
















































~w«










_•«•



















—










.— •



















a










«—































— •



















•










•



















e:










» •"



















.--*•









.^r-
.~^~^

L


















x-^









^^

ABC


















x'








^



R


















X1































































































































TOT/































L (































OS































T
















































































































































100
        AMMONIA FEED RATE-lb/Day
      100                1000             10,000
             AMMONIA FEED RATE-lb/Day
         OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE
    ANHYDROUS AMMONIA FEED FACILITIES

                  FIGURE   45
                    141

-------
                                         Table  47
                            Operation and Maintenance Summary
                              Aqua Ammonia Feed Facilities
Ammonia Feed        Process Energy     Maintenance Material
Rate - Ib/day          kw-hr/yr        	$/yr	   Labor hr/yr    Total Cost - $/yr*
     250                 570                 100                 152               1,640
     500                 570                 150                 152               1,690
   1,000                 570                 250                 152               1,790
   2,500                 570                 400                 152               1,940
   5,000                 570                 600                 152               2,140
Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr and $10.00/hr of labor

-------
lOOg.
I  2
  100
  7
LU 6
z 5
< 4
K
7
6
5
4
3
2
I
6
5
4
3
2
10,0
9
!
6
5
4
3
2
k_
>»
^10
i!
> 5
0 4
or *
u ,
z 3
LU
2
100
















DO





MAir
M<
00






























TEr
TEF
X


















































IANC
•*'
X








-
'
































X
































x
































































/































X
x






























X
x^






























X
^


p



























.
X



RC
































C

































































3 >
































i :NERGY















































































































































































































































        100   234 567891000   234 56789IOpOO  2   3  4 56789

                        AMMONIA  FEED  RATE- Ib/day
              100
                                -t-
        1000              10,000
AMMONIA FEED RATE-kg/day
                OPERATION  AND MAINTENANCE
               AQUA  AMMONIA FEED FACILITIES

                            FIGURE  46
                              143

-------
§
7
6
5
4
3
2
£
$
6
5
4
3
2
10,000
9
1 5
O
o 3
_i
g 2
1000.
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2

9
7
6
5
4
i
2
L I
i- 8
i- 7
6
- 5

3
2
9
8
6
- 5
4
3
2
1000
9
g
7
6
5

- j= 3
i
cc
-02
GO
_J
inn

















































^mm





























^^m





























•^





























— — -





























... 	 —




























=— •








L/
100 2345 6789(000 2 3



















*«•









B<



















.—









R



















•*























































































TOT/








456 789IOOOO 2




















L








3




















CO




























N-































































































456 789
    AMMONIA FEED RATE-lb/Day
               •4-
100               1000
      AMMONIA FEED RATE -kg/day
                                 -4-
                                10,000
 OPERATION  AND MAINTENANCE
AQUA  AMMONIA  FEED FACILITIES

           FIGURE  47
            144

-------
CONSTRUCTION COSTS

Alum Feed Systems

Liquid Alum

     Cost estimated for liquid alum feed systems: are b.as:ed upon use of liquid
alum, which has a weight of 10 pounds per gallon and contains the equivalent
of 5 pounds of commercial dry alum per gallon.  Fifteen days of storage
are provided using fiberglas reinforced polyester (FRP) tanks.  The FRP
tanks were assumed to b.e uncovered and located Indoors for smaller Installa-
tions, and outdoors for larger Installations.  Outdoor tanks are covered
and vented, with insulation and heating provided to prevent crystallization,
which occurs at temperatures helow 30°F.

     Dual head metering pumps were used to pump liquid alum from the storage
tank and meter the flow directly to the point of application.  No provision
was made for dilution of the liquid alum prior to application.  A standby
metering pump was Included for each installation.  All pipe utilized to
convey the liquid alum was 316 stainless steel, and 150 feet of pipe, along
with miscellaneous fittings, and valves were included for each metering pump.

     Construction costs for liquid alum feed are presented In Table 48 and
shown graphically on Figure 48.

Dry Alum

     Cost estimates for solid alum feed facilities; are based upon use of
commercial dry alum with a density of 60 pounds per cubic foot.  A five
minute detention period Is required In the dissolving tank, and 2 gallons
of water are used per pound of alum.  Fifteen days of dry alum storage Is
Included, using mild steel storage hoppers located Indoors.  Conveyance
of alum from hulk delivery trucks to the,hoppers Is pneumatically with the
blower located on the delivery truck.  The largest hopper capacity utilized
was 6,000 cubic feet.  For Installations too small for bulk delivery, bag
loaders are used on the feeder.  All hopper facilities Included dust
collectors.

     Volumetric feeders for the smaller Installations: and mechanical weigh
belt feeders for the large Installations and their respective solution tanks
were located directly beneath the storage hoppers, eliminating the need
for bucket elevators or other conveyance devices; from below ground storage.
Such Installation does, however, make the building cost somewhat greater
than other possible arrangements.  Conveyance from the solution tanks to
the point of application was by dual head dlaphram metering pumps.

     Construction cost estimates for solid alum feed are presented in Table
49 and shown graphically In Figure 48.
                                      145

-------
                                         Table   48
                                    Construction Cost
                                Liquid Alum Feed Systems
Manufactured Equipment
Labor
Pipe and Valves
Electrical and Instrumentation  3,000
Housing
         SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
         TOTAL
5.4
$ 4,200
950
940
n 3,000
5,500
14,590
2,190
$ 16,780
54
5,480
1,170
940
3,250
13,970
24,810
3,720
28,530
540
23,950
4,220
940
4,700
25,840
59,650
8,950
68,600
5.400
188,730
34,570
4,680
14,100
8,400
250,480
37,570
288,050

-------
                                         Table 49
                                    Construction Cost
                                  Dry Alum Feed Systems
Manufactured Equipment
Labor
Pipe and Valves
Electrical and Instrumentation
Housing
          SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
          TOTAL
$




$


7

2
1
6
17
2
19
Feed
10
,500
420
,000
,110
,000
,030
,550
,580
Capacity -
100
13,100
1,130
2,500
2,260
13,300
32,290
4,840
37,130
Pounds /hr
1,
33,
2,
3,
4,
51,
95,
14,
109,
000
560
430
000
960
270
220
280
500
5,
160
12
15
19
174
381
57
438
000
,940
,160
,000
,000
,590
,690
,250
,940

-------
•w-

 I
O
O
O
I-
o
r>
o:

CO

o
o
7
6
5
4
3
2
l,000,(
1
6
5
4
3
2
100,0
9
8
6
5
4
3
2
IO.OC
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1000







300






00





=— —
0



























.-.^



























.-*




























.—




























,•••'


























*-»




























^



























s



























X




























^



























?•




























•i.

























DRY

x^



























/
^



























/**
LI


























/
X
Ql













^
Jl
— f-








































D











































     10
               4 56789100   234 567891000

                        ALUM  FEED RATE-lb/hr
                               4 5 6789

                                   10,000
           10
        100
   ALUM FEED  RATE-kg/hr


CONSTRUCTION  COST

ALUM  FEED SYSTEMS



    FIGURE  48
                                               1000
                             L48

-------
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

Alinn Feed Sys terns

     Electrical requirements are for solution mixers, feeder operation,
building lighting, ventilation, and heating and in the case of larger liquid
feed installations, for heating of outdoor storage tanks.   The sharp decrease
in the building energy curve for high feed rates Is attributable to the
use of outdoor storage tanks, as contrasted to use of indoor storage tanks
at lower flow rates.

     Maintenance material costs were estimated on the basis of three percent
of the manufactured equipment cost, excluding storage tank cost.  Alum costs
are not included in the maintenance material costs.

     Labor requirements consist of time for chemical unloading and routine
operation and maintenance of feeding equipment.  Liquid alum unloading
requirements were calculated on the basis of 1.5 hours per bulk truck delivery,
and dry alum requirements on the basis of 5 hours per 50,00.0 pounds.  For
dry feed Installations using alum from bags, 8 hours were used per 16,000
pounds removed and fed to the bag loader hopper.  Time for routine Inspection
and adjustment of feeders Is 10 minutes/feeder/shift for dry feed and 15
minutes/metering pump/shift for liquid feed.  Maintenance requirements were
8 hours per day for liquid metering pumps and 24 hours: per day for solid
feeders and the solution tank.

     Figures 49 to 52 present operation and maintenance costs for both liquid
alum feed and dry alum feed.  A summary of operation and maintenance
requirements Is presented In Table 50.
                                      149

-------
                                        Table  50
                           Operation and Maintenance  Summary
                                   Alum Feed Systems


0
3
i— 1
<
>,
M
Q
1
r- 1
<
T3
•H
3
cr
•H
I-J

Alum Feed Rate
10 Ib/hr
100 Ib/hr
1,000 Ib/hr
5,000 Ib/hr
5.4 Ib/hr
54 Ib/hr
540 Ib/hr
5,400 Ib/hr



Energy kw-hr/yr
Building
6,160
23,090
63,920
320,630
5,130
245210
99,520
10,260
Process
4,900
4,900
6,530
9,800
3,270
3,270
5,450
116,340
Total
11,060
27,990
70,450
330,430
8,400
27,480
104,970
126,600
Maintenance
Material
$/yr
180
210
300
1,330
70
70
100
330

Labor
hr/yr
288
332
1,124
4,624
63
63
63
315

Total Cost*
$/yr
VI J *-
3,390
4,370
13,650
57,480
950
1,520
3,880
7,280
Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr  and  $10.00/hr  of  labor

-------
-w-

 I
1090


I


6

5

4


3



2
IT
Ul


< 100
111
u
z  w

z  5
iii  4
I-

i  3
      1000
                 3  4  56789100   234  56789KX50  20003  4 56789

                            LIQUID  ALUM FEED RATE-lb/hr          10,000
               10
                                  -H

                                  100
                                                 1000
                            LIQUID ALUM FEED RATE-kg/hr

                   OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE

                    LIQUID  ALUM  FEED  SYSTEMS
                              FIGURE  49
                                151

-------
I
6
5
4
3
2
I0,(
5
f
6
5
4
3
2
1000
9
i 8
X 7
•«*• 6
1 5
0
0 3
_l
K 2
O
1-
100
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
DOO
7
6
5
4
3
2
10,0
1 1
u 8
r 7

4
3
2
1000
9
8
w
~ iT 5
f
~ 1 4
O °
CD
100













00
1 —


























^— '


























.*:


























^*


























^'-


























.-^

























x^


























-^








^v

















X*








•>•


























•e
















«•









?
















^'









Bi-















^^^
*
TOT























X"*


!\L







X






10 234 56789100 234 567891000 200Q3
LIQUID ALUM FEED RATE - Ib/hr









^



CO







L














H



3T






/
i\E


























0


























R

































456 789
10,000
'0 do 1600
     LIQUID ALUM FEED RATE - kg/hr
OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE
 LIQUID  ALUM  FEED SYSTEMS
         FIGURE   50
           152

-------
Ui
IO.OC
I"
7
6
5
4
3
2
I00(
o
1
6
5
4
2
100
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
7
6
5
4
3
2
0
7
6
5
4
3
2
D 1,000
9
i
6
5
4
3
2
100,
9
\ •
- £ 6
5 5
tf- m CVJ O O>OOf^(D 1
1-A3d3N3 2
ii i .iiii

4
3
- 2
1000







,000




BSBBSBS
000






00

^^

—»^—



10











•••










— •














••i






X



••••••














••••










••••














— • •






^
X



M • •














..— — •






X
^ F


Bl— —














•— •





X"




•••














— •





x|




^~














**










t^














~*



^ *





~**










MAINT
MATEF


V^
^x^

^
s







	 -^

PRO









LNA
IAL
— ^




/







1^^"


IES









MCI
X-



;
Bl
E







^^


1









X




/
IL
NE










N









/



/

DNG
FGY










RG1






























234 56789100 234 567891000 234 56789
10,000
DRY ALUM FEED RATE-lb/hr
i 	
10 100 1000
                        DRY  ALUM FEED RATE-kg/hr
                 OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE
                    DRY ALUM  FEED  SYSTEMS
                          FIGURE 51
                            153

-------
-to
*
7
6
5
4
3
2
IOO.OC
6
5
4
3
2
- ' 9
6
5
3
2
1000
7
6
5
4
3
2
' I
7
6
5
4
3
2
30
o>o>f-






















































^







/






















y
^







^








456 7891000 2
FEED RATE-lb/hr















TO






x









3















TAI





/

LA




























/
^

B(























A
w







F























DS'
















































456 789
10,000
ib ibo IO'QO
                         DRY  ALUM FEED RATE-kg/hr
                  OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE
                     DRY  ALUM  FEED SYSTEMS
                           FIGURE  52
                            154

-------
CONSTRUCTION COST

Polymer Feed Systems

     Cost estimates for polymer feed systems are based upon the use of dry
polymers, fed manually to a storage hopper located on the chemical feeder.
Chemical feed equipment is based upon preparation of a 0.25 percent stock
solution.  No provision has been made for standby or redundant equipment,
as polymer would generally be utilized only as a coagulant aid or a filter
aid, and thus an equipment breakdown could be tolerated for a short period
of time while equipment is repaired.

     In addition to the manufactured feeder and solution tank, costs have
also been included for the water piping to the feeder and a polymer solution
line out of the building, installation labor, the cost of housing for the
feeder/mixer, and a bag storage area for up to 15 days storage.

     The estimated costs are presented on Table 51 and are shown graphically
in Figure 53.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

Polymer Feed Systems

     Energy requirements for the feeder and metering pump were calculated
using motor horsepower requirements recommended by manufacturers.  Building
energy requirements are based upon completely housed systems.

     Maintenance material costs used are 3 percent of manufactured equipment
and pipe/valve costs.  These costs do not Include the cost of polymer.

     Labor requirements are for bag unloading, 1 hour per ton of bags, the
dry chemical feeder, 110 hours/year for routine operation and 24 hours per
year for maintenance, and the solution metering pump, 55 hours/year for
routine operation and 8 hours per year for maintenance.

     Figures 54 and 55 present the estimated operation and maintenance costs
for feeding of a 0.25 percent polymer solution.  The operation and maintenance
requirements are summarized In Table 52.
                                      155

-------
                                                    Table  51
                                               Construction  Cost
                                             Polymer Feed  Systems
                                                                       Capacity j-lb/ day
                                                               .
                                                       ________ 1...     ......... 10_._     100       200
H                     Manufactured Equipment         $ 11,000     11,000    13,880    17,880
°*                     Labor                               670        670       670       720
                      Pipe and Valves                     260        260       260       280
                      Electrical and Instrumentation    1,230      1,230     1,230     1,230
                      Housing                           3,, 360      3.360     3,780     4,200
                              SUBTOTAL                 16,520     16,520    19,820    24,310
                      Miscellaneous and Contingency     Jm,480      2^480     2^970     3,650
                              TOTAL                  $ 19,000     19,000    22,790    27,960

-------

7
6
5
4
3
Z
1,000,0
|
8
6
5
4
3
2
«. 100.0
i 9
i_ 8
w 7
0 6
0 5
3 4
£ d
3
P 2
to
z
o
° !O,0
9
8
r
6
5
4
3
Z






00




oo 	




^•••^^M
00





i
















•i^M





















^•M





















^ • •





















• I m^mm^—^





















^^0










































^




















»-!




















..-"





























































=





















































2 345 6789IO 2 3456 789IOO ZOO 3 4 5 6789
POLYMER FEED RATE- !b/day

         10
    POLYMER FEED RATE - kg /day

 CONSTRUCTION COST

POLYMER  FEED  SYSTEMS
     FIGURE  53
         157

-------
L/l
OO
                                             Table 52
                                Operation and Maintenance Summary
                                      Polymer Feed Systems

Polymer Fee<
Rate Ib/day
1
10
100
200



3 Energy kw-hr/yr
Building
8,210
8,210
9,230
10,260
Process
17,300
17,300
17,300
17,300
Total
25,510
25,510
26,530
27,560
Maintenance
Material
$/yr
240
260
290
440

Labor
hr/yr
198
199
215
234

Total Cost*
$/vr
T / J •*-
2,990
3,020
3,240
3,610
              *Calculated using  $0.03/kw-hr  and  $10.00/hr of labor

-------
  I

  6
  5
  4

  3


  2



1000
cc
ui

S
5

ui
o
z
<
z
UI
I-  10
z
<
2  7
9
7
6
b
4
3
2
9
8
6
b
4
2
IOO.C
9
8
<«
s 4
T 3
o
UJ ^
Ul
IO.OC
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1000









Mi^MBB
poo




i^^BHBH
)0
M^BBMi















^^»





••^
«••





2
— i —









•1M





MB
••I





3









— i -• •





!•• H •
•• • •














. . — —





• •^•^•M
• «"^™^














^^«





^iBM
^••a














•^ ~" ~





•^ ^ —
i^ — •













^s
* *^
MAIN
MATE



PROC
• • ••Mi^M
- - *-~*
TTTT
BUIl











{


EN-
RIA



SS
•• —

)IN














NCE



EIJER


:





















i _




4 5 678910 2 34567 89100 200 3 456 rtja
POLYMER FEED RATE- Ib/day
                         POLYMER  FEED RATE -kg/day

                  OPERATION   AND  MAINTENANCE

                     POLYMER  FEED  SYSTEMS
                           FIGURE  54
                            159

-------
O
O
_l
<
I
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
7
6
5
4
3
2
8
/
6
5
4
3
2
IOC
f
6
5
4

2

c
7
6
5
4
2
7
6
5
4
3
2
00
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
0 100
9
8
- > -S
- i 4
1
O
GO
100















D



M^WMM












































































• • •WM^—
T 	 -
	 	

















MMM^



















••M




•••














K — —




^ M ••














	
T




— . 	 '
L














TA





4BC
2 3, 4 56 78 9 10 2 3456 789100 203
POLYMER FEED RATE-lb/doy




















R
4














COM



























5 6 789
                        POLYMER  FEED RATE-kg/day

                OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE

                   POLYMER  FEED SYSTEMS
                                             ,00
                          FIGURE  55
                          160

-------
CONSTRUCTION COST

Rapid Mix

     Construction costs were calculated for reinforced concrete basins
ranging in size from 100 cubic feet to 20,000 cubic feet.  The largest basin
capacity utilized was 2,500 cubic feet, and common wall construction was
utilized when more than one basin was required.  Mixer costs are for vertical
shaft, variable speed, turbine mixers, with 304 stainless steel shafts and
paddles, and TEFC motors.  Construction costs for G values of 300, 600 and
900, (3, 6, and 20 foot-pounds per second per cubic foot respectively) and
a water temperature of 15°C are presented in Figure 56 and in Tables 53 to
55.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

Rapid Mix

     Power requirements are a function of G and water temperature.  At a
water temperature of  15°C and G values of 300, 600 and 900, energy require-
ments were calculated on the basis of respective horsepower per unit volume
requirements, of 3, 6, and 20 foot-pounds: per second per  cubic foot.  An
overall mechanism efficiency of 70 percent was: utilized.

     Maintenance material costs consist of oil for the gearbox drive unit.

     Labor requirements were determined using a jar testing time  of one
hour per  day for plants under 50 mgd and two hours: per day for plants  over
50 mgd, 15 minutes per mixer per day for routine 0 &  M,  and 4 hours- per
mixer per 6 months for oil  changes.   An allowance of  8 hours per  basin per
year was  also  included for  draining, inspection, and  cleaning.

      Figures 57  and  58 show operation and maintenance curves  for  the  rapid
mix units,  and a summation is presented  in  Table  56.
                                      161

-------
                                                   Table  53
                                              Construction  Cost
                                             Rapid Mix G =  300
N3
Excavation and Sitework
Manufactured Equipment
Concrete
Steel
Labor
Electrical and Instrumentation
          SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
          TOTAL
Total Basin Volume -

$
2


1
6
11
1
$ 13
100
210
,890
370
520
,170
,670
,830
,770
,600


3

1
2
6
14
2
16
500
360
,470
820
,220
,190
,670
,730
,210
,940


4
1
1
3
6
18
2
20
1,000
470
,640
,210
,820
,240
,670
,050
,710
,760
5,000
1,290
16,380
3,
5,
8,
10,
44,
6,
51,
410
070
090
280
520
670
190
ft3
10
2
32
6
10
16
19
87
13
100

,000
,590
,760
,810
,130
,190
,230
,710
,160
,870

20,
5,
65,
13,
20,
32,
35,
172,
25,
198,

000
190
520
630
260
390
990
980
950
930

-------
                                        Table 54
                                   Construction Coat
                                  Rapid Mix   G = 600
                                              Total Basin Volume - ft
Excavation and Sitework       $
Manufactured Equipment
Concrete
Steel
Labor
Electrical and Instrumentation
         SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
         TOTAL                $
100
210
3,250
370
520
1,240
6,670
12,260
1,840
14,100
500
360
4,640
820
1,220
2,440
6,670
16,150
2,420
18,570
1,000
470
6,960
1,210
1,820
3,680
6,670
20,810
3,120.
23,930
5,000
1,290
25,200
3,410
5,070
8,930
11.060
54,960
8,240
63,200
10,000
2,590
50,400
6,810
10,130
17,860
19.930
107,720
16,160
123,880
20,000
5,190
100,800
13,630
20,260
35,720
37.760
213,360
32,000
245,360

-------
                                        Table  55
                                   Construction  Cost
                                  Rapid Mix   G  - 900
                                                 Total Basin Volume - ft3
Excavation and Sitework
Manufactured Equipment
Concrete
Steel
Labor
Electrical and Instrumentation
         SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
         TOTAL
_100_
210
4,060
370
520
1,170
6.670
13,000
1,950
500
360
9,270
820
1,220
2,190
6,670
20,530
3,080
1,000
470
13,910
1,210
1,820
3,240
6,860
27,510
4,130
5.000
1,290
63,000
3,410
5,070
12,500
7,140
92,410
13,860
lOjOOO
2,590
126,000
6,810
10,130
25,000
8,370
178,900
26,840
20,000
5,190
252,000
13,630
20,260
50,000
15,380
356,460
53,470
$ 14,950   23,610   31,640   106,270    205,740    409,930

-------
                                                            CONSTRUCTION  COST - $
CD
C
TB
m
Ol
0)

-------
                                         Table 56
                            Operation  and Maintenance  Summary
                                        Rapid  Mix

Total Basin
Volume - ft3
100
500
1,000
2,500
5,000
10,000
20,000

Energy
G = 300
5,090
25,450
50,900
127,250
254,500

kw-hr/yr
G = 600
10,180
50,900
101,800
254,500
509,000
509,000 1,018,000
1,018,000 2,036,000

G - 900
33,930
169,670
339,330
848,330
1,696,700
3,393,300
6,786,670
Maintenance
Material
^ I\T1-
v/yr
20
30
40
60
75
150
300

Labor
nr/yr
470
470
470
510
580
1,160
1,590

Total
G = 300
4,870
5,490
6,270
8,980
13,510
27,020
46,740

Cost -
G = 600
5,030
6,260
7,790
12,800
21,150
42,290
77,280

$/yr*
G - 900
5,740
9,820
14,920
30,610
56,780
113,550
219,800
Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr and $10.00/hr  of  labor

-------
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
9
f
6
5
4
*
2
1000
9
8
7
6
K
< 4
^^ 1
1
< %
E
iij
i-
s 100
uj i
o 7
| 6
z 5
z 4
I
10
|
o r
7
6
5
4
3
2
1,000
3
8
6
5
4
3
2
100,
9
*i!
- •* 4
1
cc
- £2
UJ
10,0
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
IOOC





,000




000
_^
/


oo y
b^ —



•^^













y

/




— —











/









— •










>
y
7^~


/





•*•







— ^
y^
^
y

"-/—]






^**
+ ^







,


>

^






X









/


/

y*





— ;









y
^

y
y
y






^__






xM
y^
r
_ — ^

[y/
/' PR(
EN





y









=>RC
bNt

PHI
ENE

Ct:
ERG






MA
MA








Ct
Kt

Ch
RG

S
' —






INI
FE








s
Y- G-

SS


G=30






tl/L









0 J

/ |
















100 234 567891000 234 5678910000 20000 4 56789
TOTAL RAPID MIX VOLUME - ft3 IOO.OC
	 1 	 __ 	 1 	 — 1 	
10
                 100
                                 1000
        TOTAL RAPID MIX VOLUME-m3
OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE
          RAPID  MIX
          FIGURE   57
           167

-------
1,000,000
1
6
5
4
3
2
^
JlOC
i 1
w i.
0 6
0 5
* 4
1 3
2
IO.OC
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
IOOC
9
8
7
6
5
4
3 -
2 -

- I
€
•
4
2
2
,000
: 1
6
5
4
3
2
0 10,0
: 9
8
6
5
4
3
2
) I00(
9
8
i- 7
^6
- - 5
f
- | 4
- S i
m
<
- -J 2
100








00

•»___•-••


)
«•— •












^*^
s=»



MMM











*'_

^*f. _ 	



jsai «- — • —










jS
../
>' >

-_.

- 	


- . •









y
x
X






^^-




i




X
S
'/
/





	




±:: 	
I 	


/
' -7^
1 1 1 1 ^
._, f
^r
' /
11 	





X
*•- 	
IN
1 	


"F~













i




100 z 3 4 567891000 234 5678910000 20000
TOTAL RAPID MIX VOLUME- ff3





)T/!L C
G=9
-------
CONSTRUCTION COST

Flocculatlon

     Estimated flocculation basin costs are for rectangular shaped reinforced
concrete structures, 12 feet deep, with common wall construction where the
total basin volume exceeded 12,500 cubic feet.  A length to width ratio
of approximately 4:1 was used for basin sizing and the maximum basin size
utilized was 12,500 cubic feet.  Structural costs for vertical turbine
flocculators are somewhat higher than for the horizontal paddle type due
to the required structural support above the basin.  Costs were calculated
for use of horizontal paddle flocculators and total basin volumes between
1,800 and 1,000,000 cubic feet, but only between 1,80.0 and 25,000 cubic
feet for vertical turbine type.  Horizontal paddles are less expensive for
use in larger basins, and generally provide more satisfactory operation
in the larger basins, particularly when tapered flocculation is practiced.

     G values of 20, 50 and 80 were used to calculate manufactured equipment
costs.  All drive units are variable speed, to allow maximum flexibility.
Although common drive for two or more parallel basins is commonly utilized,
the estimated costs were calculated using individual drive for each basin.
Estimated costs for horizontal paddle systems are shown in Figure 59 and
on Tables 57 to 59 and for vertical turbine flocculators in Figure 60 and
on Table 60.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

Flocculation

     Energy requirements for G values of 20,  50 and 80 were calculated on
the basis of respective horsepower per unit volume requirements of 0.01,
0.06 and 0.17 foot-pounds per second per cubic foot.  An overall motor/
mechanism efficiency of 60 percent was utilized.

     Maintenance material costs  are based upon 3 percent of the manufactured
equipment costs.  Although equipment costs vary somewhat with the maximum
design value for G, the maintenance material  costs are based upon a G value
of 80.

     Labor  requirements are based on routine  0 & M of  15 minutes: per day
per basin  (maximum  basin volume  = 12,500 cubic feet) and an oil change every
six months  requiring four hours  per change.   No allowance  is included  for
jar test time,  as this is included in  the rapid mix 0  & M  curves.

     Figures  61 and 62 present operation and  maintenance costs  for  G = 20,
 50 and  80  for horizontal paddle  flocculation.  Costs  for vertical turbine
 flocculators  are nearly  identical, and are  not shown  separately.  However,
 the  cost curves are applicable to vertical  turbine flocculators. only up
 to basin volumes of 25,000  cubic feet.   Table 61  summarizes the operation
 and maintenance requirements.
                                     169

-------
                                        Table 57
                                   Construction Cost
                        Flocculation - Horizontal Paddle G = 20
Excavation and Sitework
Manufactured Equipment
Concrete
Steel
Labor
Electrical and Instrumentation
         SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
         TOTAL
                                                      Total. .Basin Volume -- ft3
$





$
1,800
450
11,440
1,320
2,140
6,740
6,670
28,760
4,310
33,070
10,000
2,430
26,620
7,180
11,370
19,240
27,050
93,890
14,080
107,970
25,000
4,080
29,620
12,020
18,520
26,740
27,050
118,030
17,700
135,730
100,000
9,490
51,370
28,090
42,140
66,540
27,050
224,680
33,700
258,380
500,000
38,130
111,560
113,480
158,840
178,260
135,270
735,540
110,330
845,870
1,000,000
73,870
219,370
219,790
307,640
355,280
270,540
1,446,490
216,970
1,663,460

-------
                                        Table  58
                                   Construction Cost
                        Flocculation -  Horizontal  Paddle G =  50
Excavation and Sitewbrk
Manufactured Equipment
Concrete
Steel
Labor
Electrical and Instrumentation
        SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
        TOTAL
                                                     Total Basin Volume - ft3
1,800
$ 450
11,440
1,320
2,140
6,740
6,670
28,760
4,310
$ 33,070
10,000
2,430
26,630
7,180
11,370
19,240
27,050
93,900
14,090
107,990
25,000
4,080
33,380
12,020
18,520
27,990
27,050
123,040
18,460
141,500
100,000
9,490
70,130
28,090
42,140
71,790
27,050
248,690
37,300
285,990
500,000
38,130
208,130
113,480
158,840
210,450
135,270
864,300
129,650
993,950
1,000,000
73,870
408,750
219,790
307,640
418,400
270,540
1,698,990
254,850
1,953,840

-------
                                        Table 59
                                   Construction Cost
                        Flocculation - Boris cntal Paddle G - 80


                                               Total Basin Volume -ft*
                                  __________
                                   7800"   iCOQO    25.000   100,000
Excavation and Sitework        $    450     2,430     4,080     9,490      38,130
Manufactured Equipment           11,440    32,250    41,810   109,130     403,130
Concrete                          1,320     7,180    12,020    28,090     113,480
Steel                             2,140    11,370    18,520    42,140     158,840
Labor                             6,740    21,110    30,800    85,790     275,450
Electrical and Instrumentation    6 ,670    27r050    27,050    27,050     135,270
         SUBTOTAL                28,760   101,390   134,280   301,690   1,124,300
Miscellaneous and Contingency    ^4^310    15^210    20t140    45^ 250     168,650
         TOTAL                 $ 33,070   116,600   154,420   346,940   1,292,950

-------

^
7
6
5
4
3
2
I,OOO,(
9
8
6
5
4
3
2
•W"
^ 100,
to 9
0 8
o 7
6
1 5
-^ 2
f~
to
z 2
O
o
10.OC
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1.DOO







>00





000






)0
























x^
x^

























*
(X1


























+.

























0 *
S ' i


























!;X— -1


























H


























-^



























X



























x
x
>

























s
s
























jS
S\//>
.'/
*






















6 =
-/•
/>
f
























80
/I

























<
— ,
/I
G
























i .,
/
~3

-'























i
c
^

tc
























Ci
^
^ ^












\
j







1000  234 5678910,000 234 56789100,0002   3 4 56789

                  BASIN VOLUME-ft 3               I.OOO.OOO
         100
         -f-
         iOOO
BASIN VQLUME-m:
10,000
               CONSTRUCTION   COST
      FLOCCULATION-HORIZONTAL PADDLE


                    FIGURE  59
                       173

-------
                                              Table 60
                                         Construction Cost
                                  Flocculation - Vertical Turbine
                                                      Total Basin Volume - ft3
Excavation and Sitework
Manufactured Equipment
Concrete
Steel
Labor
Electrical and Instrumentation
        SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
        TOTAL


G=20
$
6,
1,
2,
6,
6,
25,
3,
$ 29,
600
880
820
870
890
670
730
860
590
1,
800 ftd
G=50

6
1
2
6
6
25
3
29
600
,880
,820
,870
,890
,670
,730
,860
,590
G=80

6,
1,
2,
6,
6,
25,
3,
29,
600 /
880
820
870
890
670
730
860
590
10,000 ft6
G=20
2,400
13,800
7,280
11,300
21,030
27,050
82,860
12,430
95,290
G=50
2,400
15,000
7,280
11,300
21,380
27,050
84,060
12,610
96,670
G=80
2,400
15,000
7,280
1 1 , 300
21,380
27,050
84,060
12,610
96,670
G=20
3,090
27,500
11,600
17,580
35,270
27,050
122,090
18,310
140,400
25,000 ft6
G=50
3,090
27,500
11,600
17,580
35,270
27,050
122,090
18,310
140,400
G=80
3,090
32,500
11,600
17,580
36,520
27,050
127,090
19,060
146,150

-------
7
6
5
4
3
2
I.OOO.C
7
6
5
4
3
2
,_ IOO.C
V) 9
8 8
6
K 4
o
i 3
w
o
I0,0(
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2







)00






00






^
DO




























X





























X





























X




























































/





























/



















,







































X






























x





























































G






























—





























































),5






























C,or80









































































































































































































































1000  234  5678910,000  234  56789100,0002   3  4 5 6 789
                  BASIN VOLUME-ft 3
         100
        1000
BASIN  VOLUME- m3
10,000
               CONSTRUCTION  COST
      FLOCCULATION-VERTICAL TURBINE

                   FIGURE  60
                      175

-------
                                                  Table  61
                                     Operation and Maintenance Summary
                                               Flocculation

Total Basin
Volume - ft3
1,800
10,000
25,000
100,000
500,000
1,000,000


Energy kw-hr/yr
G - 20 o - ^n
330
1,960
4,900
19,600
98,020
198,230
2,070
11,870
29,630
118,720
593,590 1,
1,188,300

r; - 80
6,100
33,660
84,080
336,550
682,750
—
Maintenance
Material
<>/vr
9/yr
380
980
980
3,750
13,500
27,000

Labor
T,_ /,T —
nr/ yr
99
199
199
397
496
990


Total Cost -
— zu
1,380
3,030
3,120
8,310
21,400
42,850
U - JJU
1,430
3,330
3,860
11,280
36,270
72,550

$/yr*
G = 80
1,550
3,980
5,490
17,820
68,940
—
*Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr and $10.00/hr of labor

-------
o
o






31
o
c
35
m

en














_

|-
O
O
o
c:
r~
H
Q
z








0 o-
"D °
rn
H
om
«v CD
z >
t2
^
_ <
0?
c _,
~. s°-
g m o
^ , o
P» 1
H w
m
z
z
0
m
0
"o.
o
o
                       MAINTENANCE   MATERIAL -$/yr

                          9                          O
Ol  -Ik Ol 0>-400(0 O
            T
               1 - 1
                       II
                                  ro
                                 —r~
                           Ol
                          —T~
 Ol
~rr
      O
      p
>-MHO o
  I I i  IQ
 4k Ol  -JC9IO
—I—I—I—I  I ' I
8
o
ro
01
*.
Ol
0)
^1
00
9 10,000 2 3 45678
BASIN VOLUME -ft3
(O
8
o
ro
01
*
01
~C> *
O ->l
O CO
0<0
o
O
0 ENERGY- kw-hr/yr _ _ .-
8 ro 01 * 01 o> ^ia>(0 ° ro 01 * 01 o>-K»




















\
\
^


















^


\
->

















S



S~
s
















k,
Sk.
X
X
— x~
	 X
S
\
s
\
- • - 	 \









\
S





\




V
— ^
•£.
2>
$5
CUrn
^z
>r>
rc5
m





s
>




s





\









s





s




s







>.
>
~ s

s
r~s
~ s


S^
\



s
^
s






o
>
'v
V
\


V
>s


s
V
^^
	 ^
?B
torn
03)
0
V
\
\
X,






V
s
1

s




\
-o
It
o
o
CO
V)



k.
1 S>






^,
X
S




S














s

s




\













s
s


\
s


s, -
y
s





o
o
o







V
\
\

) _ _____
^
--Nr—
m
z
n
3J
o
s -<
y
Sv 0
X "
-" -^
x







m"0
z5
mo
3%
-
s
\
T3
O
f$ —
m
V) —
















IS,
s



















\

\


















\


^

















\
~ k.


kf —
— y



O
o













k







-------
100 000
       1000  2  34 5678910,000  234 56789100,0002   3  4 56789

                       TOTAL BASIN VOLUME - ff3            1,000,000
                  -h
100                1000

       TOTAL BASIN  VOLUME-m3


 OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE

         FLOCCULATION



          FIGURE  62
                                                    10,000
                             178

-------
CONSTRUCTION COST

Gravity Filtration Structure

     Conventional gravity filtration structure costs are baaed upon use
of cast in place concrete with a media depth of 2 to 3 feet, and a total
depth of 16 feet for the filter box.  Construction cost estimates have been
based on the conceptual designs outlined in Table 62.  At flows less than
5 mgd, two filters were used, but at 5 mgd and greater, a minimum of four
filters was utilized.  Maximum filter size was limited to 1,275 square feet
and above 700 square feet the filters are dual-celled to allow hackwashing
of each half separately.  This approach allows a significant reduction in
the size of wash water and waste piping.  On the designs up to and including
10 mgd, raw water was fed to the filter using a gullet between the pipe
gallery and the filter structure.  For larger designs, which were dual-celled,
raw water was fed using an influent channel located on the periphery of
the filter structure.  Only one valve was used to admit raw water to the
dual-celled filters, since the filters operate as one until the end of the
filter cycle, even though they are backwashed separately.  For designs up
to and Including 10 mgd, piping was used to convey product water in the
pipe gallery, but larger designs used a covered concrete box structure in
the center of the pipe gallery.  Basic housing requirements includes housing
only the pipe gallery, which is located beneath the filter control area.
The filter structure need not be housed except in severe winter climates,
where other precautions such as diffused air addition near the filter periphery
are not taken.  The cost curves include, however, housing of the entire
filter structure.

     Costs for filtration structures are presented in Table 63 and Figure
63.  These costs include the filter structure, underdrains, wash water troughs,
a pipe gallery, required piping and cylinder operated butterfly valves,
filter flow and headless instrumentation, a filter control panel, and the
total housing requirement.   The costs do not include the cost of backwash
water storage facilities, backwash pumping facilities, filtration media,
or surface wash piping and pumps.  These facilities were not included since
their use and sizing will vary with each design, and they are most appropri-
ately added separately.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

Gravity Filtration Structure

     Energy requirements are only for building heating, ventilation, and
lighting.   All process energy required for filtration is: included in the
backwash and surface wash curves.

     Maintenance material Includes the cost of general supplies, instrumen-
tation repair and the periodic addition of filter media.  Costs are based
upon costs experienced at several plants.

     Labor costs include the cost of operation, as well as the cost of
instrument and equipment repairs, and supervision.

                                      179

-------
                                           Table  62
                                    Conceptual  Designs  for
                                 Gravity  Filtration Structures
                                  (24 to  36 Inch  Media  Depth)
                                 Total Filter     	Filters	    Housing Requirement - Ft2
00
o
Plant Flow, mgd
1
5
10
50
100
200
Area Ft2
140
700
1,400
7,000
14,000
28,000
Number
2
4
4
10
14
22
Area Eachj^Ft2
70
175
350
700*
1,000*
1,275*
Basic
150
420
800
2,900
4,060
6,380
Total
430
1,480
2,720
11,600
21,110
40,190
              *Dual  celled filters

-------
                                                     Table 63
                                                Construction Cost
                                          Gravity  Filtration Structure
                                                               Total  Filter  Area  - ft2
oo
Plant Flow Rate - mad
Excavation and Sitework
Manufactured Equipment
Concrete
Steel
Labor
Pipe and Valves
Electrical and Instrumentation
Housing
SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
TOTAL
140
1
$ 1,860
22,210
6,750
5,210
21,260
19,360
12,790
16,250
105,690
15,850
$ 121,540
700
5
3,440
53,690
17,100
9,050
56,700
74,340
36,690
37,800
288,810
43,320
332,130
1,400
10
5,250
73,810
26,270
16,020
104,330
119,800
36,690
65,910
448,080
67,210
515,290
7,000
50
15,430
287,660
93,580
66,630
339,070
395,760
94,700
272,600
1,565,430
234,810
1,800,240
14,000
100
24,350
498,980
152,050
111,600
484,250
555,200
161,280
480,250
2,467,960
370,190
2,838,150
28,000
200
41,300
926,010
259,990
190,250
985,380
1,058,850
253,430
904,350
4,619,560
692,930
5,312,490

-------
                                         CONSTRUCTION   COST-
                                                         -
                                                         0
NJ
                                                                                  O
                                                                         01 cn~J®io .P
                O
                   O
                -n z
                ^ v>
zj
m


Oi
01
                H  O
                70  O
                c  w
                O  H
                -j


                m
cr
o
25-
r-O
2
H
m
m
1
3
0.
0
O
0
IM
CM
Ol
en
- s
-1 O
j> O
r- O
q "
m
33 01
> "
-fc -4
O
0
ro
CM
01
en
82
O CD
0
O
O
\
>


























L
\
s



























L-. .
\
V




























x


























s


























s



























\
















u
O










^
\
\
\
\



























s.
\
\


























\



























\
























































































CJ
O























































































































































































































































































































































































































-------
     Figures 64 and 65 present the operation and maintenance requirements,
and Table 64 is a summation of these requirements.
                                     183

-------
oo
                                                      Table 64
                                         Operation and Maintenance Summary
                                           Gravity Filtration Structure
Total Filter
Area - ft2
140
700
1,400
7,000
14,000
28,000
Energy
kw-hr/yr
44,120
151,850
279,070
1,190,160
2,165,890
4,123,490
Maintenance
Material - $/yr
1,100
3,850
7,060
26,400
44,000
80,300
Labor
hr/yr
1,825
2,190
2,570
6,600
13,000
25,500
Total Cost*
$/yr
20,670
30,310
41,130
128,100
238,980
459,000
                   *Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr and $10.00/hr of labor

-------
a:
UJ
UJ
o
z
<
1
7
6
5
4
3
2
100,00
1
6
5
4
3
2
IO.OOC
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1001
9"
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
7
6
5
4
3
2
0 10,00
: K
6
5
i- 4
3
2
ipoo,
: 9
8
6
5
4
3
2
D 100,
9
- f 5
1
- >- 3
0
UJ
10,00







0,000







000







DoX^




X


0























X

jr






























' —






























/





























/

'





























^
































/



































MAINTENA,
MATERIA


s^
s^
r '
f


*









/



^.x
/
























NC
_
X





























E

X
~3
'




























/































/
x






























/
X





























,x
/
Xsu





























>
x"
ILDI
NER





























p

NG
GY
















































































































































          100   234 567891000   234 56789IOpOO  234 56789

                            TOTAL FILTER AREA-ft2
          H	••	1	1	
           10                100               1000
                            TOTAL FILTER AREA -m 2

                    OPERATION   AND  MAINTENANCE

                  GRAVITY  FILTRATION  STRUCTURE



                             FIGURE  64
                              185

-------
1,000,000
1
7
6
5
4
3
< 2
-w-
i
w IOO.C
8 1
_, f
? !
° :
3
2
IO.OOC
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2

9
7
6
5
4
3
2
300
7
6
5
4
3
2
) IOO.C
!- 9
8
7
6
- 5
4
3
2
10,00
9
8
7
6
5, 5

-e
- ' 3
a:
o
~ < 2
1000











^^^m
)00






0






•M











— -














• -











— -













^s











—













•V











«-"













--'










^s
^.
-------
CONSTRUCTION COST

Filtration Media

     Cost estimates have been prepared for three types of commonly used
filtration media:  rapid sand, dual media (coal-sand), and mixed media
(coal-sand-garnet).  The advantage of rapid sand media is its low initial
cost and simplicity of placement while its disadvantages are the relatively
low application rates and limited suspended solids loading.  While the more
sophisticated dual and mixed media allow higher filtration rates and suspended
solids loading than rapid sand, they are higher in Initial cost and require
In place processing.  Common practice is to backwash the media during place-
ment and then skim a shallow layer from the surface to remove excessive
fines.

     Cost estimates have been made for purchase and placement of 30-inches
of media over a 12-inch gravel underdrain.  These estimates are applicable
to either gravity or pressure filters, although pressure filters are often
designed with a somewhat deeper gravel support layer.  Characteristics of
each media and the gravel underdrain are presented in Table 65.  Costs were
developed as a function of filter area using a filtration rate of 2 gpm/
square foot for rapid sand, and 5 gpm/square foot for dual media and mixed
media.  For plants with total filter areas of 140 square feet and less,
materials were considered to be truck shipped in 100 pound bags.  For total
filter areas between 140 and 2,000 square feet, rail shipment in 100 pound
bags was assumed, and for larger filter areas, rail shipment by bulk was
assumed.

     The estimated costs include media cost, shipping, and installation.
Where required, the cost of a trained technician to supervise media placement
is also Included.  Freight cost represents a nationwide average.  Estimated
filtration media costs are presented in Figure 66 and In Table 66.
                                      187

-------
                              Table  65

         Filter Media and Gravel Underdrain  Characteristics
Rapid Sand:
     30 inches of 0.42 - 0.55 mm effective size silica sand, uniformity
     coefficient less than 1.6.
Dual Media:
     20 inches of 1.0 - 1.2 mm effective size anthracite coal, uniformity
     coefficient less than 1.7.

     10 inches of 0.42 - 0.55 mm effective size silica sand, uniformity
     coefficient less than 1.6.
Mixed (Tri) Media:
     16-1/2 inches of 1.0 -  1.1 mm effective size anthracite coal,
     uniformity coefficient less than 1.7.

     9 inches of 0.42 - 0.55 mm effective size silica sand, uniformity
     coefficient less than 1.6.

     4-1/2 inches of 0.18 - 0.28 mm effective size garnet or ilmenite
     sand, uniformity coefficient less than 1.8.
Gravel Underdrain:  (common to all four media)


     3 inches of 1-1/2" x 3/4" silica gravel

     3 inches of 3/4" x 3/8" silica gravel

     3 inches of 3/8" x 3/16" silica gravel

     3 inches of 3/16" x #10 silica gravel
                                  188

-------
00
                                                   Table 66
                                              Construction Cost
                                              Filtration Media
Plant
Capacity
TTl£ d
1
5
10
50
100
200
Filter
Rapid
Sand
350
1,750
3,500
17,500
35,000
70,000
Bed Area, ft2
Dual and
Mixed Media
140
700
1,400
7,000
14,000
28,000
Filter
Rapid Sand
6,080
24,570
27,190
131,490
262,210
523,640
Media Costs Installed

Dual Media Mixed Media
5,430
16,990
30,900
106,590
203,360
403,420
8,420
24,060
45,700
169,690
332,560
654,580

-------
7
6
5
4
3
2
1,000,
I
6
5
4
3
2
)-
- IOO.C
1 "I
7
6
5
4
3
2
10,00
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2







000




)00




0
	 ^~
,*
^




















x























/























^






















/ ^
X

















MIX


/^
/ /
' /
',/

















:D

7*-
/

/


















ME

-7

/



















D
/






















A
/

^



















x
/Xy^!
' ^
	 _£ 	










1 	

IUO 234 56789)000 234 56789IOpOO 2
TOTAL FILTER AREA -ft2









/
/
P
/
R/i












3










/
PIC












4









f
/
!M*




















,iiir


-












5 6 789
100,000
0 160 idoo
           m^
CONSTRUCTION  COST
 FILTRATION MEDIA

    FIGURE  66
       190

-------
CONSTRUCTION COST

Hydraulic Surface Wash Systems

     The cost of hydraulic surface wash systems is presented separately
from the backwash system, as some plants may not use surface wash in conjunc-
tion with backwashing.  If surface wash is utilized, the cost must be added
to the cost of the backwash system, the filter structure, and the filter
media, to arrive at the total cost of filtration.  Cost estimates include
dual pumps with one as standby, electrical control, piping, valves, and
headers within the filter pipe gallery.  No allowance for housing is included
as this is included in the filtration structure cost.  Surface wash pumps
are sized to provide approximately 50 to 85 psi at the arms in accordance
with manufacturers recommendations.

     Costs are based on the area of each individual filter within a plant,
using the filter sizes presented in the gravity filter section.  Dual arm
agitators were used with an application rate according to manufacturers
recommendations.  One agitator was included for filter areas up to and
including 75 square feet, four agitators for the 350 to  700 square foot
filters, and 6 and 8 for the  1,000 and 1,275 square foot filters respec-
tively.  It was assumed that  the wet well for the surface wash pumps is
the same as for the backwash  pumps.  The construction cost estimates are
shown by cost component in Table 67 and graphically in Figure 67.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COSTS

Hydraulic Surface Wash Systems

      Energy  requirements per  surface wash were  calculated  using  a  surface
wash  time of  8 minutes,  application rates as  recommended by manufacturers,
which were  approximately  1.5  gpm/square  foot  of filter  surface for the  dual
 arm agitators,  a  TDK  of  200  feet,  and  an overall motor  pump  efficiency  of
 70 percent.

      Maintenance material requirements are  for  repair  of the pump(s),, motor
 starter, valves  and surface agitators.  Two surface wash operations per
 day were assumed.

      Lab,or  requirements  are for maintenance of equipment only, and are based
 upon manufacturers estimates.  Operation labor is  included with  the basic
 filter.

      Figures 68 and 69 present the operation/maintenance requirement for
 hydraulic surface wash systems.  The total cost must be added to the costs
 for filter backwashing and filter operation to arrive at the total operation
 and maintenance costs for filter operation.  An operation and maintenance
 summation is presented in Table 68.
                                       191

-------
                                   Table  67
                              Construction Cost
                       Hydraulic Surface Wash Systems
                                                Individual Filter Area - ft2
                                     70"1753507001,0001,275
Manufactured Equipment          $  4,320    2,840     8,270    7,730   11,610    17,190
Labor                                62°      660     1,230    1,400    2,000    2,880
Pipe and Valves                    1,210    1,200     1,650    1,260    2,170    2,560
Electrical and Instrumentation     6,050    4,280     4,880    3,620    4,170    4,010
       SUBTOTAL                   12,200    8,980    16,030   14,010   19,950   26,640
Miscellaneous and Contingency      1,830    1,350     2,400    2,100    2,990    4,000
       TOTAL                    $ 14,030   10,330    18,430   16,110   22,940   30,640

-------
9
i
7
6
5
4
3
2
Q
8
6
5
4
3
2
100,
I
6
5
*»- 4
1 3
1-
O 0
0 c
z
o
p 10,0
« 9
K 8
i_ 7
 6
0 5
0 4
3
2
1000












000






00







































































































«»

























"• 	

























• ••

























**•

























X

























^
xx
























/



























































—













































































10
3456789100
      INDIVIDUAL
2  3456 7891000  2  3 456789
FILTER  SURFACE  AREA- ft2
           10                100
       INDIVIDUAL FILTER SURFACE AREA -m2
        CONSTRUCTION   COST
HYDRAULIC SURFACE WASH SYSTEMS

             FIGURE 67
               193

-------
                                                 Table 68

                                      Operation  and Maintenance Summary

                                      Hydraulic Surface Water  Systems
VO
              Individual  Filter
              Surface Area -  ft2
  Process
Energy-kw-hr/
Surface Wash
  Maintenance
   Material
$/Surface Wash
Labor-hours/
Surface Wash
Total Cost*
70
175
350
700
1,000
1,275
1.58
3.30
7.54
12.37
19.81
24.75
0.137
0.086
0.103
0.055
0.049
0.037
0.037
0.040
0.069
0.042
0.039
0.051
Y / *+ *•**- J.CLV.C ncLDii
0.55
0.59
1.02
0.85
1.03
1.29
             Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr and $10.00/hr of labor

-------
o
S


(U
o
o
OL

UJ
q
6
7
6
5
4
3
2
O.I
Q
1
6
5
4
7
2
0.01
9
8
7
6
«
4
T
2
j
8
1
6
i
i
t

7
6
5
4
3
2
Q
8
6
5
4
3
2
10.0
9
6

4
- -C *
U) J
0
" » 2
U
o
«*_
k_
S i.o
_ \ 9
- j= 8
- i
- 1 6
- 1 5
- b 4
tK
- LLI ;
•z.
UJ
o
























10




















































«*






















fc
	 ^^







/
/
/












S*





/
s















•**





X

















^^*


/
2 —
















MAII
M

,__ 	

/
/' PR
E
















It!
TE





OCE
gER
















Al
IA





SS
SY
















b/






























































2 3456789100 2 34 567891000 20003 4 56789
INDIVIDUAL FILTER SURFACE AREA - ft2 10,000
                          10
                                          100
                 INDIVIDUAL FILTER SURFACE  AREA— m2

                   OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE

                HYDRAULIC  SURFACE  WASH  SYSTEMS


                           FIGURE 68
                             195

-------
   1.0
01
O
D
O
O
O.I
 9
 8
 7
 6
 5

 4

 3


 2
 0.01
   9
   8

   6
   5

   4
O
I
7
6
i
4
2
I
6
C
4
3
2
O.I
9
7
6
4
3
2
0.01
_c Q
« a
O 0
* 7
o> 6
S n
n 4
i: 3
O 2
ffi
0,001








































































































— _ •




•
















	 	 -^





= S d»















,---






^•e






















— •















V






^m























mm — «















- ; ^ 	


TOT




::— » 	

LA
















,|_






BOF







10 Z 3 4 56789100 234 567891000 20003
( INDIVIDUAL FILTER SURFACE AREA -ft2









;os














4









T






































5 6 789
10,000
                          10               100
                     INDIVIDUAL FILTER SURFACE AREA-m?

                  OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE

               HYDRAULIC  SURFACE  WASH  SYSTEMS

                           FIGURE   69
                             196

-------
CONSTRUCTION COST

Backwash Pumping Facilities

     The cost of the backwash pumping system must be added to the basic
cost for the filtration structure, filter media cost, surface wash,  and
any required backwash water storage capacity to arrive, at the filtration
facility cost.  Included within the backwash pumping system cost is  the
cost of required pumps and motors, including one standby unit, flow control,
filter backwash sequencing control, pump station valving, the backwash header
cost not included in the filter structure, and motor starters.  Backwash
piping and valving was sized for a velocity of 7 feet per second.  Housing
costs are not included.  The assumed pumping head for the backwash pump
was 50 feet TDK and the maximum design rate for backwash was 18 gpm/square
foot.  The maximum size pump utilized was 7,000 gpm and for all installations,
one standby pump was included.

     Construction cost estimates, are shown by cost component in Table 69 and
on Figure 70.  Costs are presented as a function of backwash pumping capacity,
as the rate will vary with the type of media utilized and the size of filters
us ed.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

Backwash Pumping Facilities

      Since  backwash frequency is  dependent  upon  raw  water quality, and  is
not  a  function  of  filter size, all  operation and maintenance curves are
presented using a  per  backwash basis.   For  dual  cell filters,  a backwash
 is  defined  as a backwash of  both  cells.   Using  this- approach,  variations
 in  water quality and frequency of backwash  can  be  readily  taken into  account
 in  determining  annual  cost.

      Energy requirements per backwash were  calculated using a backwash rate
 of  15 gpm/square foot, a pumping  head of 50 feet TDK, and  an overall  motor/
 pump efficiency of 72 percent.  Energy requirements per backwash are  based
 on a backwash period of 10 minutes.

      Labor requirements are for maintenance labor only as all operation
 labor is included with the filtration structure curves.  To convert annual
 labor requirements to labor per backwash, two backwashes per day per  filter
 were assumed.

      Maintenance material costs are for repair of the backwash pumps:, the
 motor starters, and valving.  Costs are expressed per backwash, assuming
 two backwashes per day.

      Figures 71 and 72 present the operation and maintenance requirements
 which are also summarized in Table 70.  The total cost curve is based upon
 a 10 minute  backwash at 15  gpm/square foot, and a 50 TDH.   If  different
 conditions are utilized, the  total cost should be adjusted  accordingly.
                                      197

-------
VO
oo
                                                     Table  69

                                                Construction Cost

                                           Backwash Pumping Facilities
                                                             Pumping Capacity

GPM
MGD
Manufactured Equipment
Labor
Pipe and Valves


Electrical and Instrumentation
SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and
TOTAL

Contingency

1,260
1.8
$ 10,750
2,900
9,200
12,750
35,600
5,340
$ 40,940
3,150
4.5
13,760
4,200
16,640
15,320
49,920
7,490
57,410
6,300
9.1
36,180
4,640
16,640
15,990
73,400
11,010
84,410
18,000
25.9
72,370
8,840
31,410
26,810
139,430
20,910
160,340
22,950
33
90,460
11,840
42,130
31,760
176,190
26,430
202,620

-------
Q
i
7
6
5
4
3
2
9
8
6
5
4
2
1,000,
9
8
6
5
4
•
-------
                                   Table  70
                      Operation and Maintenance Summary
                         Backwash Pumping Facilities

bo
o
o





Backwash Pumping
Rate - gpm
1,050
2,625
5,250
10,500
15,000
19,125
Process
Energy
kw-hr/
Backwash
2.29
5.73
11.46
22.91
32.73
41.73

Maintenance
Material
$ /Backwash
0.479
0.377
0.616
0.466
0.411
0.355

Labor
Hours /Backwash
0.130
0.072
0.086
0.041
0,034
0.023

Total Cost*
$ /Backwash
1.85
1.27
1.82
1.56
1.73
1.84
Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr  and  $10.00/hr  of  labor

-------
Q
6
7
6
5
4
3
2
1.0
9
MAINTENANCE MATERIAL - $ / BACKWASH
ro 01 * 01 CT)->IODU> — ro w * 01 o>->iao«> — ro w * <" <""*•
_
7
6
5
4
3
2
9
8
6
5
4
3
2
100
9
L 1
7
6
4
x _
i it
-hr/BACKWAS

-------
   10
o
m  1.0
-  I
-w-
 I
I-
o
o
<
O
  0.01
   9
   8
   7
   6
   5
o
1
6
i
4
i
7
6
•
4
3
2
1.0
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
O.I
I 9
S? 8
ii
° *
oo 4
\
*= 1
tr
o ?
CD
<
_J
0.01






























































































































X





















Sr






















^






















s












TO









*^LAI
^S










TAL









OR
^










C





















0,












IUU 234 567891000 234 56789IOpOO 20pOO 4 5
t BACKWASH PUMPING RATE-gpm










n


































6 789
IOO.OOC
'0 100 1000
                        BACKWASH PUMPING RATE - lit ers/sec
                  OPERATION  AND MAINTENANCE
                 BACKWASH PUMPING  FACILITIES
                           FIGURE 72
                              202

-------
CONSTRUCTION COST

Reverse Osmosis

     Reverse osmosis utilizes membranes, to remove a high percentage of  almost
all inorganic ions, turbidity, bacteria, and viruses.   Most organic matter
is also removed, with the exception of several materials, including most
halogenated and low molecular weight compounds.

     Figures 73 and 74 present costs for construction of complete reverse
osmosis plants in the size ranges from 2,500 gpd to 1 mgd and from 1 mgd
to 200 mgd, respectively.  Commercial units are available in sizes up to
about 5,000 gpd for the membrane elements and up to 30,000 gpd for the
reverse osmosis modules (pressure vessels); therefore large scale plants
would be composed of many smaller, parallel modules.  Components taken  into
account in the construction cost estimates including housing, structural
steel and miscellaneous metalwork, tanks, piping, valves, pumps, reverse
osmosis membrane elements and pressure vessels, flow meters, cartridge
filters, acid and polyphosphate feed equipment and also cleaning equipment.
The cost curves are based upon the use of either spiral wound or hollow
fine fiber reverse osmosis membranes.  Table 71 presents the breakdown  of
construction costs.

     The efficiency of the membrane elements in reverse osmosis systems
may be impaired by scaling, due to slightly soluble or insoluble compounds,
or by fouling, due to the deposition of colloidal or suspended materials.
Because of this, a very important consideration in  the design of a reverse
osmosis system is the provision of adequate pretreatment to protect the
membrane from excessive scaling and fouling and to  avoid frequent cleaning
requirements.  In the development of the  cost  curves, adequate pretreatment
was assumed to precede the reverse osmosis process, and  costs for pretreat-
ment are not included in the  estimates.

     The construction cost curve  applies  to waters  with  a  total dissolved
solids  (TDS) concentration ranging up  to  about 10,000 mg/1.  Other  considera-
tions,  such as  calcium sulfate and silica concentrations and also  the desired
water recovery,  affect costs  more than the influent TDS  concentration.
The  temperature  of  the feedwater  is assumed  to be between  65 and 95 degrees
Fahrenheit, while  the pH of  the feedwater is  adjusted  to near 5.5  - 6.0
prior to the reverse osmosis  process.   A single-pass  treatment  system  (only
one  pass through the membrane) is assumed, with  an  operating pressure of
400  - 450  psi.   The assumed  water recoveries  for different flow ranges are
as: follows:

                Flow Range                 Water Recovery -  %

                2,500  - 10,000 gpd            60
                10,000  -  100,000  gpd           70
                100,000 gpd  - 1.0  mgd          75
                1.0 -  10  mgd                  80
                10  - 200  mgd                  85

 Brine disposal costs  are not included in the estimates.

                                     203

-------
                                            Table 71
                                        Construction Cost
                                         Reverse Osmosis

Manufactured Equipment
Labor
Electrical and Instrumentation
Housing
           SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
           TOTAL
0.0025
$ 3,500
730
4,000
2,500
10,730
1,610
12,340
0.01
10,500
2,100
4,500
3,800
20,900
3,140
24,040
0.
76,
15,
10,
6,
107,
16,
124,
1
400
300
200
000
900
190
090
i
447
67
62
60
636
95
732
.0
,000
,000
,800
,000
,800
,520
,320
10
3,260
330
464
432
4,486
672
5,159

,000
,000
,500
,000
,500
,980
,480
100
27,500
2,200
3,472
2,250
35,422
5,313
40,736

,000
,000
,900
,000
,900
,440
,340

53,
2,
6,
3,
66,
9,
76,
200
200,000
700,000
636,400
900,000
436,400
965,460
401,860

-------
X
6
5
4
3
2
7
6
5
4
3
2
1,000,
7
6
5
4
i 2
0
Z
2 too,
0 9
3 8
cc 7
1 4
3
2
10,0













300






000






30



























*>



























s



























s



























s



























/


























y
*

























V
X
























/
/


























r

























/
r


























^






















































>


























>



























X


























/


























/


























,
^


























r


























,,
r

























•^















1000 234 5678910,000 234 56789100,0002 3 4 5 B™ 9
PLANT CAPACITY -gpd ' '
• i i

10 100 1000

  PLANT CAPACITY - m3 /day
CONSTRUCTION  COST
 REVERSE  OSMOSIS

     FIGURE  73
        205

-------
7
6
5
4
3
2
I00,0(
1
6
5
4
3
•w- o
1
t-
W
8 10,000
_ 9
^ o
— 7
o 6
*•* 5
3
I.OOC
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
IOO.C







30,000







,000






'Jr






)00






















/


























































/




























s




























t
/
























. 	 _

>r
, f
»























































/





























r




























/


























































/


























Jr
S
S





































































































































































































234 5678910    234 56789100

              PLANT  CAPACITY-mgd
  -f-
                                    200 3  456789
10,000              100,000             1,000,000
               PLANT CAPACITY- m3/day

         CONSTRUCTION  COST

           REVERSE  OSMOSIS


               FIGURE   74
                   206

-------
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

Reverse Osmosis

     Electrical energy usage is included for the high pressure feedwater
pumps, based on an operating pressure of 450 psi and on the water recoveries
listed In the construction cost write-up.  For other pumps and chemical
feed equipment, an energy usage of 10 percent of the usage for the high
pressure pumps was assumed.  Electrical energy for lighting, heating,  and
ventilating was calculated, based on an estimated floor area required  for
complete housing of the reverse osmosis equipment.

     The largest maintenance material requirement is for membrane replacement;
a membrane life of three years was used in the cost estimates.  Other  mainten-
ance material requirements are for replacement of cartridge filters, for
membrane cleaning chemicals, and for materials needed for periodic repair
of pumps, motors, and electrical control equipment.  The maintenance material
costs vary from 17.5 cents per thousand gallons for plants above 10 mgd
to 25 cents per thousand gallons for plants below 1 mgd.  Costs for pretreat-
ment chemicals, such as acid and polyphosphate, are not Included in the
estimates.  The chemicals utilized and the dosages required will show  great
variability between different water supplies, and should be determined from
pilot plant testing.

     Labor requirements are for cleaning and replacing membranes, replacing
cartridge filters, maintaining the high pressure and other pumps, preparing
treatment chemicals and determining proper dosages, maintaining chemical
feed equipment, and monitoring performance of the reverse osmosis membranes.
Membrane cleaning was assumed to occur monthly.  In estimating labor require-
ments a minimum of about one and one half hours per day of labor was assumed
for the smallest plant.

     Operation and maintenance requirements are summarized in Table 72 and
Illustrated In Figures 75 to 78.
                                     207

-------
                                                 Table 72
                                    Operation and Maintenance Summary
                                             Reverse  Osmosis
Plant Capacity Energy kwh/yr
mgd

N3
O
oo




0
0
0
1
10
100
200
.0025
.01
.1
.0



Building
7,000
10,500
15,400
105,400
840,000
7,560,000
15,120,000
Process
8,030
28,100
260,980
2,409,000
22,082,500
220,825,000
441,650,000
Total
15
38
276
2,514
22,922
228,385
456,770
,030
,600
,380
,000
,500
,000
,000
Maintenance
Material - $/yr

9
91
700
6,390
12,800
230
910
,100
,000
,000
,000
,000
Labor
hr/yr
510
1,
1,
2,
6,
11,
710
320
840
840
670
550
Total Cost*
$/yr
5,780
9,170
30,590
184,820
1,416,080
13,308,250
26,618,600
Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr and $10.00/hr of labor

-------
100,000
  6
  5
  4
10,000  1,000,000
yea
NTENANCE MATERIAL
 100
   9
   8
   7
   6
   5
   4
      1000
         1,000  234 5678910,000  234 56789100,0002  3  4  56789
                             PLANT  CAPACITY— gpd              1,000,000
                10                  100
                            PLANT  CAPACITY-M3/day

                   OPERATION  AND MAINTENANCE
                          REVERSE  OSMOSIS

                              FIGURE   75
10*00
                               209

-------
 1,000,000

   I
  100,
co
o
o
 lo.oqp  10,000
         1,000  2  345 678910,000  234 56789100,000 2  345 6789

                           PLANT  CAPACITY- gpd              1,000,000
                1*00                I

           PLANT  CAPACITY-m3/day


OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE

       REVERSE  OSMOSIS



         FIGURE   76
                                                     icfoo
                                 210

-------
1,000,000,000
1
6
5
4
3
2
IO.OOO.OC
MAINTENANCE MATERIAL - $/yr
608
i"o N w * 01 ~^ ro 01 * 01 ffi-jaxoO pa CM * " o>^** _ ro CM * 01 O>^OMO
>- ^
cc
- id 2
UJ
)00 l,(
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
00 l(
b







o.ooo.oc








o.ooo.oc




>

/
300^000







30^00







30








0


j
f
'


/






/
r

















— -y
f




/






J
r























/






A
f


















/




g







s



















'




^






^




















'



f






A

























t





4

























j






t



















.
s
/

— -^- —
^r





/
r


















,
f
/


/

























A
_^"
r '



.
r






/

















f






/






/

















A






/






,
f

















<






/






/


















'





/






/
























:t
f
























/
/Pf

^F
^F
S M

r



x
• jf —
s
>

















/

OCE
^


AIM"

MA



. Bl
E






















SS



F*M
t-N
EF



IIL
NE






















f



All

IA



)lf
)G






















N



f

M



G
Y


























c




























^1
































37


























2 345 678910 2 3456 789100 200 3 456 789
PLANT CAPACITY- mgd
	 1 	 1 	 U. 	 HI,
        10,000
      100,000            1,000,000
PLANT  CAPACITY-m3/day
             OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE
                   REVERSE  OSMOSIS

                    FIGURE  77
                      211

-------
100,000,000
I
7
6
5
4
3
2
10,000,00
* !
•w- 5
w 4
8 3
< 2
O
1-
l,000,0(
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
IOO.OC
1
6
5
4
3
2
7
6
5
4
3
2
0 1,00
6
5
4
3
2
DO 100
9
8
6
k. £
- ^ 4
-C
- 1 ^
CC 3
0
CD „
- < 2
_J
0 10,0
9
8
7
6
5
4
2
1000







0,000








000






/
00






^i





















A
/








^*~




















/
^









— •




















>
f










«»



















y












»•


















^













••
































^

















^














*

















<














*
















/
X













^^^
^-^"^















^
'














^^<















y*










L/




















y











B




^













^













)F




•»•












v


















^
































^











t



















t











/
T(


















^^













)TAI







•«























































:o
































5"




























































































































              234  5678910     234  56789100
                           PLANT  CAPACITY-mgd
                         200 3 456 789
              10,000
        100,000
PLANT  CAPACITY -m3/doy
1,000,000
                    OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE
                           REVERSE  OSMOSIS

                              FIGURE  78
                             212

-------
CONSTRUCTION COST

Ion Exchange - Softening

     Cation exchange resins can be utilized for the removal of not only
hardness, but also other constituents such as barium, trivalent chromium,
lead, manganese, mercury and radium.   Pressure units are generally competitive
with gravity units at low capacities, while gravity units are more economical
at higher flows.  An advantage of pressurized exchange units is the capability
of pumping through the softener and directly to the clearwell, or other
point, possibly eliminating the need for double pumping.

     Facilities were sized based upon an exchange capacity of 20 kilograins
per cubic foot and a hardness reduction of 300 mg/1.  Regeneration facilities
were sized on the basis of 150 bed volumes treated prior to regeneration
and a regenerant requirement of 0.275 pounds, of sodium chloride per kilograin
of exchange capacity.  The total regeneration time required is 50 minutes.
Of this time, 10 minutes is for backwash, 20 minutes is regeneration brine
contact time (brining and displacement rinse), and 20 minutes is a fast
rinse at 1.5 gpm/ft3.  Feedwater was assumed to be of sufficient clarity
to require backwashing only for resin reclas;s:ification.  Backwash pumping
facilities and media installation are included in the construction cost.
In place resin costs of $45.00 per cubic foot were utilized.

     No facilities are included in the construction cost for spent brine
disposal.

Pressure Ion Exchange Softening

     Construction costs were developed for pressure ion exchange using the
conceptual information presented in Table 73.  The contact vessels are
fabricated steel, with a baked phenolic lining added after fabrication,
and constructed for 100 psi working pressure.  The depth of resin was 6
feet, and the contact vessel was designed to allow for as much as 80 percent
media expansion during backwash.  A gravel layer between underdrains and
media was not included.

     Regeneration facilities include two salt storage/brining basins, which
are open, reinforced concrete structures, constructed with the top foot
above ground level.  Saturated brine withdrawal from the salt storage/
brining basins is 26 percent by weight.  A saturated brine storage of two
and a half days normal use was provided in the storage/brining basins.
Pumping facilities were included to pump from the brining tanks to the
contact vessels.  An eductor is utilized to add sufficient water to dilute
the brine to a 10 percent concentration as it is being transferred from
the salt storage/brining tank to the contact vessel.

     Construction costs for pressure ion exchange softening are presented
in Figure 79 and summarized in Table 74.
                                      213

-------
                                                      Table 73
                                                Conceptual Design
                                        Pressure Ion Exchange  Softening
                                                                                       Total Salt
N>
Plant
Capacity - mgd
1.1
3.7
6.1
12.3
49
122.6
Number of
Contactors
2
3
5
10
40
100
Diameter of
Contactors -ft
8
12
12
12
12
12
ft2 of
Housing
558
1,232
1,980
3,960
15,840
31,680
Storage - Brining
Capacity - ft*
918
3,146
5,244
10,488
41,954
104,890







-------
                                        Table 74
                                   Construction Cost
                            Pressure Ion Exchange Softening
                                                         Plant Capacity - mgd
Excavation and Sitework
Manufactured Equipment
  Equipment
  Resin
Concrete
Steel
Labor
Pipe and Valves
Electrical and Instrumentation
Housing
        SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
        TOTAL

$










$
1.1
390
23,400
27,140
1,260
1,930
2,520
14,240
31,700
18,000
120,580
18,090
138,670
3.7
780
61,460
91,610
2,490
3,790
4,910
40,650
46,500
32,750
284,940
42,740
327,680
6.1
1,040
104,090
152,690
3,310
5,010
6,480
77/970
77,900
58,100
486,590
72,990
559,580
12.3
2,080
207,520
305,380
6,620
10,020
12,960
155,940
183,600
105,750
989,870
148,480
1,138,350
49.0
4,270
830,220
1,221,480
13,080
19,660
24,370
623,760
684,500
364,350
3,785,690
567,850
4,353,540
122.6
8,770
2,075,800
3,053,700
26,280
39,510
47,830
1,333,680
1,738,300
713,000
9,036,870
1,355,530
10,392,400

-------
     7
     6
     5
     4

     3
  10,000,000
-w-
 I
CO
8 1,000,000
O
O
   100,000
     9	
                  ^
                                             PRESSURE
                                             GRAVITY
           2  345 678910     2   3456 789100    200 3456 789

                          CAPACITY -mgd
            10,000               100,000
                         CAPACITY- m3/day
                      CONSTRUCTION  COST
                  ION   EXCHANGE-SOFTENING
                                                   -*-
1,000,000
                          FIGURE  79
                               216

-------
Gravity Ion Exchange *• Softening

     Construction costs were developed for gravity ion exchange,  using the
conceptual designs presented in Table 75.   The structures are similar to
those used for gravity filtration.  Differences from gravity filter structures
are larger influent channels to allow a higher loading per square foot of
surface area and use of an eighteen foot wall depth to allow a loading of
8 gpm/ft2.  A six foot resin depth was utilized and underdralns not requiring
an overlying gravel layer were utilized.  Piping was modified from gravity
filtration by the addition of a regenerant line.  Facilities included for
regenerant storage and dilution to 10 percent were similar to those described
for pressure ion exchange.

     Construction costs for gravity ion exchange softening are presented
in Figure 79 and in Table 76.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

Ion Exchange - Softening

     Electrical requirements are for regenerant pumping, rlns
-------
                                                              Table 75


                                                       Conceptual Designs


                                                Gravity Ion  Exchange  Softening





                                                                                          Total Salt

                                                                                         Storage and

                      T>1 OTtf-              KT«im1-kA-w                        T?^-2  „£         T)-.
KJ
1-1
oo
Plant
Capacity - mgd
1.5
7.5
15
75
150
Number
of Beds
2
4
4
10
14
Ft2/Bed
70
175
350
700
1,000
Ft2 of
Housing
150
420
800
2,900
4,060
Primary Capacity
Ft 3
1,300
6,490
12,990
64,930
129,850

-------
                                                          Table 76
                                                     Construction Cost
                                             Gravity Ion Exchange Softening
                                                                  Plant Flow Rate - mgd
K3
M
VD
Excavation and Sitework
Manufactured Equipment
  Equipment
  Resin
Concrete
Steel
Labor
Pipe and Valves
Electrical and Instrumentation
Housing
         SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
         TOTAL

$










$
1.5
3,490
40,960
37,800
8,750
8,460
21,300
21,770
19,190
16,250
177,970
26,700
204,670
7.5
6,180
88,490
189,200
20,110
16,420
55,260
61,050
55,040
37,800
529,550
79,430
608,980
15
9,250
137,770
378,000
30,570
23,310
77,300
84,060
55,040
65,910
861,210
129,180
990,390
75
31,630
527,120
1,890,000
98,330
83,630
284,700
246,710
142,050
272,600
3,576,770
536,520
4,113,290
150
55,110
960,040
3,780,000
131,410
145,350
486,510
370,190
241,920
480,250
6,650,780
997,620
7,648,400

-------
                                             Table 77
                                Operation and Maintenance Summary
                                Pressure  Ion  Exchange Softening

NJ
NJ
O





Plant Flow
Rate - mgd
1.1
3.7
6.1
12.3
49
122.6



Energy kw-hr/yr
Building
57,250
126,400
203,150
406,300
1,625,180
3,250,370
Process
2,270
7,620
12,570
25,350
100,970
252,630
Total
59,520
134,020
215,720
431,850
1,726,150
3,503,000
Maintenance
Material
$/yr
4,690
15,140
25,040
49,820
197,890
489,280

Labor
hr/yr
2,160
2,700
3,000
3,400
6,900
13,600

Total Cost*
$/yr
28,000
46,160
61,510
96,770
318,670
730,370
Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr  and  $10.00/hr  of  labor

-------
<«-
I
UJ
O


g
7
6
5
4
3
2
,000,
i
6
5
4
3
2
!OC
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
10,00
1
6
5
4
3
2
1,000
10,00
1
7
. 6
5
4
3
2
DOO I.OC
2
),OOOIO
: -S87
- 2 5
1 4
>-
O
- o: 3
LJ
Z
- LJ 2
0 I0,(
5
1,0

0,000






)0,000





0,000
	 -^
^r
f
r


300
J

f

y/
/
00













,






/

_^
/
















/






/
/-


















/

























j
J





/
^ -
/














4

S



/\
s

T
f X
x^




















/


s
f
















,





'
—j
r


















/

























A
/



^
/
/




















BUILI
ENEF


/ M/
/
/
' PI
El




















6Y

INI
TEI


IOC
JER






















^
IA


ES
3Y






















i



i






















'11 u












































2 3456789 10 2 3456 789100 2 3 4 5 6 789
CAPACITY- mgd
10,000 100,000 ,000,000
CAPACITY - mVday
                 OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE

              PRESSURE ION EXCHANGE SOFTENING


                         FIGURE  80
                          221

-------
   I:
   7 -
   6 -
   5 -

   4 -

   3 -


   2 -



1,000,000
   6
   5

   4

   3 -


   2 -
£ 100,000
O 9"
o
  8
  7
  6
  5

  4

  3


  2 -
  I



   - S- 5
    1000
c
7
6
f
4
2
f
6
5
4
3
2
R9
f
6
5
4
3
?
),0(
9
7
6
•>
4

?
0















^

30




— —















	 «^
X^






— —















Xs







«—














x







«•














. if







==•

III
-










A








-^
1













X







X-*






































x







x














,/







X**"











TC
- /
r
/'







^ U
*' 	
f 	


	
!

234 5678910 234 56789100 2
CAPACITY- mgd






TAI










BOF






3






f

















4






rvn









































5 6 789
10,000 100,000 1,000,000
CAPACITY - m3/day
                OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

             PRESSURE  ION EXCHANGE  SOFTENING


                         FIGURE  81
                         222

-------
u>
                                                      Table  78
                                        Operation and Maintenance Summary
                                         Gravity Ion Exchange Softening

Plant
Rate -
1
7
15
75
150

Flow
- mad
1?
.5
.5





Building
44,120
151,850
279,070
1,190,160
2,165,890

Energy kw-hr/yr
Process
1,470
7,370
14,730
73,700
147,310


Total
45,590
159,220
293,800
1,263,860
2,313,200
Maintenance
Material
$/yr
6,960
30,690
59,040
286,830
567,880

Labor
hr/yr
2,230
3,090
3,570
9,600
17,460

Total Cost*
$/yr
30,630
66,370
103,550
420,750
811,880
          *Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr  and  $10.00/hr  of  labor

-------
1,000,000
I
7
6
\ 5
-w- .
1 *
< 3
tt
LU
y 100,00
\ 1
< 5
5 4
3
2
IO.OC
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
7
6
5
4
3
2

: I
7
6
5
4
3
2
0 1,00
7
6
5
4
3
2
)0 100,
9
8
- i 7
- \ 6
- >- 3
o
a:
. w 2
LJ
IO.OC
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
IOOC




0,000



DOO
	 -^


)0



x








y
^





/









x





/









/'
s'




— r-



- -1 	




Lr
^ - >^





/










^




/









'
u




/









/
r













- --^-
j
'
/*



/









Ml
M

UIL
EN



PR(
FNf









R-
T

>IN
R



)CE









F
RIA

5
Y



S5
Y








:
f















            2  345 678910    2   3456 789100   200 3 45 6789
                           CAPACITY -mgd
                                               ,000,000
10,000             100,000            I
             CAPACITY -m3/day

    OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE

 GRAVITY  ION  EXCHANGE  SOFTENING


              FIGURE  82
                           224

-------

3
6
5
4
3
2
1,00
1
6
5
4
3
2
IOO.C
9
8
ss
rl
& 4
0
" 3
_l
? 2
P
IO.OC
9"
8
7
6
5
4
3
2


7
6
5
4
3
2
0,000
: *
6
5
4
3
2
)00 100,
9
8
- _ 6
- <5
- £ 4
i
- o 3
00
- 32
0 10,0
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
1000














000




X*

00





	 — B-5



















X*







•— •


















*J








•«•



















x








-••


















^








••

















, "
» *• ~








'.**















-^
;X- —










t^
• "r-















/










S
















V
/









X

















/









x


















X








x


















/



























>
/























TOT
— X-
/
/










X-














(\L (













BOF














(X




























T












































































































2  345678910    2   3456 789100    200 3  456789
             CAPACITY-tngd
I0,0(
                 100,000
             CAPACITY -m3 /day
1,000,000
     OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE
  GRAVITY  ION  EXCHANGE  SOFTENING

              FIGURE 83
                225

-------
CONSTRUCTION COST

Pressure Ion Exchange - Nitrate Removal

     Strongly basic anion exchange resins may be used for the removal of
nitrates, and also sulfates, fluorides, and some forms or organic and
inorganic mercury.  When a strongly basic anion exchanger is operated on
the chloride form, the sulfate is selectively removed over nitrate,  and
the nitrate is selectively removed over fluoride.  Therefore, the larger
the nitrate to sulfate ratio, the greater is the nitrate removal capacity
of the resin.  Generally, fluoride removal by anion exchange resins  is not
considered practical due to the low capacity.

     Costs were developed for treatment of a water supply with the following
anion content:  nitrate = 100 mg/1; sulfate = 80 mg/1; other anions  = 120
mg/1.  The assumed nitrate capacity for the strongly basic anion exchange
resin operated on the chloride form was 7 kilograins of nitrate per  cubic
foot, when operated to nitrate breakthrough.  It must be noted that  other
quality water supplies may result in significantly different exchange
capacities, and pilot scale studies are recommended prior to design.   A
sodium chloride regenerant was utilized, with a regenerant requirement of
15 pounds per cubic foot of resin.

     A total regeneration time of 54 minutes was utilized.  Backwash required
10 minutes, the brine contact and displacement rinse 24 minutes:, and the
fast rinse an additional 20 minutes.

     Construction costs were developed for pressure anion exchange,  using
fabricated steel contact vessels with a 100 psi working pressure and a baked
phenolic lining.  A six foot bed depth was utilized, although tanks  were
sized for up to 80 percent resin expansion during backwash.   A gravel layer
between the resin and the underdrains was not utilized.  Resin placement
and backwash pumping costs are included in the construction cost.

     Regeneration facilities include two salt storage/brining basins, which
are open, reinforced concrete structures, constructed with the top foot
above ground level.  Saturated brine withdrawn from the salt storage/brining
basins is 26 percent by weight.  A saturated brine storage of two and a
half days normal use was provided in the storage/brining basins.  Pumping
facilities were included to pump from the brining tanks to the contact
vessels.  An eductor is utilized to add sufficient water to dilute the brine
to a 10 percent concentration as it is being transferred from the salt
storage/brining tank to the contact vessel.

     Conceptual designs which were used to estimate costs are presented
in Table 79.
                                     226

-------
                                  TABLE 79

                             CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS
                   PRESSURE ION EXCHANGE - NITRATE REMOVAL

                                                Diameter of
                                                                            f\
Plant Capacity - mgd   Number of Contactors   Contactors - ft   Housing - ft

       1 2                       2                    8               930
       3.9                       3                   12             2,375
       6.5                       5                   12             3,910
      13                        10                   12             6,920


     No facilities are included in the construction cost for disposal of
spent regenerant.  Construction costs for pressure ion exchange softening
are presented in Figure 84 and summarized in Table 80.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

Ion Exchange - Nitrate Removal

     Electrical energy costs are for backwash pumping, rinse pumping, regen-
erant pumping, and building heating, lighting, and ventilation.  Backwash
pumping was based upon a ten minute wash, at 3 gpm/ft2.  Regenerant pumping
was based upon a rate of 1 gallon per minute per cubic foot of resin for
24 minutes, and fast rinse pumping was based upon a rate of 8 gallons per
minute/square foot for twenty minutes.  All pumping was assumed to be against
a 25 foot TDH.

     Maintenance material costs for periodic repair and replacement of
components were estimated based on one percent of the construction cost.
Resin replacement costs are for resin lost annually by physical attrition
as well as loss of capacity due to chemical fouling.  As anion resin is
typically replaced every 3 to 5 years, a 25 percent annual resin replacement
was included to account for resin fouling and resin loss.  Regenerant costs
are not included in the maintenance material cost.

     Labor requirements are for operation and maintenance of ion exchange
vessels and the pumping facilities.  Hours were estimated based upon compar-
able size filtration plants and filter pumping facilities.  Labor requirements
are also included for periodic media addition and replacement of the media
every 4 years.

     No costs are included for spent brine disposal.  Operation and mainten-
ance curves: are presented in Figures 85 and 86 and  are  summarized in Table  81.
                                      227

-------
                                                                 Table 80
                                                            Construction Cost
                                                Pressure Ion Exchange - Nitrate Removal
                                                               Plant Capacity - mgd
KJ
K>
00
Excavation and Sitework
Manufactured Equipment
  Equipment
  Media
Concrete
Steel
Labor
Pipe and Valves
Electrical and Instrumentation
Housing
         SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
         TOTAL
1.1
$ 700
37,670
87,460
2,270
3,470
26,160
13,210
26,460
20,470
217,170
32,580
$ 249,750
3.7
1,080
84,440
295,190
3,380
5,150
63,030
36,480
36,790
33,300
558,840
83,830
642,670
6.1
1,400
129,860
491,990
4,480
6,820
110,660
65,610
58,100
53,630
922,550
138,380
1,060,930
12.3
1,870
243,410
983,970
5,960
9,020
223,480
131,220
114,830
180,500
1,793,580
269,040
2,062,620

-------
9
§
7
6
5
4
3
2
I0,000,f
7
6
5
4
3
-w-
1 2
t-
O
0 I.OOO.C
9
CONSTRUCTION
0
ro & * 01 (D^joouj- f° 01 * ui o>~«ia






)00




JOO

s
X

DOO

















-^
^ 	 '









































-^





















f




















f

















































































































































































































    2  3456 78 910    2  3456 789100   200 3456 789

                CAPACITY- mgd
    10,000
    100,000
CAPACITY -m3 /day
             CONSTRUCTION  COST
PRESSURE  ION  EXCHANGE-NITRATE  REMOVAL

                  FIGURE  84
                    229

-------
                                             Table  81
                                Operation and Maintenance Summary
                             Pressure Ion Exchange - Nitrate Removal


N)
U>
O




Plant
Capacity - mgd
1.1
3.7
6.1
12.3



Energy kw-hr/yr
Building
56,090
126,400
203,150
313,960
Process
1,900
6,380
10,510
21,200
Total
57,990
132,780
213,660
335,160
Maintenance
Material
$/yr
24,110
79,730
132,670
264,720

Labor
hr/yr
2,200
2,500
3,000
3,300

Total Cost*
$/yr
47,850
108,710
169,080
307,770
Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr and  $10.00/hour  of  labor

-------
Ul
O
Z
,000
7
6
5
4
3
2
100,0
6
5
4
3
2
10,00
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
I.OOC
9
8
6
5
4
3
2
000
7
6
5
4
3
2
00 f,0(
9
I
7
6
5
4
3
0 I0(
- 8*
6

4
3
1 | 1 1 1 ~I T I 1 * 1
- ENERGY-kw-hr/yr _
2 ro ui * 01 cn-^oxo-/-, *






)0,000


y
>r
/
3,000
	 -^
^r
S'



)00






)0







/




s
^ —




















<*-




/









y
^~









^





/








/











A
A




j
~?






f
/--











x
M/
M



s
**' BUI






PRO
/













NT
ATE




.Dlf






;ES














EN
RL




6






3














M
L




E






E














C




N






IE














-




. '






RC










































































































































































         I    2  345678910    2   3456 789100   200 3 456789

                          CAPACITY-mgd
               -4-
              10,000             100,000
                   CAPACITY -m3/day

                  OPERATION   AND  MAINTENANCE

         PRESSURE  ION  EXCHANGE-NITRATE REMOVAL



                           FIGURE 85
                             231

-------
1
7
6
5
4
3
2
I.OC
6
5
4
3
2
100
9
w 8
^ 7
6
i 5
8 3
2 2
IO.OC
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
?

<
7
6
i
4

2
0,000
: 1
7
6
5
4
3
2
000
: 9
8
7
6
5,
4
3
2
>0 10,0
9
8
7
- ^ 6
- >»• 5
- i 4
1
- or 3
0
CD
- < 2
1000











^r



30



'—











X1








•— • -











X







— -











/'

















s
S* TO!






- 	

P *•'
LAB(










AL









R










C(




















sr


























i 	




















































































:
~



    2  345 678910    2  3456 789100   200 3  456 789

      (	CAPACITY -mgd   	'

    10,000             100,000
         CAPACITY- m3 /day

        OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE

PRESSURE  ION  EXCHANGE-NITRATE REMOVAL
                 FIGURE  86
                   232

-------
CONSTRUCTION COST

Activated Alumina for Fluoride Removal

     Water supplies with fluoride concentrations up to 10 mg/1 and higher
can be effectively treated by contact with activated alumina.   Fluoride
reductions to less than 0.5 mg/1 are generally achieved by activated alumina
contact, with blending being utilized to meet desired fluoride concentrations.
Treatment is generally selective for fluoride and arsenic, although small
amounts of other anions often are removed.  Regeneration of the activated
alumina with caustic removes both exchanged fluoride and arsenic.

     Facilities were sized based upon a fluoride exchange capacity of 0.6
percent by weight, or 0.25 pounds of fluoride per cubic foot of activated
alumina, and a fluoride reduction from 3 mg/1 to 0.5 mg/1.  Operation was
assumed to be at pH 5.5, although higher pH values may be used with a
resultant lower exchange capacity.  Regeneration facilities were sized on
the basis of batch rather than continuous regeneration, due to the signifi-
cant savings in regeneration chemical cost when batch regeneration is
utilized.  However, a reduced capacity of the facilities results from the
increased regeneration time.  Two one hour contacts; with 0.1 N sodium
hydroxide were included for fluoride removal from the alumina, followed
by a one-half hour contact with 0.05 N sulfuric acid for neutralization
of remaining caustic.  An activated alumina void volume of 2.28 gallons
per cubic foot and in place resin costs: of $13.86 per cubic foot were
utilized.  Feed water was assumed to be sufficiently low in suspended solids
so that backwashing was only occasionally necessary, although backwashing
facilities are included in the construction cost.

     Construction costs were developed for pressure ion exchange using the
conceptual information presented in Table 82.  The contact vessels are
fabricated steel with a baked phenolic lining, and constructed for 100 psi
working pressure.  The depth of resin was 8 feet, and the contact vessel
was designed for 80 percent media expansion during backwash.  A gravel
layer between underdrains and media was; not included.

     Regeneration storage facilities were sized for 30 days requirement.
Sodium hydroxide required for regeneration was assumed to be purchased in
a solid form for capacities less than 10 mgd, and as a 50 percent solution
for larger plants.  A caustic dilution tank was. included when the 50 percent
solution was used.  Due to the small requirement for sulfuric acid, a
concentrated sulfuric acid storage tank was only included for 70 mgd and
larger plants, although a sulfuric acid dilution tank was included in each
case.  Metering pumps were included for transfer of concentrated caustic
and sulfuric acid to the dilution tanks, and pumping facilities were included
to pump from the dilution tanks to the exhausted contactor.
                                      233

-------
                                  TABLE 82

                             CONCEPTUAL DESIGNS

                   ACTIVATED ALUMINA FOR FLUORIDE REMOVAL

                                                Diameter of
Plant Capacity - mgd   Number of Contactors   Contactors •> ft   Housing -'ft2

          0.7                     2                    6               252
          2-0                     2                   10               700
          6.8                     5                   12             1,980
         27                      20                   12             7,920
         54                      40                   12            15,840
        135                     100                   12            31,680


     All facilities were assumed to he located indoors.   Construction costs
are presented in detail in Table 83 and are also shown in Figure 87.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

Activated Alumina for Fluoride Removal

     Electrical energy costs are for regenerant pumping, occasional backwash
pumping, and building heating, ventilation and lighting.  The latter require-
ments constitute the majority of the energy requirements, and use of an
outdoor installation would have a very significant impact on energy require-
ments.  Process energy is extremely small, and is only for regenerant pumping.
If backwash is required, process energy requirements would increase signifi-
cantly.

     Maintenance material costs are for periodic repair  and replacement
of components, and were estimated on the basis of one percent of the
construction cost.  An activated alumina replacement cost was also included
in maintenance material, at an annual rate of 10 percent.  Regenerant costs
are not included in the maintenance material cos±s.

     Labor requirements are principally for regenerant preparation and
regeneration of the activated alumina.  Labor requirements also include
periodic media addition to make up losses and occasional replacement.

     Operation and maintenance curves are presented in Figures 88 and 89 and
are summarized in Table 84.
                                     234

-------
                                                     Table 83
                                                Construction Cost
                                     Activated Alumina for Fluoride Removal
                                                             Plant Capacity -
U)
Ln
Manufactured Equipment
   Equipment
   Activated Alumina
Labor
Pipe and Valves
Electrical and Instrumentation
Housing
          SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
          TOTAL
0.
$ ?s,
7,
9,
15,
i 9,
6,
74,
11,
$ 85,
7
?30
820
780
300
600
500
230
130
360
2
42
13
12
18
10
25
123
18
142
.0
,020
,920
,830
,180
,850
,800
,600
,540
,140
6
130
78
45
64
21
58
398
59
458
.8
,390
,310
,680
,940
,300
,000
,620
,780
,410
27
492
313
182
257
57
197
1,499
224
1,724
,240
,240
,690
,030
,600
,000
,800
,970
,770
54
972,090
626,470
365,400
510,510
113,700
350,000
2,938,170
440,730
3,378,900
135
2
1
1
1


7
, 1
8
,417
,566
,220
,287
272
695
,448
,117
,565
,380
,i«U
,070
,040
,000
,000
,670
,300
,970

-------
                                                  CONSTRUCTION  COST — $
N)
U)
T]

O
C

m


o>


3 -s
^
H
m
o

o °
c— Z ~o
M >
SH H
^^ "^
^ 5 10
? C 3.°
> O wo-
1 H ^8
J2 0 5
c ^~
o
3J r>
_ **
O ^
mH
m-%"
o
32! °
0 -o-
*J o
g 8
r~











at

? ^>
o
-1 <«
" „

°- w
--J
OD


ro
Ol




OD
<£>
?,
o
o
























v> (

























M J

























k (

























X <

























»-

























-goj

























.|
\
\























0 (


\






















tt .



v
\




















[k (





V



















It C






k
^

















»"







r

















-JO>(








s
s
















-o
o ^ r
O
0
O







\
\















0 t











N













M -i












\












* i













^











K <















V









A-40B

















N







O
"b
K0 O 1
o
o
o
























N> (

























«l •

























» I

























X t

























» -JO

























H0


























-------
S3
                                                  Table 84
                                      Operation and Maintenance Summary
                                   Activated Alumina for Fluoride Removal
Plant Capacity
mgd
0.7
2.0
6.8
27
54
135
Energy kw-hr/yr
Building
17,640
49,000
138,600
554,400
1,108,800
2,217,600
Process
10
10
10
10
30
70
Total
17,650
49,100
138,600
554,410
1,108,830
2,217,670
Maintenance
Material
$/yr
1,780
3,040
14,030
55,660
111,130
278,680
Labor
hr/yr
2,400
2,580
2,940
4,490
7,560
17,580
Total Cost*
$/yr
26,310
30,190
47,590
117,190
219,990
521,010
        Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr and $10.00/hr of labor

-------
  1,000,000
•««-
 I
_l
<
cc
UJ

<


UJ
o

<
H
UJ
h-
z
1
7
6
5
4
3
2
100,0
5
2
10,000
5
2
1000
9"
8
6
5
4
3
2
*
7
6
5
4
3
2
OOIO.OC
6
5
3
2
1,000
9
- f 5
(9
(C
- ui 2
UJ
I00,(
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
10,000







0,000








000







X
DOO




y
yT
/

























f




jjl
Jr


























>
^


A




























A
V
































V






/

























^








^

























/








n>

























/


































'







^
























y
X






>
/'
/^






















y
/^
f





A
S
f






















j
J







S
r






















J
f








f
































,

























'








,

























}








t


















. _____^_





/
MA
M,







X
___






INK
MEI
























BUILOHNG
ENERGY





























































Ni
L


































;E




































































































































                23 4 5678910     2   3  456 7 89100   200 3  4 5 6 789

                             CAPACITY - mgd
             	1	.	1	1	
                10,000              100,000             1,000,000
                             CAPACITY-m3/day

                     OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE

              ACTIVATED  ALUMINA-FLUORIDE  REMOVAL


                               FIGURE  88
                                238

-------
1
6
5
4
3
2
1,000,
f
6
5
4
3
2
100.
9
8
< I
•at- 5
,1 «
S- 3
0
3* 2
6
10,00
9
8
6
5
4
3
2
: K|
7
6
5
4
3
2
000
: 1
6
5
4
3
2
000 IOC
9
: ?
6
""* O
4
3
4
2
0 10,0
9
8
7
- £ 6
- "x 5
-T4
-5 3
-
-------
CONSTRUCTION COST

Powdered Activated Carbon Feed Systems

     The systems were sized for feeding of an 11 percent slurry (one percent
carbon per gallon of water).  The 11 percent slurry Is stored and continuously
mixed In uncovered concrete tanks, which, are placed below ground level except
for approximately the top foot.  For feed capacities less than 700 pounds
per hour, eight days of storage In two equal size basins: is Included.  For
greater feed rates, two days of storage In a single basin is Included.
Mixers were sized based upon a G value equal to 600.  Storage/mixing basins
include equipment for powdered activated carbon feed from bags in smaller
installations and from trucks or railroad cars in larger installations.

     For feed rates less than 20 pounds of carbon per hour, a diaphragm
type metering pump Is used to feed directly from the mixing/storage tank
to the point of application.  For rates greater than 20 pounds per hour,
a positive displacement type pump Is used to continuously transfer slurry
to an overhead rotodip volumetric feeder, which, feeds directly to the point
of application.

     Construction cost Is shown In Figure 90 and presented In detail In
Table 85.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

Powdered Activated Carbon Feed Systems.

     Energy requirements are based upon the rated horsepower of pump motors
and continuous mixing of the 11 percent carbon slurry at a G value of 600.

     Maintenance material requirements consist; of oil for gearbox drives
and for minor repair of pumps and motors, as well as the associated electrical
switching gear.

     Labor requirements for carbon unloading were b,ased upon rates of 10
minutes per 50 pound bag, 2 hours per 9,000 pound truck load, and 4 hours
per 27,000 pound railroad car.  Requirements for the mixing storage basin
are 30 minutes per day per basin for inspection and routine maintenance,
and 16 hours per year per basin for cleaning and gearbox oil change.   Slurry
pumps would require one manhour per day per pump.

     Table 86 summarizes the operation and maintenance requirements,  which
are also shown in Figures 91 and 92.
                                     240

-------
                                                    Table 85
                                               Construction Cost
                                    Powdered Activated Carbon Feed Systems
                                                              Feed Capacity - Pound/Hour
                                                      3.5      35       35Q       7QO       7,000
                 Excavation and Sitework         $      90     340     1,410     2,120    10,600
                 Manufactured Equipment               8,180  21,200    66,410   118,810   506,640
NJ
£                Concrete                              270   1,000     3,910     5,580    27,890
                 Steel                                 230   1,640     6,730     9,800    48,990
                 Labor                                 560   2,120     8,520    12,510    62,550
                 Pipe and Valves                    17,160  17,450    17,790    18,580    84,350
                 Electrical and Instrumentation     22,490  23,320    24,930    50,580   109,780
                 Housing                             6.000   6.000     6.000     6.000     6.000
                          SUBTOTAL                  54,980  73,070   135,700   223,980   856,800
                 Miscellaneous and Contingency        8,250  10,960    20,360    33,600   128,520
                          TOTAL                   $  63,230  84,030   156,060   257,580   985,320

-------
10
4 56789100   234 567891000
        FEED CAPACITY- Ib/hr
20003
456 789
    10,000
      10
             100
 1000
                 FEED CAPACITY-kg/hr
               CONSTRUCTION  COST
  POWDERED  ACTIVATED CARBON FEED SYSTEMS
                   FIGURE  90
                      242

-------
                                           Table 86
                              Operation and Maintenance Summary
                           Powdered Activated Carbon Feed Systems
NJ
JS
OJ



Feed Rate
Ib/hr
3.5
35
350
700
7,000
Energy kw-hr/yr
Building
10,260
10,260
10,260
10,260
10,260
Process
7,000
59,000
482,000
946,000
2,294,000
Total
17,260
69,260
492,260
956,260
2,304,260
Maintenance
Material $/yr
2,000
4,000
8,000
14,000
62,000
Labor
hr/yr
85Q
1,110
1,840
2,010
11,000
Total Cost*
$/yr
11,020
17,200
41,170
44,700
241,130
Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr  and  $10.00/hr  of  labor

-------
100,000
£ MATERIAL- $/yr
O ro CM *  » C
\ 6
j= 5
-54
JC
- I 3
O
cc
- UJ o
z
UJ
I00t(
f- 9




3
IO.OC







0,000






=^-"
),000








DOO






/
/
o' -














— '















/
/

















^^












v
/
f































/





















^











/






















«•











,






















&











/


































/





















^












/




















_^
*^











/
r



















^^r^











j
/



















4
™











j
/



















4
W











4
^




















s











4






















s











^

































?






















X
<' M/l
IV








.^




















./
/





X

INTEN/
ATERI/








^P
E















BUILDIN

1






^
RO
MB




/


N
L







^^
3





























; EN

1



/



If







x-
£t
s
Y




















,
/











^
%















^(

















^
















k '


































r


10
             To-
               34 56789100   234 567891000
                            FEED RATE — Ib/hr
20003 4 56789
         10,000
 4-
                                        1000
                           FEED CAPAC!TY-kg/hr
                 OPERATION  AND MAINTENANCE
         POWDERED  ACTIVATED CARBON  FEED SYSTEMS
                          FIGURE  91
                            244

-------
 1,000,000

  I?
100,000
8 3
10,000 10,000
   r  i 3
     ac
     o
   - CO 2
     1000

       9
       S

       7

       6

       5
   ..  IOC
        10    234 56789100    234 567891000  20003  4  56789


                         FEED RATE-lb/hr                    f0'000
              •4-
IC
                                                  idoo
                        FEED CAPACITY-kg/hr


                  OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE

          POWDERED  ACTIVATED  CARBON FEED SYSTEMS




                            FIGURE  92
                              245

-------
CONSTRUCTION COST

Pressure Filtration Plants

     Costs have been developed for pressure filtration plants which are
suitable for use with 24-36 inch deep filter beds consisting of rapid sand,
dual media or mixed media.  Regardless of the media used,  structural and
hydraulic requirements of these media are similar.   Filtration rates ranging
from 2 to 7-8 gpm/ft2 are possible, depending upon the media utilized.

     Cost estimates are based on use of either vertical or horizontal
cylindrical ASME code pressure vessels of 50 to 75 psi working pressure.
Each plant consists of a minimum of 4 vessels, with conceptual designs  as
shown in Table 87.  Filter vessels are provided with a pipe lateral under-
drain and filter media is supported by graded gravel.  This type underdrain
is suitable for water backwash with surface wash assist.   For air-water
backwashing the pipe laterals are replaced with a nozzel underdrain.

     Costs include a complete filtration plant with vessels, cylinder operated
butterfly valves, filter face piping and headers within the filter gallery,
filter flow control and measurement instrumentation, headloss instrumentation
and a master filter control panel.  The filters are designed to backwash
automatically on an input signal such, as headloss,  turbidity breakthrough,
elapsed time or by manual activation.  Not included in the cost estimate
are supply piping to the filtration units from other unit  processes, filter
supply pumping, backwash storage and pumping, surface wash or airwash supply
facilities, or filtration media.  Housing requirements are based on the
minimum rectangular space into which the facilities will fit.  The basic
housing includes covering of the pipe gallery (including a small portion
of the ends of the tanks and a minimal service area for control panel)  and
other appurtenances related to the filtration structure, except for the
1 mgd plant which because of its design and configuration  is totally housed.
The total housing requirement is for complete housing of the filters and
pipe gallery, which would only be necessary in the most severe climates.

     Estimated construction costs, including only basic housing, are shown
in Figure 93 and in Table 88.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

Pressure Filtration Plants.

     Energy requirements were developed from the conceptual designs for
process and for heating, lighting and ventilating the basic housing require-
ment.  Process energy is for the filtration system supply  pumps and backwash
pumps.  Continuous 24 hour per day, 365 days per year operation with one
backwash per day of 10 minutes duration was assumed.  It was further assumed
that the surface wash supply would be obtained from the pressurized distribu-
tion system with suitable means for backflow prevention.
                                     246

-------
                                           Table  87
                                     Conceptual Designs
                                 Pressure Filtration Plants

                                           Filter Vessels
Plant Flow
mgd
1
10
50
100
200
Total Filter
Area, ft2 (2)
140
1,400
7,000
14,000
28,000
Number
4
4
18
35
70
Diameter and Area Plant Area
Lengths, ft Each, ft2 Requirements, ft2
7 vertical O)
10 x 35
10 x 40
10 x 40
10 x 40
35
350
400
400
400
2 , 100
5,000
13,750
26,050
64,200
Housing
(^ Basic
2,100
2,000
8,200
14,950
28,500
, ft2
Total^
2,100
5,000
13,750
26,050
64,200
C1)  Vertical pressure filters approximately 10'  tall
(2)  Filter rate approximately 5 gpm/ft2
(3)  Rectangular space covering entire plant area
(4)  Entire plant enclosed

-------
          Table 88
     Construction Cost
Pressure Filtration Plants
                   Plant Capacity,  mgd
Filter Area - ft2
Excavation and Sitework
Ji! Manufactured Equipment
oo
Concrete
Steel
Labor
Piping and Valves
Electrical and Instrumentation
Housing
SUBTOTAL
Miscellaneous and Contingency
TOTAL
1
14Q
$ 930
94,890
650
260
9,150
22,230
19,180
61,600
208,890
31,330
$ 240,220
10
1.400
1,650
236,250
890
450
23,320
66,700
49,400
58 , 700
378,660
56,800
435,460
50
7.000
3,850
1,114,000
4,440
2,270
176,000
598,000
284,780
197,600
2,380,940
357,140
2,738,080
100
14,000
7,600
2,343,000
8,880
4,540
352,000
1,196,000
586,800
343,800
4,892,620
726,390
5,569,010
200
28.000
13,800
4,435,000
16,650
9,080
704,000
2,392,000
1,135,580
641,300
9,347,410
1,402,110
10,749,520

-------
VO

o-


u
3J
m
CO ""

w' V J —I
O m
33 Z *-
-71 mn S§
« -n 3) 5
5 F£ T
m H £4 3
^1 ' PO
tf) ^ O
w H Z
rt
2 0
o
•T^l /A
r-H 5.
^ o
Z °
H
CO









o
o








.38
i- o
m
31 01
m
I '*



to
*
0
o


•*




C_) (O
O
^



























1 O



























4 4



























' C



























n o



























>-.



























ia



























ICC



























O
O
0
0


























> o
1
I
\
\
I






















4 .{






\
\
\
>

















b CJ



























1 0



























^~-









l
^
















jODy










s
















o
o
0
o









»,

V
>













> o













L

>











4 •*
















S-
-N









u

















—









» ff



























>~JOB

















s









o
"0
*>P ^
O

















1
I








3 O



























J J



























' 0



























n 
-------
     Maintenance material costs are for additional filter media>  charts
and ink for recorders, and miscellaneous, repair items for electrical control
equipment and valves.

     Labor requirements were based upon review of records from operating
plants.

     Table 89 and Figures 94 and 95 present operation and maintenance costs.
                                     250

-------
                                            Table 89
                               Operation and Maintenance Summary
                                  Pressure Filtration Plants
Maintenance

Capacity, mgd
1
10
50
100
200
Filter
Area, ft2
140
1,400
7,000
14,000
28,000
Energy kw-hr/yr
Building
215,460
205,200
841,320
1,533,870
2,924,100
Process
35,597
330,316
1,652,776
3,303,155
6,606,310
Total
251,007
535,516
2,494,096
4,837,025
9,530,410
Material
$/yr
1,200
7,300
26,000
45,000
80,000
Labor
hr/yr
1,460
2,920
8,760
11,680
20,440
Total Cost*
$/yr
23,330
52,565
188,420
306,910
570,310
Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr and  $10.00/hr  of  labor

-------
100,000
1
7
6
5
4
3
2
10,0
i_ f
<:6
-w- 5
i 4
CO
< 3
cc
LU
I- Z
<
S
3 ioc
I!
< 5
S 4
2
9
8
7
6
5
3
2
9
§
7
6
5
4
3
2
00 10,0
7
6
5
4
3
2
X) 1,00
: 9
8
- \ 5
- •= 4
s
f 3
1
o
- cc 2
UJ
Z
UJ
100,0
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2








00,000





0,000






)0


A
/















X
^^







— 7
jT

















/







-y


















X








/

















^
~?








/















x1^








X

/ /















/







x
x^

^x























^/


X

















/•








x

















X






/

^


















xx






/
i
^
















v
X

M/
M/




yX
X
X















>
x



INT
TFF


X


/
B
E




















:N
TA



PR
EN

JIL
NE




















's



0(
El

Dl
RO




















^




K

MI
Y
























SS
\1

\










































10
            2  34 567891000  234 56789IOpOO  234 56789
                        FILTER  AREA-ff2                  100,000
                                           -4-
                 100
               FILTER  AREA-m2
                                          lO'OO
                 OPERATION  AND MAINTENANCE
                 PRESSURE  FILTRATION  PLANTS

                          FIGURE  94
                            252

-------

7
6
5
4
3
2
1,000
6
5
4
3
2
100,0
9"
8
7
- 6
t/r 5
T 4
1 3
O
_l 2
10,0
1
6
5
4
3
2

7
6
5
4
3
2
L000
3
8
6
5
4
3
2
00
6
t
6
2.
00 I0,(
9
- _ 7
i i i
LABOR-hr
OJ * 
/

TOT





X















AL





L/















C





B















OST





)R



























100
234 567891000  234 5678910000  234  56789
             FILTER  AREA-ft2    '             100,000
                               •4-
 10
             100
         FILTER  AREA-m2
                                   1000
          OPERATION  AND MAINTENANCE
          PRESSURE FILTRATION  PLANTS

                    FIGURE  95
                     253

-------
CONSTRUCTION COST

Continuous Automatic Backwash Filter

     The continuous automatic backwash filter is an adaptation of rapid
sand filtration principles.  The filter bed is contained in a shallow
rectangular concrete structure which is laterally divided into compartments.
Each compartment is in effect a single filter.  Filter flow rate Is based
upon declining rate as there are no rate of flow controllers.   An attractive
feature of the filter is that operating head losses are generally less than
one foot of water.  A motor driven carriage assembly equipped with a backwash
pump and a washwater collection pump backwashes each compartment sequentially
as it traverses the length of the filter.

     Costs were developed for filter units, capable of handling flows from
1 mgd to 200 mgd at a filtration rate of 2 gpm/ft2.  Conceptual designs
are listed in Table 90.  A filter box depth of 5 feet was used for all size
filters and each size plant utilizes a minimum of two filters.  The filter
units are essentially self-contained and require no inter-connecting piping.
Filtered water, influent and backwash water are conducted to and from the
filter by troughs or channels integrally cast within the concrete filter
structure.

     The nature of the equipment requires that it be housed for protection
from inclement weather and freezing temperatures.  Housing costs were
developed assuming total enclosure of the filters: with minimum additional
space for access on two of the four sides for maintenance.

     The costs are presented in Table 91 and Figure 96 and include the
filtration structure, internal mechanical equipment, partitions,  underdrains,
rapid sand filter media (depth generally 11 inches) wash, water collection
trough, over-head pump carriage, electrical controls and instrumentation.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE COST

Continuous Automatic Backwash Filter

     Energy requirements are for building heating, lighting and ventilation
and pumping costs related to backwashing of the automatic backwash filter.
It was assumed that the entire filter unit is. housed.

     Maintenance material costs include general supplies, pump maintenance
and repair parts, replacement sand, and other miscellaneous items.

     Labor costs were estimated from projected maintenance time requirements
and are related to general supervision and maintenance.

     Table 92 summarizes the operation and maintenance requirements which are
illustrated graphically in Figures 97 and 98.
                                     254

-------
Ul
Ul
                                                         Table  90

                                                    Conceptual Design

                                           Continuous Automatic Backwash Filter
Plant Flow
mgd
1
5
10
100
200
Total Filter
Area, ft
360
1,750
3,520
35,200
70,400
Filters
Number
2
2
2
20
40

Area, ftz
180
875
1,760
1,760
1,760
o
Housing, ft
1,088
3,332
6,120
81,600
162,625

-------
                                                         Table 91
                                                    Construction Cost
                                           Continuous  Automatic Backwash Filter
                                                                  Plant  Flow,  mgd
                                                                       10          100            200
            Excavation and Sitework         $      280       1,330       2,500       23,000        45,000
            Manufactured Equipment             97,450     175,000     341,000    3,075,000     6,140,000
K           Concrete                           10,980      27,780      46,210      472,830       936,380
            Steel                              4,600      11,900      19,650      182,920       362,170
            Labor                              23,200      53,000     100,000      773,780     1,449,000
            Piping and Valves                   10,500      14,100      21,000       55,000       110,000
            Electrical and Instrumentation      5,000       7,000      12,000      188,300       371,000
            Housing                            27.800      79,200     129,600    1.568,000     3,057,000
                      SUBTOTAL                179,810     369,310     671,960    6,338,830    12,520,540
            Miscellaneous and  Contingency       26,970      55, 400     100,790      950,820     1,878,080
                      TOTAL                 $  206,780     424,710     772,750    7,289,650    14,398,620

-------

7
6
5
4
3
2
6
5
4
3
2
1 0,000, C
89
6
5
4
<* 3
1
£ *
0
O
g 1,000
s «
3 7
K 6
I- 5
w
Z 4
O
0 3
2
100,












>00






000






000




















































^


























**


























+ ''
























X
X
*























/
r























v
r

























£.

























/.


























/
/
























/
/^
r























y
^^























-i/
/
























•^













—











/
r —


























•














100 2* 3 4 567891000 234 56789IOpOO 334 56789
r 100,000
TOTAL FILTER AREA- ft2
• > 	 	

ib 160 1000
            TOTAL  FILTER AREA-m2
           CONSTRUCTION  COST
CONTINUOUS AUTOMATIC  BACKWASH  FILTER

                FIGURE  96
                  257

-------
                                             Table 92
                                Operation and Maintenance Summary
                               Continuous Automatic Backwash Filter
Plant Flow, mgd
N)
Ui
oo




1
5
10
100
200
Total Filter
Area, ft2
360
1,750
3,520
35,200
70,400
Energy, kw-hr/yr
Building
111,629
341,863
627,912
8,372,160
16,685,325
Process
3,854
13,624
42,890
428,900
857,800
Total
115,483
355,487
670,802
8,801,060
17,543,125
Maintenance
Material
$/yr
650
1,400
2,200
19,000
35,000
Labor
hr/yr
728
832
1,040
10,000
18,000
Total Cost*
$/yr
11,394
20,385
32,724
383,032
741,294
Calculated using $0.03/kw-hr and $10.00/hr of  labor

-------
100,
7
6
5
4
3
2
10,0
•w- '
i °
< 5
ifi 4
I 3
UJ 2
o
z
3 100
if
5
4
3
2
1
6
5
4
3
2
000
1
7
6
5
4
3
2
00 10,0
9
I
6
5
4
3
2
0 1,00
9
8
6
5
4
3
2
100
9
- ^ 6
- •* 4
- 5- 3
o
IT
~ Z 2
UJ
10,0







00,000





0,000






000






00
















































X





















.-





X





















**c -





X














MAir
MA










s
s







/







TEf
TER





X


/


















At
Al




X

-7




















c




x










>
r














^

^

























^

/






















x^
s

/
/






y
/














/

x
/
BU
ENI





/
X
PR
EN














/
/-


LD
IR(




f
*

OC
ER













x
y



N
Y



^



re
gy













/
/



^
3



t




^
t












> -

/






y-









































100   234  567891000   234 56789IOpOO  2

                 TOTAL FILTER AREA, ft2
345 6789
      100,000
 10
                 100
                                   1000
              TOTAL FILTER  AREA - m 2

          OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE
    CONTINUOUS  AUTOMATIC  BACKWASH  FILTER

                   FIGURE  97
                     259

-------
1
7
6
5
4
3
2
1,000,
6
5
4
3
2
IOO.OC
If
I- 6
 „
0 5
0
 9
I
10,00
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
7
6
5
4
3
2
000
: 1
6
5
4
3
2
0 I0,0(
9
6
5
4
3
0 100
f- 9
8
7
- _ 6
- j= 4
- i 3
O
m
- < 2
_J
. 100
















30







0



































































^



•





























**



^





























X


^






























^

^































i*

9































*

































*
^|
































,-x
^
































X
X































/
X































y
F
/






























>
r^































A
f
A
w
































s






























f

4




















TOTAL








/
p ^f
^r
f
t*




















ci







s
/
























)S-






y

/
LA






























y

/
B(





























y


/
)F




























/


/

































»





















































100   234  567891000   234 5678910/500 234 56789
                 TOTAL FILTER AREA-ft2
                  -+-
1C
   100
TOTAL FILTER AREA-m2
                                  1000
         OPERATION  AND  MAINTENANCE
  CONTINUOUS  AUTOMATIC  BACKWASH FILTER


                   FIGURE  98
                   260

-------
VI.  EXAMPLE CALCULATION - DIRECT FILTRATION
     THe following example uses the curves presented In this Interim Report
to develop capital and operation and maintenance costs for a direct filtration
plant treating a flow of 7 mgd, but designed with a capacity up to 10 mgd.
Table 93 presents the design and operating information for this example.
The table shows for each required unit process or system,  the basic design
criteria, the design parameter, and the operating parameter.  The design
and operating parameters are used with the appropriate cost curves.

                                  TABLE 93

                               DESIGN CRITERIA
                       10 MGD DIRECT FILTRATION PLANT
System and Design Criteria

Flow Rate - mgd
Alum Feed System - 30 mg/1
operating dose
Polymer Feed System - 0.2 mg/1
operating dose

Rapid Mix - 30 seconds, G=600

Flocculation - 20 minutes, G=80

Filtration - 5 gpm/ft2, 24 hour
filter run
Filter Media — mixed media
Surface Wash - 12 hour filter run
Backwash Pumping - 12 hour filter
run, 4 filters
 Design Parameter
         10 mgd
     104 Ib/hr

      17 Ib/day

     464 ft3
  18,570 ft3
   1,388 ft2

   1,388 ft2
4 @ 350 ft2 each
   5,250 gpm
  Operating Parameter
          7 mgd
      73 Ib/hr

      12 Ib/day

     464 ft3
  18,570 ft3
   1,388 ft2

   1,3.88 ft2
4 @ 350 ft2 each
   5,250 gpm
Note:  No clearwell Is included in this; example.
     Design criteria presented in Table 93 represent average conditions,
but should not be utilized indiscriminantly for any water supply.   This
report Is not Intended to serve as a total design manual, but rather to
aid In process selection, to Illustrate the effect of contaminant concentra-
tions upon overall process sizing, and to provide cost estimating data after
the design engineer has selected appropriate design parameters, number of
treatment units for each unit process, standby capacity, etc.

     Table 94 presents the capital cost and operation/maintenance summary
for this example.  In Table 94, construction cost and building energy require-
ments are based upon the design parameter for the process, and thus are
                                     261

-------
                                              Table 94
                                 Direct Filtration Cost Calculation
                                                          Operation  and Maintenance Requirements
Unit Process
Alum Feed System -
Dry Installed Capacity-104 Ib/hr  48
Feed Rate - 73 Ib/hr
Polymer Feed System
Installed Capacity-17 Ib/day
Feed Rate - 12 Ib/day
Rapid Mix-G=600, Vol=464 ft3
Flocculation - G=70
Horizontal Paddle, Volume =
18,570 ft3
Filtration
Total Filter Area=l,388 ft2
Filter Media
1,388 ft2
Surface Wash
Four 350 ft2 filters
Backwash Pumping
Installed Capacity=5,250 gpm
10 minute wash, 4  filters
SUBTOTALS
Sitework, interface piping
roads at 5%
Subsurface Considerations
Standby Power
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST
General Contractors Overhead
and  Profit
 SUBTOTAL
 Engineering  @  10%
 SUBTOTAL
 Land,  3 acres  @ $2,000/acre
 Legal,  Fiscal and Administrative
 Interest  during construction-
 TOTAL CAPITAL COST
Refer to
Figure
Numbers
'hr 48
51, 52
53
54, 55
56
57, 58
59
61, 62
63
64, 65
66
67
68, 69
70
71, 72



99



ive 101
•7% 103
Electrical Energy Maintenance
Construction kw-hr/yr Material
Cost Building Process $/year
33,000 23,090
4,900 200
19,000 8,210
17,300 270
IfiyOOO 0
47,240 30
150,000 0
57,000 1,400
500,000 270,000
0 7,050
45,600 000
73,720 0 150
20,440
80,000 0
49,640 _ 180
917,320 301,300 196,520 9,280
45,870
0
0
963,190
120,400
1,083,590
108,360
1,191,950
6,000
20,000
60,000
1,277,950
Labor
Hours/year
310
200
47Q

200
2, SCO
0
120
Iftn
3,960









                                                 262

-------
independent of the actual flow through the process.   However, process energy,
maintenance material, and labor requirements are all based upon the operating
variable for the process, and therefore, vary with the flow through the
process.  For example, the alum feed system is sized for a feed capacity
of 104 pounds per hour, yet is only operated in the example at 73 pounds
per hour.  Construction costs and building related energy are then obtained
from the cost curves using the design parameter (104 pounds per hour),  while
operation/maintenance costs other than building related energy are obtained
from the cost curves using the operating parameter (73 pounds per hour).
This approach represents, in our opinion, the most accurate method for  use
of the curves when a process operates at less than design capacity.  Other
approaches may be used however, simply by varying the operating parameter.

     The sum of the construction costs, for the individual unit processes
yields a subtotal which is the basis for a number of special costs related
more to the aggregate cost than the cost of the individual unit processes.
These special costs include:  (1) special sitework,  landscaping, roads,
and interface piping between processes, (2) special subsurface considerations,
and (3) standby power.  The special costs can vary widely, depending upon
the site available, the design engineer's preference, and regulatory agency
requirements.  The computer program being developed as a part of this Project
will allow percentages and/or costs to be used for these special costs.
Adding these special costs to the aggregate cost of the unit processes  gives
the total construction cost.

     To the total construction cost, the following costs must be added:
(.1) general contractors overhead and profit, (2) engineering, (3) land,
(4) legal, fiscal, and administrative, and (5) interest during construction.
Curves for these costs, with the exception of engineering cost and land
are presented in Figures 99 to 103.  A curve for engineering cost is not
included as the cost can vary widely depending on the need for the complexity
of preliminary studies, time delays, the size of the project, and any
construction related inspection and engineering design activities.  The
computer program being developed as a part of this Project will allow a
variable input percentage for engineering, and for land, a variable cost
and acreage requirement.

     Table 95 presents the calculation of annual cos.t and cost per 1,000
gallons treated.  This calculation involves, a number of variables, such
as amortization percentage and period, lab.or rate, power rates, and unit
cost for chemicals.  The variables used in Table 95 are representative  of
United States averages, but may vary significantly between geographic areas.
The computer program being developed will allow variable input for each
of these rates or unit costs.
                                     263

-------
                                  TABLE 95
                  ANNUAL COST FOR DIRECT FILTRATION EXAMPLE
Total Annual Costs:
     Amortized Capital @ 7%, 20 years
$120,630/year
     Labor, 3,960 hours @ $10/hr (total labor    $ 39,600/year
     costs including fringes and benefits)
     Electricity, 497,820 kwh @ $0.03

     Fuel

     Maintenance Material
$ 14,930/year

$      Q/year

$  9,280/year
     Chemicals, Alum, 320 tons/year @ $70/ton    $ 31,160/year
     Polymer, 4,380 Ibs/yr @ $2/lb               	

                           TOTAL ANNUAL COST     $215,600/year

                                       215,600 x 0.1
     Cents per 1,000 gallons treated =
                                        365 x 7 mgd

                                     = 8.43 <:/1,000 gallons treated
Note:  Does not include clearwell costs or ultimate sludge disposal costs.
                                    264

-------
50,000,000
-vr
\
\-
V)
8 25,000,000
z
0
o
£ 10,000,000
z
o
o
< 5,000 ,000
t-
o
2,500,000
i.onn.nnn










mmf^mm



























































       9        10        II        12
      PERCENT OF TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST
GENERAL  CONTRACTOR OVERHEAD AND
     FEE PERCENTAGE VS  TOTAL
        CONSTRUCTION  COST

            FIGURE  99
           265

-------
9


6



100,0
ll
6
5
4
* 3
1
co 2
CO
0
o
IO.OC
> 89]
i 7e!
fe 5
_
1 3
<
Q 2
z
<
< 100 C
co 9
U- o
i I
w
_l 4
3
3
100







00








)0








— 7^
/
/
/




























/
































/































f






























































X
/
s'




























/
s^






























^































s
































s
































s
































t





















































































































































































                                          3456 789
     2   3456789     2  3456789     2
10,000           100,000          1,000,000
    SUM OF CONSTRUCTION,  ENGINEERING AND  LAND COSTS -$


    LEGAL, FISCAL  AND  ADMINISTRATIVE  COSTS

        PROJECTS  LESS  THAN  $1,000,000

                   FIGURE   100
                       266

-------
i
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
6
5
4
3
2
r l00*'
i a
1- 7
S 6
0 5
4
UJ
> i
LEGAL, FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATI
0 _0
O w oj -& m o>->ja><0 § ro t
















)00








0

































































































































































































































































































2 345 6789
























X
s
































-X
X*

































X

































x


































x

































y


































^


































^













2 3 456789


















,^^
^^^
, *^






























.X


































X"


































X


































X


































X


































••


































*"


















2 3456 789
100,000         1,000,000          10,000,000       100,000,000
    SUM OF CONSTRUCTION, ENGINEERING  AND LAND COSTS- $

  LEGAL, FISCAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS
       PROJECTS  GREATER THAN  $1,000,000

                   FIGURE  101
                      267

-------
10,000
   I
•V)-
 I


I   3
o

i   2
o
o 1000

o  I
z  7
ft^  fi

Q  5
W
LU
tr
UJ
  100
    9
    8

    6
    5

    4
               J0%

               _8%

               6%
       /
        /
       V
//
    10
     10,000 2  345 6789100,0002  3456789

          SUBTOTAL OF ALL OTHER  COSTS- $
                                              345 6789
      INTEREST  DURING  CONSTRUCTION-PROJECTS
                  LESS THAN $ 200,000
                       FIGURE   102
                          268

-------
 10,000,000
 1,000,000
o
r-
CJ
o
oc.

v>
a:
3
O


I-
co
UJ

z
   3,000
  10,000

   9
   8
   7
   6
   5

   4
 1000
//

               v/
                                A^
                               //'
                                        10%
                                                  4^
                                                  7
         2  34 56789     234 56789      234 56789
    roo.ooo          1,000,000          10,000,000        100,000,000

                      SUBTOTAL OF ALL OTHER  COSTS-^
            INTEREST  DURING CONSTRUCTION

           PROJECTS  GREATER THAN  $ 200,000


                       FIGURE  103
                          269

-------
VII.  EXAMPLE CALCULATION - PRESSURE GRANULAR ACTIVATED CARBON PLANT

     This example uses the curves included in this Interim Report to develop
capital and operation and maintenance costs for granular activated carbon
treatment using pressure contactors.  In the example, the plant design capacity
is 15 mgd and the system is operating at full capacity.

     Table 96 presents the design criteria and operating information for this
example.  These design criteria represent hypothetical conditions, and should
not be utilized indiscriminately for any water supply.  Before design of
facilities is initiated, pilot plant s.tudies are necessary to determine the
optimum carbon contactor empty bed contact time (EBCT) and regeneration
frequency for the carbon.  These two factors will have a very significant
Influence on the cost of a given size system.

                                  TABLE 96
                               DESIGN CRITERIA

               15 MGD PRESSURE GRANULAR ACTIVATED CARBON PLANT

System Description & Design Criteria    Design Parameter    Operating Parameter

Flow                                    15 mgd              15 mgd

Required Carbon Volume1                 20,889 ft3          20,889 ft3

Number Contactors2                      18                  18

Supply Pumping3                         10,500 gpm          10,500 gpm

Backwash Pumping                        1,360 gpm           1,360 gpm

Required Multiple Hearth Furnace Area5  245 ft2             245 ft2

Initial Carbon Charge6                  626,670 Ibs

Makeup Carbon - 7% per regeneration     •*—                  263,201 lb.s

1Determined at assumed EBCT of 15 minutes, with application rate of 5 gpm/ft2
 and a 10 foot carbon depth..
2Assume 12' 0 units @ 113 ft2/uni.t
 Operating head 35 feet
 One backwash per day for 10 minute duration
5Furnace area based upon regeneration every two months, a carbon density
 of 30 lbs/ft3, a hearth loading of 70 Ihs./ft2/day and 40 percent down time
6Based upon density of 30 lbs/ft3
                                     270

-------
     Table 97 presents the capital cost and operation and maintenance require-
ments for each of the unit processes required in this example.  The figure
numbers for the curves which were used to develop these costs and operation
and maintenance requirements are also shown in Table 97.  The one exception
is for supply pumping, a curve which was unavailable in final form at the
time this Interim Report was. prepared.
     The sum of the construction costs for the individual unit processes
shown in Table 97 yields a subtotal cost which is the basis for a number
of special costs more appropriately related to the subtotal cost than to
the construction cost of each individual unit processes.  These special
costs include:  (1) special sitework, landscaping, roads, and interface
piping between processes, (2) special subsurface considerations, and
(3) standby power.  The special costs can vary widely, depending upon the
site, the design engineer's preference, and regulatory agency requirements.
Adding these special costs to the aggregate cost of the unit processes gives
the total construction cost.

     To arrive af the total capital cost, the following costs must be added
to the total construction cost:  (1) general contractor's overhead and
profit, (2) engineering, (3)  land, (4) legal, fiscal and administrative,
and (5) interest during construction.  Curves for these costs, with the
exception of engineering cost and land are presented in Figures 99 to 103.
A curve for engineering cost  is not included as the cost will vary widely,
depending on the need for preliminary studies, time delays, the size and
complexity of the project, and any construction related inspection and
engineering design activities.

     Table 98 presents a calculation of total annual cost and cost per 1,000
gallons treated.  This calculation involves a number of variables such as
amortization rate and period, labor rate including fringes and benefits,
electrical rates, and natural gas rates.  The variables used in Table 3
are representative of United  States averages, but may vary significantly
between geographical areas.
                                    271

-------
                                              Table 97
                         Pressure Granular Activated Carbon Cost Calculation
Unit Process
Refer to
 Figure
Numbers
Pressure Carbon Contactors  11
Volume = 20,889 ft3       12,  13
Surface Area = 2,090 ft2
Initial Carbon Charge,       27
626,670 Ibs
Supply Pumping -             *
10,500 gpm

Backwash Pumping -          70
1,360 gpm, one ten
minute wash/day/contactor
Multiple Hearth Carbon      23
Regeneration, 245 ft2   24, 25, 26
Makeup Carbon -             27
263,201 Ib/yr

SUBTOTALS

Sitework, interface
piping, roads at 5%

Subsurface Considerations
Standby Power

TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST
General Contractors
Overhead and Profit         99
SUBTOTAL
Engineering @  10%
SUBTOTAL
Land, 6 acres @ $2,000/acre

Legal Fiscal and           101
Administrative
Interest during            103
constriction - 8%
TOTAL CAPITAL  COST
Construction
   Cost	
  1,600,000
             1,200,000
             3,375,000

               168,750
                     0
             	0
             3,543,750

               354,380
             3,898,130
               389,810
             4,287,940
                 12,000
                 41,000

               330,000

             4,670,940
Electrical Energy
	kw-hr	
Building  Process
 600,000
           11,000
Natural Gas
  scf/yr
Maintenance
 Material   Labor
  $/year    hr/yr
370,000
160,000
45,000

0 963,270
0 **
                                                              9,500
                                                              2,500
                                                             3,900
                                                               800
                 20,000
                                    360,000***   22,800,000***4,800***  2,760
                                       —           —       160,000
                620,000   1,334,270    22,800,000 176,800
                                              7,460
   *These  curves were unavailable in final form at the  time  the  Interim Report  was prepared.
    The  curves will be included in the Final Report.
  **Included  in the pressure contactor costs.
 ***Value  for 245  ft2 (0.6) to account for 60% down  time.
                                                 272

-------
                                  Table 98


           Annual Cost for Granular Activated Carbon Plant Example



Total Annual Costs :
Amortized Capital @ 7%, 20 years
                                                 $  440,890/yr
Labor, 7,460 hours @ $10/yr (total labor    $   74,600/yr

costs including fringes and benefits)



Electricity, 1,954,270 kwh <§ $0.03



Natural Gas 22,800,000 scf @ $0.0013



Maintenance Material



              TOTAL ANNUAL COST



Cents per 1,000 gallons treated = ^l
                0                   365 x 15 mgd



                                = 14. 26
-------
                                 APPENDIX A

                         GEOGRAPHICAL INFLUENCE UPON
                           BUILDING RELATED ENERGY.

     Overall building related energy requirements are greatly influenced
by the geographical location.  Those components which show, strong geographical
influence are heating and cooling, whole lighting and ventilation are rela-
tively constant in different geographic areas.   A lighting requirement
of 2 watts/square foot is adequate for most enclosed water treatment processes
or equipment.  This is equivalent to 17.5 kw-hr/ft2/yr.    Ventilating require-
ments are also relatively constant, a 2.2 kw-hr/ft2/yr,  based on six air
changes per hour.

     An analysis was conducted of heating and cooling requirements for each
of the 21 cities included in the ENR Indices.  This analysis was done for
a building module of 20' x 40* x 14', an average winter  indoor temperature
of 68°F and an average summer indoor temperature of 75°F.   Although it
certainly would not be true in many situations, electrical energy was assumed
for heating in each area.  The results, expressed in terms of kw-hr/ft2/yr
are shown in Table 1, along with the ventilation and lighting requirements.

     As can be seen, building related energy requirements  range from a low
of 25.8 kw-hr/ft2 in Miami to a high of 219.8 kw-hr/ft2  in Minneapolis.
The 21 city average was 102.6 kw-hr/ft2, and this value  was used to develop
the total operation/maintenance cost curves included in  this Report.
                                     274

-------
City
Seattle
Salt Lake City
Omaha
Minneapolis
Chicago
New York
Boston
San Francisco
Denver
St. Louis
Las Vegas
Richmond, Va.
Nashville
Washington, D.C.
Los Angeles
Pheonix
Albuquerque
Dallas
Tampa
Atlanta
Miami

Averages:
                                  TABLE  1
                         GEOGRAPHICAL INFLUENCE UPON
                           BUILDING RELATED ENERGY

                            Electrical Energy  - kw-hr/ft2/yr
Lighting
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.5
17.5.
17.5
„ 	 _—
Venti lation
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
Heati ng
59.4
144.0
157.3
199.4
146.4
90.3
104.4
40.5
149,5
116.6
36.3
71.6
70.6
78.3
27.7
23.7
80.6
43.8
9.2
54.9
2.9
Cooling
0.2
0.8
0.9
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.4
0.5
1.6
2.4
2.4
1.6
2.0
1.6
0.5
2.4
1.2
5.6
3.2
1.5
3.2
1 UTAL
79.3
164.5
177.9
219.8
166.9
110.7
124.5
60.7
170.8
138.7
58.4
92.9
92.3
99.6
47.9
45.8
101.5
69.1
32.1
76.1
25.8
L7.5
2.2
81.3
1.6
102.6
NOTE:  Building module used was 20'  x 40'  x 14',  with a winter inside
design temperature of 68°F, a summer inside design temperature of 75°F
and a ventilation rate of 6 changes  per hour.
                                  275

-------
                                APPENDIX B

                          ESTIMATING COSTS FOR

                    GRANULAR ACTIVATED CARBON SYSTEMS

                      IN WATER PURIFICATION BASED ON

                    EXPERIENCE IN WASTEWATER TREATMENT
INTRODUCTION
    Because the use of granular activated carbon (GAG) is relatively new
in the purification of potable water, there is a rather limited amount of
cost data available from actual plant operations.  Fortunately, however,
GAC has b.een used since 1965 for the adsorption of organics from wastewater.
Complete, detailed, reliable cost data are available on constructing,
operating, and maintaining complete GAC wastewater treatment systems
including carbon contact, regeneration, and transport.  These data are
available from a number of sources and for a variety of plant capacities.

    There are differences: in the use of GAC for water purification and
wastewater treatment, however, and these differences will influence cost.
Some of the differences are obvious, but others are less apparent.
However, a sanitary engineer who is informed and experienced in both fields
as well as in cost estimating can use the cost experience accumulated in
wastewater operations to estimate GAC costs for water purification quite
readily, and with the same degree of accuracy (± 15%) attendant to
preliminary estimates for other water treatment processes.

GAC SYSTEM COMPONENTS

    Systems utilizing granular carbon are. rather simple.  In general, they
provide for:  (I) contact between the carbon and the water to be treated
for the length of time required to obtain the necessary removal of organics,
(2) regeneration or replacement of spent carbon, and (.3) transport of makeup
or regenerated carbon into the contactors and of spent carbon from the
contactors to regeneration or hauling facilities.

    Selecting Carbon and Plant Design Criteria.  Pilot plant tests are a
mandatory prelude to carbon selection and plant design for both water and
wastewater treatment projects.  Pilot column tests make it possible to:
(1) select the best carbon for the specific purpose based on performance;
(2) determine the required contact time; (3) establish the required  carbon
dosage, which will determine the capacity of the carbon regeneration furnace
or the necessary carbon replacement costs; and (4) determine the effects of
variations in influent water quality.


                                    276

-------
    One of the principal differences in costs for GAC treatment between
water and wastewater will be the more frequent regeneration required in
water purification due to earlier breakthrough of the organics of concern.
In wastewater treatment, GAC may be expected to adsorb 0.30 to 0.55 pounds
of COD per pound of carbon before the carbon is exhausted.  In water
treatment, the organics of concern may breakthrough at carbon loadings
much lower than those which are obtained in wastewater treatment.  THE
ALLOWABLE CARBON LOADING OR CARBON DOSAGE AND THE NEEDED REGENERATION
CAPACITY MUST BE DETERMINED FROM PILOT PLANT TEST RESULTS.  These factors
cannot be estimated from wastewater data.  Therefore, costs taken from
wastewater cost curves which are plots of flow in mgd versus cost (capital
cost or 0 & M costs) cannot be applied directly to water treatment.
Allowance must be made in the capital costs for the greater regeneration
capacity needed, and in the 0 & M costs for the greater amount of carbon to
be regenerated or replaced.

    Preliminary indications are that the lightly-loaded carbons resulting
from water treatment can be more rapidly and easily reactivated than those
from wastewater treatment, so that proportionally less furnace capacity
will be needed.  However, the regeneration characteristics of carbon saturated
with, organics adsorbed during water purification are not well established
at this time.  Until these characteristics are better understood, It appears
prudent to use the regeneration characteristics of GAC which has been saturated
with organics adsorbed from wastewater as a guide to regeneration capacity
required for water treatment.  If such time and temperature requirements
per pound of carbon to be regenerated are used, regeneration equipment may
be larger and more expensive than necessary, but the amount of such cost is
not great, and some factor of safety in regeneration capacity would be
obtained.

    Selection of the general type of carbon contactor to be used for a
particular water treatment plant application may be based on several
considerations indicating the judgement and preference of the engineering
designer.  The choice generally would be made from three types of downflow
vessels:

    1.  Deep-bed, factory-fabricated, steel pressure vessels of  12-foot
        maximum diameter.  These vessels might be used over a range of
        carbon volumes from 2,000 to 5Q,OQO cubic feet.

    2.  Shallow-bed, reinforced concrete, gravity filter-type boxes may
        be used for carbon volumes ranging from 1,000 to 200,000 cubic
        feet.  Shallow beds probably will be used only when long service
        cycles between carbon regenerations can be expected, based on
        pilot plant test results.

    3.  Deep-bed, site-fabricated, large  (20 to 30 feet) diameter, open
        steel, gravity tanks may be used  for carbon volumes ranging from
        6,000 to 200,000. cubic feet, or larger.
                                      277

-------
     These ranges;  overlap,  and  the designer may very well make the  final
 selection based on  local factors, other  than total capacity, which affect
 efficiency and cost.

     GAC  Contactors.  The advanced wastewater treatment  (AWT) experience
 with GAC contactors may be applied to water purification if some differences
 in requirements are taken  into account.  The required contact time must be
 determined from pilot plant test results.  Contactors may be designed for
 a downflow or upflow mode  of operation.  Upflow packed beds or expanded beds
 provide  maximum carbon efficiency through the use of countercurrent flow
 principles.  However, upflow beds can be used only when followed by
 filtration due to the leakage of some carbon fines in the effluent.  Down-
 flow beds  probably will be used in most municipal water treatment applications,
 Single beds or two beds in series may be used.  Open gravity beds or closed
 pressure vessels may be used.  Structures may be coal-tar epoxy coated steel
 or reinforced concrete.  In general, small plants will use steel, and large
 plants may  use steel or reinforced concrete.

     In some instances where GAC has. been used in existing water filtration
 plants, sand in rapid filters has been replaced with. GAC.  In situations
 where GAC  regeneration or  replacement cycles are exceptionally long (several
 months or years), as may be the case in taste and odor removal, this may
 be a solution.  However, with the short cycles anticipated for most organics,
 conventional concrete box  style filter beds are not well suited to GAC
 contact.  There principal  drawbacks are the shallow bed depths and the
 difficulty of moving carbon in and out of the beds.  Deeper beds, or
 contactors with greater aspect ratios of depth to area, provide much greater
 economy in  capital costs.  The contactor cost for the needed volume of
 carbon is much less.  Carbon can be. moved in water slurry from contactors
 with conical bottoms easily and quickly and with virtually no labor.   Flat-
 bottomed filters which require labor to move the carbon, unnecessarily add
 greatly to carbon transport costs.   For most, if not all, GAC installations
 for  trihalomethane (THM) removal, precursor organic removal, or synthetic
 organic removal,  the use of conventional filter boxes will not be a permanent
 solution and specially designed GAC contactors should be installed.
 Contactors should be equipped with flow measuring devices.   Seperate GAC
 contactors are especially advantageous where GAC treatment is required only
 part of the time during certain seasons, because they then can be used only
 when needed and bypassed when not needed, thus saving unnecessary exhaustion
 and regeneration of GAC.  In summary, tremendous cost savings can be
 realized in GAC treatment of water through proper selection and design of
 the  carbon contactors.

    GAC Replacement or Regeneration.   Spent carbon may be removed from
 contactors and replaced with virgin carbon, or it may be regenerated either
 on-site  or off-site.  The most economical mode depends upon the quentities
 of GAC involved and the effective service life of the carbon.   For large
 plants and large volumes of GAC,  on-site regeneration is the answer.   Only
 in small plants,  or in large plants with service cycles of several months,
will carbon replacement or off-site regeneration be economical.
                                     278

-------
    Carbon may he thermally regenerated to full virgin activity.  However,
carbon losses may b.e excessive under these conditions.  Experience in
Industrial and was:tewater treatment Indicates that carbon losses can be
minimized (held to 8 to 10 percent per cycle) if the GAG activity of regen-
erated carbon as Indicated by the Iodine Number, is held at about 90 percent
of the virgin activity.  For removal of certain organics, there may be no
decrease In removal despite a 10 percent drop in Iodine Number.

    Thermal Regeneration Equipment. GAG may be reactivated in a multiple—
hearth furnace, a fluidized bed furnace, a rotary kiln, or an electric
infrared furnace.  Spent GAG is drained dry (40 percent moisture content)
in a screen-equipped tank or in a dewatering screw before Introduction to
the regeneration furnace.  Dewatered carbon is usually transported by a
screw conveyor.  Following thermal regeneration, the GAG is cooled in a
quench tank.  The water-carbon slurry may then be transported by means of
diaphragm slurry pumps, eductors, or a blow-tank.  The regenerated carbon
may contain fines produced during conveyance, and these fines should be
removed in a water tank or in the contactor.  Maximum furnace temperatures
and time of retention in the furnace are determined by the amount (pounds
of organics per pound of carbon) and nature (molecular weight) of the
organics adsorbed.

    Off-gases from carbon regeneration present no air pollution problems
provided they are properly scrubbed, or, In some cases, passed through
an afterburner (for odor control) and then scrubbed.

    Required Furnace Capacity.  The principal cost differences between GAG
treatment of water and wastewater lie In the capital cost of the furnace
and In the 0 & M costs for the quantity of carbon to be regenerated.  As
already discussed, the cost of regeneration per pound of carbon may be
less for carbons used In water treatment due to the greater volatility of
the organics adsorbed, but a prudent approach to use at the present time
is to assume that the cost of regeneration per pound of carbon Is the same
for GAG used in treating water and wastewater.

    Also, as previously mentioned, the pounds of organics adsorbed on a
pound of carb,on at the point of breakthrough may be quite different for
water and wastewater.  Usually the loading will be much less for water
treatment carb.ons.  TO ACCURATELY ESTIMATE GAG COSTS FOR WATER PURIFICATION
IT IS ESSENTIAL TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE DIFFERENCE IN THE AMOUNT OF
ORGANICS ADSORBED AS COMPARED TO THOSE ADSORBED IN AWT.  To fail to take
this important difference into account could lead to erroneous estimates
of cost, and the estimated cost differences could be substantial.  To
repeat, it is not possible to use GAG cost curves for AWT based on mgd
throughput or plant capacity to obtain costs for water treatment.
Differences in regeneration requirements must be taken Into account.

    Carbon'Transport and GAG Process Auxiliaries.  There can be tremendous
differences in 0 & M costs for GAG systems depending upon the method selected
for carbon transport.  Transport of GAG in water slurry by gravity or use
of water pressure is simple, easy, inexpensive, rapid, and uses very little
labor.  Moving dry or dewatered carbon manually or with mechanical means

                                     279

-------
involving lab.or can b.e very difficult, time consuming, and costly.  The
proper use of conical bottoms in carbon contactors, dewatering bins, storage
bins, wash tanks, and the like can minimize GAG handling costs.  Efforts to
use existing (or new) flat-bottomed structures requiring operator or other
labor to more the carbon can be costly.

SOURCES OF COST AND DESIGN DATA FOR GAG SYSTEMS

    General.  There are three main sources ,of cost information and organic
adsorption data needed to prepare cost estimates for GAC systems for
production of drinking water.  These are the:  (.1) EPA publications,
particularly those of recent research at the Cincinnati laboratories,
(2) articles concerning the experience with GAC in AWT, and (.3) papers
concerning the use of GAC in water filtration plants.

    EPA Publications.  Pertinent publications of Interes:t are:

    1.  Clark, Robert M., et al., "The Cost of Removing Chloroform and
        Other Trihalomethanes From Drinking Water Supplies", EPA 600/1-77-008,
        March, 1977.

    2.  Symons, James M., "Interim Treatment Guide for Controlling Organic
        Contaminants in Drinking Water Using Granular Activated Carbon",
        EPA Water Supply Research. Division, Cincinnati, January, 1978.

    3.  "Advanced Wastewater Treatment as Practiced at South Tahoe",
        EPA 17010ELQ08/71, August, 1971.

    Reference No. 2 on page 108 gives an example of the method of converting
carbon dosage requirements for water purification Into regeneration
requirements and costs, using carbon dosage requirements obtained from
the results of pilot plant work.  This example Includes capital and 0 & M
costs.

    AWT Cost Experience.  Good cost data is available from operating
installations at:  (1) The South Tahoe Public Utility District, South
Lake Tahoe, California (.13 years), (.2) the Orange County Water District,
Fountain Valley, California (4 years), and (3) the Upper Occoquan Sewage
Authority, Manassas Park, Virginia (.capital cost data only - plant not yet
in operation).

    The South Tahoe data is summarized In two books;  (.1) Gulp, R.L. and
Culp, G.L., "Advanced Wastewater Treatment", Van Nostrand Relnhold, New
York, 1971, and (.2) Gulp, Wesner, Culp "Handbook of Advanced Wastewater
Treatment", Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York., 1978.

    GAC Experience in Potable Water Treatment.  The experience with 12
integrated filtration-adsorption units Is summarized on pages 239-247 of
"New Concepts In Water Purification", Culp and Culp, Van Nostrand Reinhold,
New York, 1974 (see Table 1).
                                     280

-------
                                  TABLE 1
                     GRANULAR CARBON INSTALLATIONS IN
                MUNICIPAL WATER PLANTS IN THE UNITED STATES
Water Plant Location
AWWS Co., Hopewell, Virginia
Nitro, West Virginia
Montecito Co. Water District
 Santa Barbara, California
Del City, Oklahoma
Somerset, Massachusetts
Pawtucket, Rhode Island
Lawrence, Massachusetts

Piqua, Ohio
Bartlesville, Oklahoma
Granite City, Illinois
Winchester, Kentucky
Mt. Clemens, Michigan
Year
Installed
1961
1966
1963
1967
1968
1969
1969
1969
1970
1971
1970
1968
Size of
Plant (mgd)
3.0
10.0
1.5
5.25
4.5
24
10
8
4.5
7
1.5
7
Flow Rate
(gpm ft3)
2.0
1.5-2.0
6
2
2
2
2
2
2
1.4
2
1.7
Carbon
Bed
Depth
24 in.
30 in.
12 ft.
36 in.
11 in.
18 in.
24 in.
30 in.
18 in.
24 in.
18 in.
24 in.
24 in.
                                    281

-------
    Industrial and Miscellaneous Municipal' Carbon RerggmefatioTi Tu'riiace
Installations.  Some cost data is also available from the following carbon
furnace installations:
                       CARBON FURNACE INSTALLATIONS
Installation
                                                    Use
                                              Dye Wastewater
                                              Wastewater, Industrial
                                                               II

                                                               tl
	                       Date

Hollytex Carpet Mills, PA          1969
BP Oil, N.J.                       1971
Stepan Chemical Co., N.J.          1972
Hercules, Mississippi              1972
Amerada Hess, N.J.                 1973
American Aniline, PA               1973
American Cyanimid, N.J.            1977
Esso Research                      1973
Republic Steel Corp.               1974
Colorado Springs, CO               1969
Rocky River, OH                    1972
Derry Township, PA                 1974            "           "
Vallejo, CA                        1974            "           "
Santa Clara V.W.D. Palo Alto, CA   1975            "           "
Tahoe-Truckee San. Dist., CA       1976            "           "
No. Towanda, N.Y.                  1976            "           "
Nassau Co., N.Y.                   1977            "           "

    There are another 30-50 carbon furnaces installed for use in connection
with refining (decolorizing)  of corn syrup and beet sugar.
                                                          Municipal
                                                               it
                                   282

-------
                                   TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                            (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
 1. REPORT NO.
   EPA-600/2-78-182
                              2.
                                                           3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
   Estimating Costs for Water  Treatment As A Function
   of  Size and Treatment Efficiency
             5. REPORT DATE
              August 1978 (Issuing  Date)
             6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
   Robert C.  Gumerman, Russell L.  Gulp,  and
   Sigurd P.  Hansen	
                                                           8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
   Culp/Wesner/Culp
   Consulting Engineers
   Santa Ana, CA  92707
              10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
               1CC614  SOS-1  Task  38
              11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.

                 CI-76-0288
 12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
   Municipal  Environmental Research Laboratory—Gin.,OH
   Office  of  Research and Development
   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
   Cincinnati,  Ohio   45268
                                                            13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
                EPA 600/14
 15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

   Project  Officer:  Robert M. Clark  513-684-7209
 16. ABSTRACT
   This  interim report discusses unit  processes and combinations of unit processes
   which are  capable of removing contaminants included in  the National Interim
   Primary Drinking Water Standards.   Construction and Operation and Maintenance  cost
   curves are presented for 30 unit processes, which are considered to be especially
   applicable to contaminant removal.   The Final Report for  this project will include
   similar cost curves for over 100 unit processes.  All costs are presented in terms
   of January 1978 dollars, but a discussion is included on  cost updating.  For
   construction cost,  either of two methods may be used.   One is to use indices which
   are specific in the eight categories used to determine  construction cost.  The
   second is  use of an all-encompassing index, such as ENR Construction Cost Index.
   Operation  and maintenance reauirements mav be readilv updated,  or adiusted to  local
   conditions,  since labor reauirements are expressed in hours per vear. and
   electrical reauirements in kilowatt-hours per vear.
17.
                                KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                  DESCRIPTORS
                                              b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
                           c. COSATI Field/Group
   Construction Costs
   Cost Analysis
   Cost Estimates
   Cost Indexes
   Economic Analysis
   Operating Costs
   Unit Costs
   Unit Process Costs
   Conceptual Designs
   Contaminant Removal
   Process Efficiency
     13 B
     91 J
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
   Release to Public
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
	Unclassified	•
21. NO. OF PAGES
     295
                                              20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
                                                  Unclassified
                                                                         22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
                                            283
                                                      U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1978-757-140/1342 Region No. 5-11

-------