vvEPA
             United States
             Environmental Protection
             Agency
           Municipal Environmental Research
           Laboratory
           Cincinnati OH 45268
EPA-600/2-84-134
August 1984
            Research and Development
Design Manual:
Removal of
Fluoride from Drinking
Water Supplies  by
Activated Alumina

-------
                                           EPA-600/2-84-134
                                           August  1984
               DESIGN MANUAL
          REMOVAL OF FLUORIDE FROM
          DRINKING WATER SUPPLIES
                     BY
             ACTIVATED ALUMINA
                     by

         Frederick Rubel, Jr., P.E,
           Rubel and Hager, Inc.
           Tucson, Arizona  85711
          Contract No. 68-03-2917
              Project Officer

             Steven W. Hathaway
      Drinking Water Research Division
Muinicipal Environmental Research Laboratory
           Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
MUNICIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
     OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
    U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
          CINCINNATI, OHIO  45268
                                             ntoi Protection Agency
                                    . Environmental r*,

-------
                                 DISCLAIMER
       "The information in this document has been funded wholly or in
part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency under Contract
No. 68-03-2917 to AWARE, Inc.  It has been subject to the Agency's peer
and administrative review, and it has been approved for publication as an
EPA document.  Mention of trade names or commercial products does not
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use."
                                      ii

-------
                                  FOREWORD
     The U.S.- 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 testimonies to the deterioration of
our natural environment.  The complexity of that environment and the
interplay of its components require a concentrated and integrated attack
on the problem.

     Research and development is that necessary first step in problem
solution; it involves defining the problem, measuring its impact, and
searching for solutions.  The Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
develops new and improved technology and systems to prevent, treat, and
manage wastewater and solid and hazardous waste pollutant discharges from
municipal and community sources, to preserve and treat 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 and provides a most vital communications link
between the researcher and the user community.

     The pollution of our nation's groundwater has been called the
environmental problem of the 1980s.  When polluted groundwater serves
as a source of public drinking water, pollutants must be removed to
levels below standards regulated by the Safe Drinking Water Act (Public
Law 93-523).  Fluoride, in concentrations exceeding the optimum level
beneficial to teeth, can become detrimental to new tooth formation in
infants and children up to about 12 years old.  This design manual shows
step by step the actual methods for designing a central water treatment
plant for removal of excess fluoride from small community water supplies.
                                       Francis T. Mayo, Director
                                       Municipal Environmental Research
                                       Laboratory
                                     iii

-------
                                  ABSTRACT
     This manual is an  in-depth presentation  of  the  steps required to design
and operate a water treatment plant for removal  of excess fluoride using the
activated alumina method.   Low capital and operating  costs, simple operation,
and ability to .closely  control the effluent fluoride  level are features that
highlight this process.   The alumina process requires adjustment of raw water
pH to 5.5 prior to passing through  the  treatment media; after treatment, the pH
is readjusted to the desired level.   Initially,  the process removes more than
95 percent of  the  fluoride  in the raw water.   Blending may be  practiced if
initial fluoride is low.  As  treatment continues, the activated alumina grains
adsorb fluoride ions until saturated.  Implementation of a caustic soda regen-
eration releases and  totally removes  fluoride ions in  a  highly concentrated
wastewater which must be discarded.   After regeneration, the pH of the treat-
ment  media is  lowered  to  where  treatment resumes  again and  a  new cycle
commences.

     This  manual  includes discussion of  design requirements  and  details of
operation  and maintenance.   It  discusses  the  capital  and operating costs
including  the many variables which  can  raise  or  lower  costs  for identical
treatment  systems.   Wastewater disposal is also discussed.
                                       iv

-------
                                  CONTENTS
Chapter
             FOREWORD                                               ill
             ABSTRACT                                                iv
             CONTENTS                                                 v
             LIST OF FIGURES                                       viii
             LIST OF TABLES                                          ix
             ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS                                         x

             INTRODUCTION

             1.1   Purpose and Scope                                1-1
             1.2   Background                                       1-1
             1.3   Fluoride in Water Supplies                       1-3
             1.4   Health Effects                                   1-3
             1.5   Reduction of Fluoride                            1-4
             1.6   References                                       1-5

             TREATMENT METHODS FOR FLUORIDE REMOVAL

             2.1   Introduction                                     2-1
             2.2   Granular Activated Alumina                       2-1
             2.3   Alternate Treatment Methods                      2-3
             2.4   References                                       2-5

             DESIGN OF CE.NTRAL TREATMENT SYSTEM

             3.1   Introduction                                     3-1
             3.2   Conceptual Design                                3-3
             3.3   Preliminary Design                               3-6
                   3.3.1   Treatment Equipment Preliminary Design   3-6
                   3.3.2   Preliminary Equipment Arrangement        3-14
                   3.3.3   Preliminary Cost Estimate                3-15
                   3.3.4   Preliminary Design Revisions             3-17
             3.4   Final Design                                     3-17
                   3.4.1   Treatment Equipment Final Design         3-20
                   3.4.2   Final Drawings                           3-26
                   3.4.3   Final Capital Cost Estimate              3-26
                   3.4.4   Final Design Revisions                   3-26
             3.5   References                                       3-26

-------
                         CONTENTS (continued)


Chapter

   4             CENTRAL TREATMENT SYSTEM CAPITAL COST

                 4.1    Introduction                                        4-1
                 4.2    Discussion of Cost Variables                        4-2
                       4.2.1   Water  Chemistry                             4-3
                       4.2.2   Climate                                     4-4
                       4.2.3   Seismic Zone                                4-4
                       4.2.4    Soil  Conditions                             4-4
                       4.2.5   Existing Facility                           4-5
                       4.2.6   Backwash and Regeneration Disposal
                               Concept                                    4-6
                       4.2.7   Chemical Supply Logistics                   4-7
                       4.2.8   Manual Versus Automatic  Control              4-7
                       4.2.9   Financial Considerations                    4-7
                 4.3    Relative Capital Cost of Fluoride Removal
                         Central Water Treatment Plants Based
                         Upon Flow Rate                                   4-8
                 4.4    References                                         4-8

   5             TREATMENT  PLANT OPERATION

                 5.1    Introduction                                        5-1
                 5.2    Initial Startup                                    5-4
                 5.3    Treatment Mode                                     5-4
                 5.4    Backwash Mode                                      5-8
                 5.5    Regeneration  Mode                                  5-9
                 5.6    Neutralization Mode                               5~10
                 5.7    Operator Requirements                             5-11
                 5.8    Laboratory Requirements                            5-11
                 5.9    Operating Records                                 5-12
                       5.9.1   Plant  Log                                  5-12
                       5.9.2   Operation Log                              5-12
                       5.9.3   Water  Analysis Reports                      5-12
                       5.9.4   Plant  Operating Cost Records                5-12
                       5.9.5   Correspondence Files                       5-14
                       5.9.6   Regulatory Agency Reports                  5-14
                       5.9.7   Miscellaneous Forms                        5-14
                 5.10  Treatment Plant Maintenance                       5-14
                 5.11  Equipment Maintenance                             5-14
                 5.12  Treatment Media Maintenance                       5-14
                 5.13  Treatment Chemicals Supply                        5-15
                 5.14  Housekeeping                                       5-15


                                        vi

-------
                              CONTENTS  (continued)


   Chapter                                                               Page

   6             CENTRAL TREATMENT PLANT OPERATING COST

                 6.1   Introduction                                       6-1
                 6.2   Discussion of Operating Costs                      6-2
                       6.2.1  Treatment Chemical Costs                    6-2
                       6.2.2  Operating Labor Costs                       6-6
                       6.2.3  Utility Cost                                6-7
                       6.2.4  Replacement Treatment Media Cost            6-8
                       6.2.5  Replacement Parts and Miscellaneous
                               Material Costs                            6-10
                 6.3   Operating Cost Summary                            6-10

APPENDIX A       SUMMARY OF SUBSYSTEMS INCLUDING COMPONENTS               A-l
APPENDIX B       TREATMENT SYSTEM DESIGN EXAMPLE                          B-l
APPENDIX C       DISCUSSION OF ACID CONSUMPTION REQUIREMENTS
                   FOR pH ADJUSTMENT OF RAW WATER                         C-l
APPENDIX D       TABULATIONS OF CAPITAL COST BREAKDOWNS
                   FOR CENTRAL FLUORIDE REMOVAL WATER
                   TREATMENT PLANTS BASED UPON FLOW RATE                  D-l
APPENDIX E       ENGLISH/METRIC CONVERSIONS                               E-l
                                     Vll

-------
                                   FIGURES


Number                                                                   Page

3-1              Water Analysis Report Form                               3-2

3-2              Basic Flow Diagram                                       3-5

3-3.1            Process and Instrumentation Diagram (P&ID)                3-7

3-3.2            Process and Instrumentation Diagram (P&ID)                3-8

3-4              Treatment Bed and Vessel Design Calculations            3-10

3-5              Preliminary Equipment Arrangement Plan                  3-11

3-6              Preliminary Equipment Arrangement Elevations            3-16

3-7              Chemical Mixing Tee Detail                              3-23

4-1              Cost of Fluoride Removal at an Ideal Location            4-9

4-2              Cost of Fluoride Removal for a Typical Location         4-10

5-1              Valve Number Diagram                                     5-2

5-2              Basic Operating Mode Flow Schematics                     5-7

5-3              Fluoride Removal Water Treatment Plant Operation
                   Log                                                   5-13

5-4              5,000 Gallon Chemical Storage Tank-Liquid Volume        5-16

6-1              Curve Illustration Rule of Thumb for Volume of
                   Water to be Treated Per Cycle vs. Raw Water
                   Fluoride Level                                         6-5

A-l              Schematic Flow Diagram                                   A-2

C-l              Graph of pH as a Function of Total Alkalinity
                   and Free Carbon Dioxide                                C-2


                                     viii

-------
                                   TABLES


Number

1.1              Maximum Contaminant Levels for Fluoride                  1-2

3.1              Preliminary Cost Estimate-Example for Fluoride
                   Removal Water Treatment Plant Preliminary
                   Capital Cost Estimate                                 3-17

3.2              Final Cost Estimate-Example for Fluoride Removal
                   Water Treatment Plant Final Capital Cost
                   Estimate                                              3-18

4.1              Final Cost Estimate Example for Ideal Location
                   Fluoride Removal Water Treatment Plant Final
                   Capital Cost Estimate                                  4-3

5.1              Fluoride Removal Water Treatment Plant valve
                   Operation Chart                                        5-3

5.2              Calculated Downflow Pressure Drop Data                   5-5

6.1              Price for Alcoa F-l, 28-48 Mesh Activated Alumina        6-9

6.2              Operating Cost Tabulation                               6-10

D.I              Tabulation of Estimated Capital Cost* of Fluoride
                   Removal Central Water Treatment Plants Based
                   Upon Treatment Flow Rate in Dollars Rounded Off
                   to the Nearest Thousand                                D-l

D.2              Tabulation of Estimated Capital Cost* of Minimum
                   Fluoride Removal Central Water Treatment Plants
                   Based Upon Treatment Flow Rate in Dollars Rounded
                   Off to the Nearest Thousand                            D-2
                                      IX

-------
                              ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
     This is to acknowledge the efforts of all those involved in the creation
and development of this manual.  These include:
Manual Preparation

AWARE Inc., Nashville, Tennessee
Project Manager:  Dr. Ann N. Clarke
Production  Staff:   Marlayne  Clark,  Dee Biggert,  Sue Prosch,  Jackie  Thomas
                   (drafting)
Technical Direction

CERI Project Officer:  James Smith, CERI, EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio
Technical Project Officer: Steve Hathaway, MERL, EPA, Cinncinati, Ohio
                                      x


-------
                                  CHAPTER 1

                                 INTRODUCTION
1.1  PURPOSE AND SCOPE

     This manual has been prepared to present up-to-date information on design
of central treatment  plants  for the removal of  excess  fluoride from potable
water supplies.

     This manual is an independent document.  The detailed design information
presented herein applies exclusively to granular activated alumina technology
for selective removal of excess  fluoride.  Several other  treatment methods have
been employed  for  this  application, but  none  with the cost-effectiveness and
process efficiency of the activated alumina method.   Some  of the more familiar
methods and their  limitations are covered in Chapter 2.

     When  excess  fluoride is  present  in  potable  water  in  combination with
excess quantities  of  other organic and/or  inorganic  contaminants,  the acti-
vated  alumina  method may  not be optimum  for  the application.   Those water
supplies must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis for selection of the appro-
priate treatment method, or combination of methods,  for  the application.  That
technology is beyond the scope of this manual.

     There has  been interest exhibited  in  "point-of-use" application of the
activated alumina  technology; however, that area is not included in the scope
of this manual.
1.2  BACKGROUND

     Under the National Interim Primary Drinking Regulations, maximum contami-
nant  levels  (MCL)  in potable  water supplies  have  been  established for ten
inorganic chemicals, including fluoride.  The MCL for fluoride varies from 1.4
to 2.4 mg/1 depending upon the annual average of maximum daily air temperatures
(see Table 1.1).  Since it became known that excess  fluoride in drinking water
caused mottled teeth in children ,  many methods of removing fluoride  have been
developed.  The activated  alumina method  is one of them.
                                      1
                                     1-1

-------
             TABLE 1.1.  MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVELS FOR FLUORIDE


"c
12.0
12.1-14.6
14.7-17.6
17.7-21.4
21.5-26.2
26.3-32.5

Average Maximum Daily
"F
53.7
53.8-53.3
58.4-63.8
63.9-70.6
70.7-79.2
79.3-90.5
Fluoride
Level
mg/1
2.4
2.2
2.0
1.8
1.6
1.4
     Although many  investigators  have found that activated  alumina  is quite
effective in reducing fluoride to very low  levels in  treated water,  there is
confusion, as to  the  procedure   for  using  the  activated   alumina  process.
Churchill , in his  1936 patent on the use of activated  alumina  for  fluoride
removal,  states that  a  pH of 5 to 6.5 should be  used for treatment  for best
results.  There is no stated capacity in his patent.   E.  A.  Savinelli and A.
R. Black  , in their 1958  bench experiments, '.showed that  a  capacity  of 3,400
grains/cu ft was  achieved when the  treated  waiter pH was  5.6.   These studies
were made with tap water to  which  sodium  fluoride  had  been added.  Yeun C. Wu
showed that treatment pH is quite important  for high  removal capacities.  He
reported maximum removals of 4,200 grains/cu ft^with treatment at pH  5 on pure
sodium fluoride solutions.   Other  investigators     who have made bench, pilot
or commercial installation studies have reported much  lower capacities because
they have not understood or  chosen to operate at optimum pH conditions.

     There are three plants  at which there have been several  years of low-cost
operating experience in producing waters  with fluoride concentrations reduced
to acceptable levels.  They  are:

1.  Lake  Tamerisk,  Desert Center,  California (1,100 gpm) - 1970
2.  Rincon Water Company, Vail, Arizona      (  500 gpm) - 1972
3.  Town  of Gila Bend, Arizona               (  900 gpm) - 1978

     By paying  close  attention to pH control,  the  three plants are able to
operate routinely with removal capacities exceeding 2,000 grains/cu  ft.

     As the raw water fluoride concentration increases, the  activated alumina
capacity  increases.  For a water with a fluoride concentration of 22 mg/1  (not
a normal  level in U.S.A.), the alumina capacity reaches 4,500 grains/cu  ft.

     The  granular activated alumina employed at the above treatment plants is
Alcoa Grade F-l with mesh size of 28-48.  Larger  mesh sizes have been tried;
they work, but  their  fluoride capacities are lower.    Finer mesh material has
not been  used in other than  laboratory  bench-scale  work.   A new pelletized

                                      2
                                      1-2

-------
material, F-100, has been developed by Alcoa and has been tested in the  field.
This material will soon be available.   It  is  the  same mesh size  (28-48)  as  the
F-l and  has  the same fluoride removal  capacity.  Its advantage is  in  having
very few fines.  It is,  therefore,  easier  to  handle.  There are  other manufac-
turers that  produce an activated  alumina product  similar  to the  Alcoa F-l.
However,  to-date,  there has been very little demonstration work  to  verify  the
performances.

1.3  FLUORIDE IN WATER SUPPLIES

     Fluorine, a gaseous halogen,  is not found  in the free state, but occurs in
combination with other elements as  fluoride compounds.  Most of these compounds
are a complex of calcium-fluoride-phosphate.  Fluoride ions normally exist in
small concentrations in all water  supplies.  Unless contaminated by fluoride-
bearing wastes, the concentrations in surface water supplies are normally low.
Frequently surface  waters with  low fluoride  concentrations  receive  fluorida-
tion treatment to raise the level  to an optimum desired for consumer protection
from tooth decay.  The optimum level established by the  U.S.   Public  Health
Service  is  one-half of  the MCL.    Well water supplies  have  higher fluoride
concentrations due  to  the  fact  that exposure to fluoride-bearing minerals  is
far greater.   There are, however, many well water supplies with fluoride  levels
low enough to  require the above-mentioned fluoridation  treatment.  The vast
majority of well water contains  fluoride levels close to optimum, or within  the
MCL.  Nevertheless, per Letkiewicz  ,  there are more than 2,000 water supplies
in the United States in which the  fluoride MCL is  exceeded.   Of  those,  nearly
all have  fluoride  levels  occurring between  the  MCL and  12 mg/1.   There  are
known water supplies with  natural  fluoride levels as high as 30 mg/1. In those
water supplies, the concentration of other minerals is usually  too  high to be
used for potable water service without desalinization.

1.4  HEALTH EFFECTS

     Due  to  the natural  affinity of fluoride  ions for  calcium,  there is a
complex  interaction between ingested  fluoride  and  skeletal  components.   Med-
ical studies  have been conducted for many years to determine  the  health effects
on animals and humans resulting from that  interaction.  Results have not been
conclusive.  These  studies  are very difficult  to control because,  except  for
dental fluorosis  (mottled teeth)   in  children,  the  skeletal  effects develop
over long periods of time.  During those periods  there  are many  other elements
interacting with the skeletal system as well as  with the fluoride  ions.   The
specimens observed  during the studies  may also have  ingested  fluoride from
sources other than water;  or may have absorbed airborne fluoride ions through
the lungs or even the skin.

     In  the  field  of  veterinary  medicine there are many  documented   cases,
covering  dairy cattle and other farm animals,  that have experienced fluoride
toxicosis  (bone  deterioration due  to  excessive fluoride)  from ingestion  of
water with fluoride levels ranging from  6  to  12 mg/1.  This affliction results
in crippling and death.

                                      3
                                     1-3

-------
     Dental fluorosis is recognized  as  a direct result of ingestion of water
with fluoride content exceeding the MCL by children ranging in  age up to twelve
years old.  Dental  fluorosis  can  vary from a mild discoloration of the tooth
enamel  to  a severe  pitting  and  embrittlement of  the  tooth  structure.   The
severity of the condition varies  directly with the  concentration of the fluor-
ide and the amount of water ingested.  Once the adult teeth are fully formed,
there is no further  deterioration.   This condition is  considered as a health
problem by some health experts; but others state that it is a cosmetic problem
which is not to be considered as detrimental to health.

1.5  REDUCTION OF FLUORIDE

     It is desirable to control  the concentration  of  fluoride  in potable water
supplies as close to  the optimum level as possible.  The optimum is one-half of
the MCL (see Table 1.1).   In water  supplies where the  fluoride level exceeds
the MCL, steps must be taken  to reduce that  level to below the MCL (preferably
to the optimum level). This design manual addresses removal of excess fluoride
by the activated alumina method.  There are other treatment methods which could
be considered  (see Chapter 2).  There  are also other options which may offer
less costly solutions.  These optional  solutions all  involve alternate sources
of supply.

     The first choice is an existing  water supply within the service area with
known quality  that  complies  with the fluoride  MCL in  addition to  all other
MCL's  (both organic  and  inorganic).   If  another source complies  with  the
fluoride MCL but exceeds another MCL  (or  MCL's),  it  may  still be  feasible to
blend the two sources and achieve  a water quality that complies with all MCL's.
There are other features of this option that may present liabilities during its
consideration.  These would include,  but not be limited  to,  high temperature or
undesirable quantities  of  non-toxic  contaminants  such as  turbidity,  color,
odor, hardness, iron, manganese,  chloride, sulfate, sodium, etc.

     Another option is to  drill a  new well  (or wells) within the service area.
This approach  is  attempted only  when there is sound  reason  to  believe that
sufficient quantity of acceptable quality water can be located.  The cost (both
capital and operating) of a new well must not exceed the cost of treating the
existing source.  There is an element of risk in this approach.

     Another approach is to  pump  good  quality water  to the service area from
another  service area.   As  the  distance  increases,  the  rise in  elevation
increases  and/or  the  existence  of  physical  barriers  occurs,  the  costs  of
installing  the  delivery  system  and  delivering the water  become  increasingly
unfavorable.   Similar to  the alternate  source within  the service area, this
imported source can also be blended as described above.

     Use of bottled or other modes of imported acceptable quality water to be
used only for potable water purposes is also an option.  The reliability,  the
cost and the assurance that the  consumers will only use that source are deter-
rents to be considered.

                                      4
                                     1-4

-------
      Other options such as "point-of-use" treatment systems are viable alter-
 natives.   However, the treatment reliability of  such  units cannot be assured
 unless there  are  stringent controls governing their operation and maintenance.
 Also the  problem of assuming that all users consume only  water that has been
 treated where untreated water is also available must be addressed.

 1.6  REFERENCES

 1.    Dean, L.T., Arnold,  F.A.,  Jr.,  & Elvove,  E., Domestic Water and Dental
      Caries., Pub. Health Rep.  57:1155 (1942).

 2.    Churchill, H.V.,  U.S. Patent 2,059,553 (Nov. 3, 1936).

 3.    Savinelli, E.A.  and  A.P.  Black, Defluoridation  of Water  with Activated
      Alumina., Journal AWWA,  50:33 (1958).

 4.    Wu,  Yeun C.,  Activated Alumina Removes Fluoride Ions from Water, Water and
      Sewage Works, 125:6:76 (June 1978).

 5.    Boruff,   C.S.,  Removal  of Fluorides  from  Drinking  Waters,  IEC,  26:69
      (1934).

 6.    Goetz, P.C.,  U.S. Patent 2,179,227 (December 6, 1938).

 7.    Maier, F.J.,  Defluoridation  of Municipal Water  Supplies,  Journal AWWA,
      45:879 (1953).

 8.    Swope, H.G.  and  R.H.  Hess,  Removal  of Fluorides  from Natural Waters by
      Defluorite.   IEC, 29:424 (1937).

 9.    Zabban and  R.  Helrick,  Defluoridation of  Waste  Water, Proc.  30th Ann.
      Purdue Industrial Conference (1975).

 10.  Zabban and N.W. Jewett,  The Treatment of Fluoride Wastes, Proc.  22nd Ann.
      Purdue Industrial Waste Conference,  Engineers Bulletin No. 129 (1967).

11.    Rub'el, F.,  Report on Feasibility Evaluation of the Removal  of Excess
      Fluoride  from  Mine  Water,  (Confidential),  C-b  Shale Oil  Venture,  Rio
      Blanco,  Colorado  (June 1,  1978).

12.    Shupe, J.L.  and A.E.  Olson,  Clinicopathic  Features of Fluoride Toxicosis
      in Animals,  Proceedings  of the  International Fluoride Symposium,  Utah
      State University, (May 24-27,  1982).

13.    Letkiewicz,  F., Occurrence of Fluoride in  Drinking Water,  Air and Food,
      EPA  Draft Report, ODW (October 1983).
                                       5
                                      1-5

-------
                                  CHAPTER 2

                    TREATMENT METHODS  FOR FLUORIDE  REMOVAL
2.1  INTRODUCTION

     There are several central treatment plant methods that can remove excess
fluoride from potable water supplies.  This manual  only addresses the activated
alumina method which to date  has  been the  most successful.  Alternative physi-
cal/chemical processes  which  include  adsorption, ion exchange, membrane separ-
ation and chemical precipitation are  described  briefly  in this chapter.   The
status of the alternate methods has already been  summarized by several authors.
An AWWA Journal article by Sorg  covers the subject quite well.

2.2  GRANULAR ACTIVATED ALUMINA

     The granular activated  alumina  method which  is  an  adsorption process is
the most efficient and least costly treatment method available to date.  Excep-
tions can occur at existing treatment installations where minor modifications
to the treatment process can remove the necessary quantity of fluoride.  This
design  manual is directed  toward implementation of the  granular activated
alumina method for the  selective  removal of excess  fluoride from potable water
supplies.

     The treatment media specification is  provided in Chapter 1.  The material
is a by-product  of  aluminum production.    It  is primarily an  aluminum oxide
which has been activated by exposure  to high temperature and caustic soda.  The
material is extremely porous.  Therefore,  the surface area per unit of weight
is quite high.  The material is ground into a granular form, and screened into
various mesh sizes ranging from one half  inch gravel down to  fine dust which
passes a 325  mesh screen.   Each  of  the various sizes  is adapted to specific
applications , which include drying of air/gas and catalysts.

     There have been many papers  written on the  application of granular activ-
ated alumina to the removal of fluoride from water. Some  of these are included
in  the  References for  Chapter 1.   One of the  earliest  and  most publicized
activated alumina fluoride removal plants which was built  in Bartlett, Texas in
1952  operated for  many  years;  the  raw  water  fluoride  level  was  8 mg/1.
Initially the raw water pH which  was above 8.0 was not adjusted.  Eventually,
it was adjusted to 7.0.   The  alumina capacity for fluoride ions was  reported at
700 grains/cu  ft.   At a  later date, a new  well  was  developed which had  a
fluoride level of  3 mg/1.    With  raw water pH  adjusted  to 7.0,  the reported
                                      6
                                     2-1

-------
fluoride capacity of the alumina was reduced to 450- grains/cu ft.  This plant
is no longer operational.  The  current  basic  process  technology was formally
published in an EPA Technical Report   in 1978.   Other researchers have since
duplicated this work  and published reports covering  laboratory, pilot-scale
and full-scale plant projects.

     By carefully adjusting raw water  pH to 5.5,  maximum fluoride removal is
reliably achieved.  Fluoride ions  are  attracted and held to the vast surface
area thorughout  the  pores of the  activated alumina  grains.   The attractive
forces are strongest  in the pH range  of 5.0-6.0.   As p'H deviates  from that
range,   fluoride  adsorption forces decrease at  an increasing  rate.   In this
optimum pH range other ions that compete with fluoride for the same adsorption
sites are not adsorbed.  Included are silica which  is  adsorbed  in the pH range
6 through 10  and some hardness ions which are removed  in  the  pH range 7 through
10.   Hardness  removal occurs  at  the  start  of a treatment run.   However,
activated alumina adsorption  is preferential  to fluoride;  therefore,  as the
run progresses, hardness  removal  ceases.  Alkalinity  is not adsorbed at the
optimum fluoride removal pH; in the pH  range 7 through 10 a negligible amount
of alkalinity  is  removed.   At  the  optimum fluoride  removal pH,  some organic
molecules and  some trace  heavy  metal ions are  adsorbed; however, except for
arsenic, these are completely regenerated along with the fluoride. Since these
ions compete for  the  same  adsorption  sites with the  fluoride,  their presence
depletes the alumina capacity for  fluoride.  Arsenic presents a  problem as it
is preferentially adsorbed over  fluoride by the alumina at the same optimum pH.
Arsenic is more difficult to regenerate than fluoride.  Therefore, when excess
fluoride and arsenic are present in a water supply, a special treatment tech-
nique  is required.  That  subject  is beyond the scope of this manual.

     Modes of operation for this process are described  in detail  in Chapters 4,
5, and 6 of  this manual.

     Several  investigators have  developed varying  theories that  cover the
physical/chemical interaction between activated  alumina  and  fluoride ions dur-
ing the separate modes' of operation.  Singh and  Clifford  have researched this
subject.  They suggest the  following simplified series  of chemical reactions to
explain the  ion exchange  adsorption of fluoride and the subsequent regenera-
tion of the  packed bed of  fluoride - exhausted alumina:

                        SIMPLIFIED PICTURE OF ALUMINA
                    ADSORPTION AND REGENERATION REACTIONS

1.   NEUTRAL ALUMINA
          Alumina + HOH                  Alumina HOH

2.   ACIDIFICATION
          Alumina HOH  + HC1              Alumina HC1 + HOH

3.   ION EXCHANGE IN ACIDIC SOLUTION
          Alumina HC1  + NaF              Alumina HF + NaCl

                                       7
                                     2-2

-------
4.   REGENERATION
          Alumina HF + 2NaOH            Alumina NaOH + NaF + HOH

5.   ACIDIFICATION
          Alumina NaOH + 2HC1           Alumina HC1 + NaCl + HOH

2.3  ALTERNATE TREATMENT METHODS

     Some of the methods that have been employed to remove excess fluoride from
potable water  include bone  char adsorption,  ion  exchange,  reverse osmosis,
electrodialysis, alum coagulation and lime softening.  A brief summary of these
methods is included for reference only.

     The  bone  char  process  for  fluoride  removal  is   very  similar  to  the
activated alumina process.   It selectively removes fluoride (and arsenic) and
is regenerated  by  means of  dilute  caustic soda.  However,  it  has drawbacks
which normally disqualify  it when  compared to activated alumina.   The media
(when produced)  cost  50 percent more  than  the  alumina; its initial fluoride
capacity was far less than the alumina; its fluoride capacity was  lost during
each successive regeneration; was susceptible to attack by low pH; and irrever-
sibly  adsorbed  arsenic.   These negative  characteristics have   discouraged
further development of the bone char method.

     Several  full  scale fluoride  removal  plants  using bone char have been
operated for varying periods.  The one most publicized was the USPHS plant at
Britton, South  Dakota which  operated from  1953  to 1971.   The  reported data
indicate that this plant removed 5  mg/1 fluoride  and  that the average fluoride
capacity of the media was 450 grains/cu ft.

     There is no current interest in this method.

     The ion exchange  treatment method is not considered viable for  the removal
of fluoride  from potable water supplies.   Strong base anion resins have the
ability to remove fluoride along with all other anions.  However,  the cost of
this treatment for potable water supplies is not  compatible with the financial
resources of  the small community.    Some researchers   have  reported  on this
method, but their findings are not favorable.

     The reverse osmosis (R/0) process employs the use  of  semi-permeable mem-
branes  for  the  separation  of dissolved solids  from water.  The  process is
primarily used to reduce the total dissolved solids  (TDS) content of a water
supply.  When  used  for  potable  water applications, its  function is to reduce
the TDS to below the  recommended maximum of 500 mg/1 which is a secondary EPA
standard.  If the high TDS water also has excessive levels of fluoride,  R/0 may
reduce  the fluoride to a level within  the MCL.

     Fluoride  ion rejection  by  R/0 membrane is pH and  temperature  sensitive.
At low  pH  (5.5), the  fluoride  rejection is close  to  50 percent.    Therefore,
adequate fluoride removal can only be accomplished at relatively  low raw water
                                       8
                                     2-3

-------
fluor-ide concentrations ( 4 mg/1) unless the pH is raised.  At the higher pH,
calcium fluoride  precipitation  creates  membrane fouling problems.   New mem-
brane development indicates that fluoride rejection approaching 90 percent can
be achieved in the lower pH range.

     Reverse osmosis is an energy intensive process.  Energy cost  is a function
of raw water IDS and reject water flow rate.  Although, under some conditions
higher product to reject water flow ratios (conversion) can be used, 75 percent
is usually an upper  limit.   Therefore,  at least 25 percent of  the  raw water
pumped through the process must  go to waste.  Discharge of that water is  also a
large cost  item  associated with  this process.   This water also contains at
least 90 percent of the original  TDS in the raw water.

     Desalting systems  such  as  R/0 and electrodialysis  (E/D)  cannot be cost
competitive with  the  activated  alumina process for  the  selective removal of
excess fluoride except for very  small systems.  This applies to both installa-
tion and operating costs.   However,  low solids water achieved by  these proces-
ses produce other desirable qualities such as:  low hardness,  low sodium, and
low sulfate which  may have appeal to  select  groups.   Thereby,   "high purity"
water could  be  an attraction  in health  oriented,  prestige, or retirement
communities.  In  communities with very high population  densities a two pipe
system (one with desalted water for potable service,  the other with untreated
water for  toilets, bathing,  laundry,  and irrigation) could  be  economically
feasible.

     Electrodialysis  is  also a  membrane separation method  that is  used to
remove dissolved  salts from brackish water.   The process removes  ionized salts
from water by the passing of ions through ion permeable membranes by means of
direct  current  electrical energy.   The membranes are  stacked  in  pairs of
anionic and  cationic  permeable membranes.   Raw  water  flows between  pairs
through labyrinths which create  turbulence while the direct current drives the
anions through the anion permeable membrane  and the cations through the cation
permeable membrane. These  ions collect in a  reject  stream which flows to waste
or can be partially recycled.  As with R/0, the E/D process is not selective;
it removes all inorganic ions.  It does not remove non-ionic dissolved solids
or suspended solids.   Also,  as with R/0, concentrations of ions in the brine or
reject stream can  lead to precipitation of  scale-forming  material  which can
foul the process.  Presence of hardness, iron and manganese ions, can lead to
high maintenance cost.  Membrane maintenance is an economic drawback for this
system.

     The advantage of E/D is that it operates at low pressure  where R/0 oper-
ates at pressures  approaching 400 psig.   E/D is  still  an energy  intensive
process  due  to  the current  required  to move the  charged  ions  through their
respective membranes.

     The E/D method like R/0  is not practical for selective  removal of fluoride
from potable water.   However,  when  fluoride is present  in a brackish water
supply,  and the  capital requirements  are within the  means of the community,

                                      9
                                     2-4

-------
these membrane  separation  methods are technically  capable  of delivering the
desired treatment water quality.

     Alum coagulation is a chemical precipitation process which employs alum,
an inorganic coagulant aid, to react with fluoride and other ions in solution
to form an insoluble solid^  This process, though effective for some applica-
tions, is expensive.  Sorg   reports  on other researchers who  found that 250
mg/1 of alum were required to reduce the  fluoride  level  in a water supply from
3.5 mg/1 to 1.5  mg/1 and 350 mg/1 of alum were required to reduce the fluoride
level to 1.0 mg/1.   Many variables such as pH, temperature, raw water chemistry
and mixing procedures affect this process.
                          Q Q 1 f\
     Several investigators  '  '    have shown  that  lime  softening,  a chemical
precipitation process,  can remove fluoride  from potable water supplies.  The
fluoride  removal  mechanism is  a co-precipitation  with magnesium hydroxide.
Finkbeiner   reported that according to his  formula 70 mg/1 of magnesium must
be removed to reduce  fluoride  from  4  mg/1 to 1.5  mg/1 and 137 mg/1 magnesium
removal reduces fluoride from 8 mg/1 to 1.5 mg/1.   If sufficient magnesium is
not present  in  the water, magnesium  salt in appropriate quantities  must be
added to accomplish the desired level of fluoride removal.

     Because  of  the  large  quantities,   and therefore  costs,  of  chemicals
required, this method is very limited.   It  does apply to water supplies with
moderate  levels of  fluoride  that  require  lime softening for large amounts of
magnesium.

2.4  REFERENCES

1.   Sorg, T.J.,  "Treatment Technology to meet the Interim Primary Drinking
     Water  Regulations   for  Inorganics",  AWWA  Journal  70:105-112  (February
     1978).

2.   Alcoa Activated Aluminas, Form F37-14-370  (1982).

3.   Rubel,  F.  and R.D.  Woosley,  Removal  of Excess Fluoride  from Drinking
     Water, EPA Technical Report 570/9-78-001 (January  1978).

4.   Rubel, F. and F.S.  Williams, Pilot  Study of  Fluoride and Arsenic Removal
     from Potable Water, EPA Report 600/2-80-100  (August 1980).

5.   Singh, G. and D.A.  Clifford, The Equilibrium Fluoride Capacity of  Activ-
     ated Alumina, EPA  Report 600/S2-81-082  (July 1981).

6.   Thompson,  J.,  and  F.Y.  McGarvey,   Ion  Exchange  Treatment  of  Water
     Supplies, AWWA Journal 45:2:145  (February  1953).

7.   Katz,  W.E.,  Electrodialytic Saline  Water  Conversion  for Municipal and
     Governmental Use,  Proceedings  of Western Water and Power Symposium, Los
     Angeles, California (April 8-9,  1968).
                                      10
                                      2-5

-------
8.   Boruff, C.S.,  A.M. Buswell, and W.V. Upton, Adsorption o£ Fluorides from
     Salt by Alum Floe. Ind. Engrg. Chem. 29:10:1154 (October 1937).

9.   Scott, R.D., et al.  Fluoride in Ohio Water Supplies-Its Effect.  Occur-
     rence, and Reduction Journal.  AWWA, 29:1-9 (January 1937).

10.  Finkbeiner, C.S.  Fluoride Reduction Plant  Installed at Village of Bloom-
     dale, Ohio.  Water Works Engrg.  91:7:990  (July 1938).
                                      11
                                     2-6

-------
                                  CHAPTER 3

                      DESIGN OF CENTRAL TREATMENT SYSTEM
3.1  INTRODUCTION

     The  design of  a  central treatment  plant  for the  selective  removal of
fluoride  from potable  water  supplies  is a straightforward process.  Fluoride
removal treatment can be applied to existing potable water systems  that have a
history of high  fluoride  and new wells with high  fluoride  which must be reduced
prior to being allowed to deliver to distribution.

     The designer must be careful to clearly define the design criteria prior
to  initiating   the  preliminary  design.    The  most  important  items  are  the
following:

1)   Comprehensive chemical  analyses  (see Figure  3-1)  of representative raw
     water samples (includes all historical analyses).

2)   Treated water   quality  compliance  standards  issued  by the  regulatory
     agency within whose jurisdiction the system resides.

3)   Wastewater  discharge ordinance  issued  by  the  responsible  regulatory
     agency.

4)   Accurate data on system production and consumption requirements (present
     and future).

5)   State and  local codes and health department requirements.

6)   Comprehensive climatological data.

     The  treatment  system is  a  subsystem within  the  larger water  utility
system.    Other  subsystems are  the well  pump,  the storage reservoirs,  the
pressurization  system  and the distribution system.   Defluoridation generally
is the  only treatment required; however, removal of  other contaminants such as
bacteria,   suspended  solids,  hardness,  organics or  other objectionable  qual-
ities may also  be required.

     The sequence of other  treatment  steps must be compatible with  fluoride
removal.  Removal of  suspended solids, organics and hardness should take  place
upstream of the fluoride removal  process.   Disinfection  with chlorine should
                                     12
                                     3-1

-------
                                    EXAMPLE

                     FLUORIDE REMOVAL  WATER TREATMENT PLANT

                           REPORT OF WATER ANALYSIS
NAME AND ADDRESS
SOURCE OF WATER
CONTAINER
SAMPLE DATE
TAKEN BY:
Analysis No. /Date
^ Calcium
z Magnesium
£ Sodium
o
=> Total Cations
^ Total Alkalinity(M)
o
Phenalphthalein
< Alkalinity (P)
o Total Hardness
IJ Sulfate
2: Chloride
% Nitrate
Q. ' "
ifi
ec
*- Total Non-Carbonate
Solids
Silica
Free Carbon Dioxide
Iron (Fe) Unfiltered
o Iron (Fe) Filtered
-j Manganese (Mn)
r Turbidity
£ Co1or
n
Fluoride
^ Arsenic
o.
PH
Specific Conductance
(micromhos)
Temperature (UF)
































































































































































































































                       WATER ANALYSIS  REPORT FORM
                             FIGURE  3-1

                                    13
                                   3-2

-------
take place after fluoride  removal because chlorine exposure degrades activated
alumina performance.   No known investigation has revealed the amount of chlo-
rine that  can be tolerated  by the alumina; however,  process degradation has
been eliminated  on projects  where  pre-chlorination  was  terminated.   Other
treatment processes may be required upstream of the fluoride removal, but the
decision must be made on a case by case basis.

     The  most  practical  concept  is  to  install the  treatment plant  in the
immediate vicinity of the well  (space permitting).   The well  pump  will then
deliver the water through treatment into distribution and/or storage.  If the
existing  well pump  is  oversized (pumps at  a much  higher flow rate  than the
maximum daily requirement),  it should  be resized to deliver slightly more (say
125 percent) than the peak  requirement,  the reason being that the  flow rate
dictates  the  treatment  equipment  size  and  therefore,  the  capital  cost.
Reducing flow rate for an oversized pump results  in excessive  energy costs.  As
explained  later, the  treatment media  volume  is  a  function  of  flow rate.
Consequently, the  treatment  vessels,  pipe  sizes and  chemical  feed  rates all
increase as the  flow rate increases.  Storage should be provided to contain a
minimum of one half the maximum daily consumption requirement.  This is based
on  the  premise  that  consumption takes place during  twelve  hours  of the day.
Then, if treatment operates  during  the entire twenty four hours, storage draw-
down occurs during twelve  hours and recovers during the remaining twelve hours.

     Materials of construction must comply  with  local  building code and health
department requirements in addition to being suitable  for the pH range of 2-13.
Treatment  system equipment must be protected from the elements.  Although not
mandatory,  it  is prudent  to house  the  system within  a  treatment building.
Wastewater resulting from backwash and regeneration  of the treatment media can
only be discharged  in  accordance  with local  ordinance.   There  are several
options for disposal; however,  they are subject to climate,  space and other
environmental  limitations.    Since each of the variables  can significantly
affect both capital and operating costs, the designer must carefully evaluate
the  available wastewater  handling  options  prior to  making  conceptual selec-
tions.

     Throughout  this manual English Units are employed.  For  designers working
with Metric Units, a tabulation of  English  to Metric conversion is provided in
Appendix  E.

3.2  CONCEPTUAL  DESIGN

     The  basic  design  for an activated alumina fluoride removal water  treat-
ment plant is very flexible.  This stage of  design provides a definition of the
process.   However,  it  does  not provide equipment size, arrangement, material
selection detail or  specifications.

     The  designer has  four  basic  options   from which to select a conceptual
design.   Every  combination  of  options will perform the process and, under  a

                                      14
                                      3-3

-------
selected set  of conditions,  a certain  combination may  be preferred.   The
options are as follows:

1)   gravity or pressure flow
2)   single or multiple treatment bed(s)
3)   upflow or downflow treatment flow direction
4)   series or parallel treatment vessel  arrangement

     Through  extensive experimentation  the  most  efficient,  cost  effective
configuration was  found to  be the parallel  downflow multiple  bed  pressure
system.  For maximum cost effectiveness (both capital and operating) two treat-
ment beds  are  optimum.  The two bed  series configuration yields the highest
fluoride loading on the treatment media and the lowest treated water fluoride
level.   However,  this low  fluoride  level is  undesirable and  the  benefits
(economy and water quality) achieved in the blending of treated product water
of the parallel bed configuration (described in Chapter 5) are not available.
The multiple bed parallel  configuration  also  provides  greater flexibility in
treatment  flow rate than the series configuration.  The single treatment unit
configuration is less  efficient unless there is  an exceptionally  large treated
water storage capacity.  In  that  case, the economy of treated water blending
can take place in storage.  Because of  the  space  and  capital requirements, this
is  not  an  economic  concept.   A  gravity flow system does not  provide  the
economics of a pressure system.  Treatment flow rates are lower; repumping of
treated water is always required;  and  capital  costs  are higher.  Unless extra-
ordinary measures  are  taken  to allow  for  loss  of head,  gravity  flow  can be
sensitive  to  fine  suspended  solids in the raw  water.   Downflow treatment in
pilot  test  experiments  has  consistently yielded higher  fluoride  removal
efficiency  than upflow.  Since the downflow concept  utilizes a packed bed, the
flow distribution has been superior.  If the upflow beds were restrained from
expanding,  they  would  in effect also  be  packed.  However, they would forfeit
the necessary capability to backwash.  Once the bed configuration  is defined, a
basic  schematic  flow  diagram  is  prepared (See  Figure  3-2).   This diagram
presents all  of the subsystems.   A  summary  of  this  information,  including
subsystem  components,  is  listed  in Appendix A.   Figure 5-3  is  included in
Chapter  5, "Treatment  Plant Operation",  to  assist  the designer  in  under-
standing the  flow pattern  for a treatment unit  during each mode of operation.

     Regeneration wastewater  treatment is  a separate  technology which  can be
handled by  several different  processes.   That subject is beyond the scope of
this manual.   For  this design  manual  the lined evaporation  pond  concept is
implemented  for  disposal of  regeneration  wastewater.   This  concept is only
applicable  in arid climates where evaporation  rates  are high and  land required
for the basins is available  at  low  cost.   In  regions where evaporation rates
are low, backwash and  regeneration wastewater  can  be neutralized and contained
in a  surge tank  from which slow discharge to a sewer  system is permissible.
This latter disposal method can only be employed when  local-regulatory agency
approval is provided.
                                      15
                                     3-4

-------
       Raw Water
     Sample
    PH
SENSORl
    Treated Water To
_T* Indicator & Alarm
                                        CAUSTIC
                                         PUMPS
                                  CAL
                                       0
                                                A A
                                                              .Vent
                                                        Vo
                                                STIC DAY
                                                TANK
                                        ACID-
                                       PUMPS
                                                TREATMENT

                                                 UNIT NO. 2
                                   —00
CAUSTIC STORAGE
      TANK

   ^Vent
                                              ACID DAY
                                                TANK
                                                           ACID STORAGE
                                                               TANK
                                              -| Future Conn.
                                              H Future Conn.
                                                  ^Backwash Wastewater
                                       Regeneration Wastewater
                           LINED EVAPORATION POND
                   FIGURE 3-2 BASIC  FLOW DIAGRAM
                                      16
                                     3-5

-------
     Prior to proceeding with the design,  financial feasibility must be deter-
mined.  Funding  limits for the project must be  defined.  The designer must make
a determination  that  funding is available to proceed  with  the project; this
requires a preliminary rough project estimate with an accuracy of plus or minus
thirty percent (+30%).   If the preliminary rough estimate exceeds the available
funds, adjustments must be made to increase funding or reduce project costs.

     Prior to proceeding into the next phase,  Preliminary Design, the designer
must finalize the Design Criteria listed in Section 3.1.

3.3  PRELIMINARY DESIGN

     After completion and approval of the Conceptual Design by the client, the
regulatory agency(s),  and any other affected party, the designer proceeds with
the Preliminary Design.   This  includes  sizing  of the equipment,  selecting
materials of construction, determining  an equipment  layout  and upgrading the
Preliminary  Capital Cost  Estimate  to  a  20  percent   (j+20%)  accuracy.    The
deliverable items are:

1)   Process & Instrumentation Diagrams (See Figures 3-3.1 and 3-3.2)

2)   Preliminary Process Equipment  Arrangement  Drawings  (See Figures 3-5 and
     3-6)

3)   Outline Specifications

4)   Preliminary Capital Cost Estimate  (See Figure 3-7)

     Upon  completion  and approval  of  the  Preliminary Design,  the  designer
proceeds with the Final Design.

3.3.1  Treatment Equipment Preliminary  Design

     This  section  provides the basic methodology  for  sizing equipment items
and selecting materials of construction.  An  example illustrating this method
is provided in Appendix B.

3.3.1.1  Treatment Bed and Vessel Design
     Per  discussion  presented  in  Section  3.1,  the recommended  treatment
concept  is based upon  the use of two  treatment  pressure  vessels  piped   in
parallel  using  the downflow  treatment mode.   The recommended  materials   of
construction  are carbon  steel (grade  selection based  upon  cost  effective
availability) for ASME  Code  - Section  VIII,  Division  1  pressure rating with
3/16 in.  thick  potable  water grade  natural  rubber interior  lining.   Vessel
pressure rating to be minimum necessary to satisfy system requirements.

     Basic  technology which  has evolved  from experience  at  existing central
plants dictates  that  the volume of treatment media (V) be one cubic foot per
                                      17
                                      3-6

-------
                                                             Acid - 1/2" 316 S.S.
        70-50 PSI

     	HX»—&-	TV
 Sample
1/2* PVC
 pH SENSOR
             LEGEND
     PVC  - Polyvlnyl Chloride
     C.S.- Carbon  Steel
     S.S.- Stainless Steel
     fX  - Shut-off Valve
     S!  - Butterfly Valve
     r-s|  - Check Valve
     IS]  - Pressure Control Valve
     H  - Expansion Joint
         - Pressure Indicator
         - Temperature Indicator
         - Pressure Indicator/Totalizer
         - Pressure Relief Valve
     $/S  - Straight Side
                                                          Sample -1/2"PVC
                                                                    Backwash Wastewater-
                                                                    '6"PVC
                                                       Regeneration Wastewater
LINED EVAPORATION POND
                    TREATMENT UNITS NO. 1  & 2
                    Vertical  Cylindrical C.S.
                    Pressure  Vessel
                    ASME Code 50 PSIG §  175°F
                    9'-0" Dia.x 8'-0" S/S
                    Lining-3/16" Natural White
                    Rubber
                    NOTE
                    The Design Data Shown on
                    This Diagram Are Taken From
                    Example in Appendix B
     FIGURE 3-3.1 PROCESS  AND  INSTRUMENTATION DIAGRAM   (P  &  ID)
                                               18
                                              3-7

-------
< *".
3 CO
- CO
0«
^/ ^B

£C UJ
o w
£co




Acid 1/2"316 S.S
*
Acid 1/2" 316 S.S
I










to
6
•
t-
,0
*-
0}
3
CO
O







CO*
t
p
*
' w
*»*
T
_0
•»*
(0
s
«
o

X '
U. '
P3 k>4
ACID PUMPS T^

T

r-, 2"C.S.

r
P4
]
**
c
o
> /•
/
/
r »IM*«A
^^Vent 2"C.S.
* *\ -
0 \ =
»- 1 U.
w TO 1
 1
o y i-M-t»4-
2"c-s- P 4 Drain
Apin "TnnAr**r TAMIIT
- MOIL/ O 1 w ri rt O C. IMIMrx
ACID DAY TANK-T4



pH ADJUSTMENT ^<}ID STORAGE ACID DAY
ACID PUMPS -P3 ,P4 TANK -T2 TANK-T4
PVC Head, Teflon 5000 Gallon C.S. 100 Gallon
Diaph., 0.5-5.0 GPH Horizontal Cycindrical Polypropylene
50 PSIG., 110V, 10, 60 HZ, Pressure Vessel Cycindrical,
Interlock W/Well Pump 8 ' -0"0 x 11'-6"S/Sx h" tw. Flat Bottom
W/Cover
y" c.s.
J

'
£ i
PI rk 1P2
, CAUSTIC U h
PUMPS
-3..


1
4-*
C
> /
/


r «I»*A^
p^Vent 2" C.S.
? -\
£ \ =
JTi 1 ,
^ 1 "-
® Tl 1
> y i ^^
j
Vy.O. -1 5
	 -1 CAUSTIC STORAGE TANK
                            CAUSTIC DAY TANK-T3
           REGENERATION
          CAUSTIC PUMP-PI
   Cast Iron Positive Displacement
   2 GPM,  50 PSIG, 110V,  10,  60 HZ
   Interlock W/Well Pump
pH ADJUSTMENT

CAUSTIC PUMP -P2
                      CAUSTIC STORAGE

                      TANK -Tl
PVC Head, Teflon
Oiaph.,0.25-2.5 GPH
50 PSIG.,110V,10,60HZ
                     5000 Gallon C.S.
                     Horizontal  Cycindrical
            ...      Pressure Vessel
Interlock W/Well  Pump  8'-0"0 x U'-6" S/S X 3/8" tw.
                     W/10KW Inversion
                     Heater
CAUSTIC DAY
TANK -T3

150 Gallon
Polypropylene
Cycindrical
Flat Bottom
W/Cover
FIGURE   3-3.2   PROCESS  AND INSTRUMENTATION  DIAGRAM  (P &  ID)
                                                19
                                                3-8

-------
gallon per minute of treated water flow rate  (g).  This provides a superficial
(or empty bed) residence time of  7.5 minutes,  which  is  conservative.   Actual
residence time is approximately half the superficial residence time.  That is
true because the  space  between the grains of media is approximately 50 percent
of the total bed  volume.  Where multiple beds are used, the volume of treatment
media per unit is equal to the total treatment flow rate  divided by the number
of treatment beds (N).   See  Figure 3-4 for Treatment Unit  illustration.  (NOTE:
When  raw  water  is  bypassed and blended  back with  treated  water,   only  the
treated water  is included  in  sizing  the  bed.)  In order  to  prevent "wall
effects", bed diameter (d)  should be equal or greater than the bed depth (h).
Good practice dictates that bed depth be a minimum of three feet and a maximum
of six feet.  At  lesser than minimum depth, distribution problems may develop;
and, at greater than maximum depth, fine material removal and  pressure loss may
become a problem.

     At the  Gila Bend, Arizona fluoride removal  plant,  there  are two 10 ft-
 0_in.  diameter by 5  ft-0  in.  deep treatment beds.  At  design flow each 380
ft  bed treats 380  gpm.  Each  treatment unit operates  at 450 gpm during peak
consumption  periods.   Each  unit has been  successfully  operated at  treatment
flows  as  high as  600  gpm,  a  treatment rate  that  exceeds  one  and one-half
gallons per  minute  per cubic  foot.  That  flow rate reduces  the superficial
residence time to five  minutes which is  recommended as a  minimum limit.  As the
superficial  residence  time decreases,  two undesirable features occur.  First,
the treatment is  less efficient,  that is,  treated water fluoride concentration
does not reach as  low  a level; and second,  regeneration frequency  increases
requiring  more  operator  attention  and  proportionately more downtime  for
regeneration of  the beds.   Conversely,  lowering the  treatment flow rate below
the suggested  1  gpm/ft  level  increases  the size of the  treatment beds and
their vessels, thereby increasing capital cost and space requirements.

     Pressure vessel fabrication  is standardized  by  diameter in multiples of
6 in.  increments.  Tooling  for manufacture of pressure vessel dished heads is
set up  for  that  standard.   Design dimensions  differentiate  between pressure
vessel and treatment bed diameters.  The vessel outside diameter  (D)  is approx-
imately 1 in. greater  than  the bed (or vessel inside) diameter which provides
for both  vessel  walls with lining.    If  the  pressure  is  high  (100  psig or
greater) the 1 in.  will increase  to  reflect  the increased  vessel wall thick-
ness.

     Although there are many methods of distributing the water flow through a
treatment bed, the method which  has been successfully used in fluoride removal
plants  that are  presently  in  operation is recommended.  The  water is piped
downward into  the vessel.   This diverts the  flow into  a horizontal pattern.
From  there  it  radiates in  a horizontal plane prior  to  starting its downward
flow through the bed.  The  bed, in turn,  is  supported by a false flat bottom
which  is  supported by  the  bottom head of the  vessel by means of concentric
rings.  The  false flat bottom also supports the horizontal header and plastic
fabric  sleeved  perforated  lateral collection system.    Treatment  media is
placed  in the vessel through a circular manway  (minimum diameter 16 in.) with
                                      20
                                     3-9

-------
        FREEBOARD

        50%  BED
        EXPANSION
        TREATMENT
        MEDIA
                                   TREATMENT VESSEL
                           SYMBOLS

             q  - Treated water flow rate (gpm)
             N  - Number of Treatment Beds.
             d  - Treatment bed diameter (ft.)
             h  - Treatment bed depth (ft.)
             V  - Treatment bed volume - ird  h  (ft.  )
             Md - Density of Treatment Media (Ib./ft. )
             M  - Weight of Media
             D  - Outside diameter of Treatment Vessel (ft.)
             du - Depth of Dished Pressure Head (ft.)
             H
             H  - Overall height of  Treatment Vessel  (ft.)
         GIVEN
             h < d, 3'-0" < h < 6'-0",  V - C./N (ft.3)
             H - 2 dH + h + h/2 + 6",  d - *»q/N -a h
             D - d + 1"
             M. • 50 Ib./ft (varies with packing characteristics of media in vessel)
             M^ - Md x V - 50V (Ib.)

FIGURE 3-4    TREATMENT BED AND VESSEL  DESIGN CALCULATIONS
                                             21
                                            3-10

-------
                                      4'-0"
                                    *
                                  CAUSTIC
                               STORAGE TANK
                    TREATMENT
                     UNIT NO. 2
TREATMENT
 UNIT NO. 1
FIGURE 3-5   PRELIMINARY EQUIPMENT ARRANGEMENT PLAN
                         22
                        3-11

-------
hinged cover  in the top  head  of the vessel.   The Treatment  Bed and Vessel
Design is illustrated in Figure 3-4.  A typical example for determining treat-
ment bed and treatment vessel dimensions is presented in Appendix B.

3.3.1.2  Pipe Design
     Material must be suitable  for ambient  temperature, pH 2-13, system press-
ure and potable water service.   Due to the  low pH, carbon steel is not accept-
able.  Stainless  steel  is acceptable; however,  it  is  too  costly.  There are
several plastic materials  such  as PVC,  polypropylene,  and  high density poly-
ethylene that are  satisfactory.  Of  those, PVC is usually the best selection
because of its  availability and  ease of  fabrication and  assembly.  The draw-
backs to the plastic materials  are their  loss of  strength at elevated tempera-
tures  (above  100  F);  their coefficient of  thermal  expansion;  their external
support requirements; their deterioration from  exposure to sunlight; and their
vulnerability  to  damage  from  impact.    Nevertheless,  these  liabilities  are
greatly  outweighed by  the low  cost  and  suitability  for  the service.   The
designer can easily protect the piping from all of  the above concerns, except
elevated ambient  and/or water  temperatures.   If  elevated temperature exists,
the  use  of  polypropylene lined carbon  steel  flanged pipe  (and  cast  iron
fittings) is recommended.   This material provides the strength  and  support that
is lacking in the pure plastic materials.

     The designer must economically  size the piping  system to allow  for deliv-
ery  of design flow without excessive  pressure losses.  If  water velocities
present  conditions  for  water  hammer (due  to fast  closing  valves, etc.), the
designer must include shock absorbing devices to prevent that occurrence.

     Isolation  and process control  valves should  be wafer  style butterfly
type, except in low flow rate systems where small  pipe  size dictates  the use of
true union ball valves (See Figure 3-2  for  location).  The use of  inexpensive,
easily maintained valves   that  operate manually  is recommended.   The valves
could also be automated  by the  inclusion of pneumatic or electric operators and
controls.  Automation is not recommended because the cost of the hardware and
its maintenance outweighs  the savings of plant operators' time.

     See Appendix B for  pipe;size design  using  the example previously employed
for vessel and  treatment media design.

3.3.1.3  Instrumentation Design
     Design  is  a  misnomer for  this  category of equipment.    Literally the
designer  specifies  the  system  functional  requirements  which are  adapted  to
commercially available instruments.   Included are:

         Instrument                            Range                Accuracy
pH sensor/indicator/alarm                     0-14                    +^ 0.1
pressure indicator                            varies*                 +_ 1%
temperature indicator (optional)              30 -120 F               +_ 1%
flow indicator/totalizer                      varies*                 +_ 2%
*range to be compatible with application,  maximum  measurement  not to exceed
90 percent of range.
                                      23
                                     3-12

-------
3.3.1.4  Acid Storage and Feed Subsystem
     The acid storage tank is  sized to contain tank truck bulk delivery quanti-
ties of concentrated  sulfuric  acid.   Bulk delivery provides  the lowest unit
price for the chemical.  In small plants (less than 175 gpm) acid consumption
may not  be  enough  to justify large  volume  purchase  of  chemicals.   In the
smaller plants,  drums  or even carboys may be  more practical; therefore, for
that type operation,  the requirement  for  a  storage  tank  is  eliminated.   A
50,000 pound tank truck delivers  3,250 gallons  of 66 B'H^O  (15.5 Ib/gal).  A
5,000 gallon tank provides  a  50  percent cushion.  The example  in Appendix B
illustrates the method of designing the components of  this system.

     The carbon  steel  tank  does  not  require  an interior lining; however, the
interior must be sand  blasted  and  vacuum cleaned prior to filling with acid.
The  storage  tank must be  placed  outside of  the  treatment  building.   The
66 B'H SO,  freezes at -20 F.  Therefore unless the treatment plant is located
in an  extremely  cold climate, no weather  protection  is required.   The tank
should be painted white to reflect  sunlight;  this will prevent  heat gain  in the
tank which heats  the  acid making it more aggressive. All piping  is to be 2 in.
carbon steel with threaded cast iron fittings.

     The acid pumps  are standard  diaphragm  models with  materials  of construct-
ion suitable for 66  B'H.SO,  service.   Standard  chemical pumps are specified by
the designer.  In the preliminary design, the  sizing is  adequate  for  layout and
estimating.    Acid  feed  rate  varies with  the  total alkalinity  and the free
carbon dioxide content of the  raw  water,  and in  some  cases,  is much higher,
requiring larger pumps and day  tanks.   The  actual acid  feed  rate  is easily
determined experimentally by  adjusting  a  raw water sample pH  to 5.5 by acid
titration.   Acid  consumption for  raw  water  pH  reduction ( is  discussed  in
Appendix C.   In normal treatment plant operation,  the water quality will vary
from time to  time.   Therefore,  the  plant  operator must check the pH period-
ically and maintain it at 5.5.  The pump  stroke  speed and length  are to be
adjustable to  accommodate these  variations.   The  pH  probes  that are used to
control pH must be calibrated against standard buffers  at least once per month.

3.3.1.5  Caustic Soda  Storage and Feed Subsystem
     The caustic soda storage  tank is also  sized  to  contain  tank truck bulk
delivery quantities  of 50 percent  sodium hydroxide.   The caustic is used for
treatment bed regeneration  and neutralization of  treated water.  Regeneration
frequency is  a  function  of raw  water  fluoride  concentration,  flow rate and
treatment  media  fluoride  capacity.    The  amount  of caustic  required  to
neutralize the treated water,  that is to raise the pH  from 5.5  to 7.5, varies
considerably.    The  actual caustic  feed  rate  is easily  determined experi-
mentally by readjusting the treated water pH  by titrating a sample with caustic
until  the  desired pH  is achieved.   In raw water with high  alkalinity the
lowering  of  pH produces  high  levels of dissolved carbon  dioxide (CO.).  In
those waters removal of the CO^ by  aeration raises the  pH to the  desirea  level
providing  a less expensive alternative  than addition of caustic.   In low
alkalinity water the  chemical  addition  is  less expensive.   The  sizing of the
carbon steel caustic  storage tank  is covered in  Appendix B.  This vessel must
                                      24
                                     3-13

-------
be heat treated to stress relieve welds.   The carbon  steel does not require an
interior lining; however,  it  does require sand blasting  and vacuum cleaning
prior to filling.  All  piping  is to  be 2 in. carbon steel with threaded cast
iron fittings.

     Fifty percent sodium hydroxide freezes at 55 F;  therefore, it must main-
tain  a  minimum  temperature of  70 F.    This is  handled  by a  temperature
controlled electrical immersion  heater.   For safety  reasons the storage tank
must be outside of the treatment building where ambient temperatures might drop
quite low.   To conserve electrical energy required  for heating,  the storage
tank may be insulated and/or housed in a  separate enclosure.  If not insulated
or  housed,  the tank  must  be painted  white  to  reflect  sunlight  and prevent
chemical overheating.

     A pump  is required  to  feed  50 percent NaOH into the effluent main where
the low pH treated water is neutralized.   For regeneration, a larger caustic
feed pump is required for pumping  the concentrated caustic  to a mixing tee in
the raw water branch pipe.   In the mixing tee the caustic is diluted to the 1
percent (by weight) concentration  required to regenerate the treatment bed.

3.3.1.6  Wastewater Lined Evaporation Pond
     In  the  example  used in Appendix B we  have  assumed  that the wastewater
disposal option that is most cost  effective  as well as preferred by the regu-
latory agency is a lined evaporation  pond.  This method is used in arid regions
in  the desert southwest.  It is  not a viable method in the  humid southeast or
cold climate of the northern tier of states.   In  those areas a viable disposal
option is to neutralize the  regeneration wastewater with acid as it leaves the
treatment vessel  and collect the  entire regeneration wastewater  batch  in a
surge tank.  The neutralized wastewater is then bled at a controlled flow rate
to  the  sanitary  sewer.   In the  sewer it blends  with the defluoridated water
that has been discharged to waste.

     To size the lined evaporation pond  the  basic information required is the
average  annual volume  of  regeneration wastewater  to  be evaporated  and the
average annual evaporation rate.  The former  is determined by the designer and
the  latter  is  obtained from the  national  weather bureau (or  in  some cases,
state university  climatological  departments).  Treatment plant production is
normally much  higher  in  summer  than  winter, and  evaporation rate  is  also
correspondingly higher  in summer.  The ponds  have sloped  sides, pond depth to
be  8  ft  (minimum).   Ponds  are  to be lined with 30 mil  reinforced hypalon, a
material  that  is  not vulnerable  to ultraviolet radiation deterioration or
exposure to pH 12.   The dissolved solids will concentrate  and precipitate in
the pond.

3.3.2  Preliminary Equipment Arrangement

     With all of the major  equipment  size and configuration  information avail-
able, the designer proceeds to  prepare a layout (arrangement drawings).  The
layout provides sufficient  space for proper  installation, operation and main-
tenance  for  the  treatment  system  as  well  as each individual equipment item.
                                      ^ O
                                     3-14

-------
U.S. Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) regulations must be
applied to the designer's decisions  during  the  equipment arrangement effort.
These requirements may be supplemented or superceded by state or local health
and safety regulations,  or, in some cases,  insurance regulations.  The designer
must also adhere to a compact arrangement  to minimize space and resulting cost
requirements.  Figures  3-5 and  3-6  illustrate  a typical preliminary arrange-
ment plan and elevation. This arrangement provides no frills; but it does have
ample space for ease of operation and maintenance.  Easy access to all valves
and instruments reduces plant operator effort.

     The building that  protects  the  treatment  system (and operator)  from the
elements is normally a  standard  pre-engineered  steel building.   These build-
ings which  are modularized  units  are  low  cost.   The  designer  selects  the
standard building  dimensions that  satisfies the  installation,  operation and
maintenance  space  requirements  for  the  treatment  system.   There  are  many
suppliers of  this  type  of building; installed  costs are highly competitive.
The building must provide access doors, emergency shower and eye  wash,  and a
lab bench with sink.  All other features are optional.

     When  the arrangement is  completed,  the designer  can proceed  with the
preliminary cost estimate.

3.3.3  Preliminary Cost Estimate

     The designer prepares the preliminary cost  estimate  based upon the equip-
ment that has been selected,  the  equipment arrangement and the building selec-
tion.  The designer then takes off  the  equipment,  applies unit prices to labor
and material,  and  finally summarizes  in  a  format that  is preferred  by the
owner.   (See Table 3-1  for example).  This estimate is  to have an accuracy of
plus or minus 20  percent (j+20%).  In  order to assure sufficient budget for the
project it  is prudent to estimate on  the high  side  at  this  stage of design.
This may be accomplished by means of a contingency to cover unforeseen costs,
an inflation escalation factor, or estimating with budget prices furnished by
suppliers and contractors.   Budget prices are  roughly  10 percent  higher than
competitive bid prices.
                                      26
                                     3-15

-------
CO
 I
                                                 FRONT ELEVATION
                            ACID STORAGE TANK
                                                II
                                    SIDE ELEVATION


FIGURE 3-6  PRELIMINARY EQUIPMENT  ARRANGEMENT  ELEVATIONS

-------
              TABLE 3.1.  PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE-EXAMPLE FOR
                   FLUORIDE REMOVAL WATER TREATMENT PLANT
                      PRELIMINARY CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE
Location:
Flow Rate:  600 gpm
Date:

Process Equipment                                                    Cost, $

Treatment Vessels                                                     37,000
Treatment Media                                                       21,000
Process Piping, Valves and Accessories                                18,000
Instruments and Controls                                              10,000
Chemical Storage Tanks                                                22,000
Chemical Pumps, Piping and Accessories                                 6,000
                                                  Subtotal           114,000

Process Equipment Installation

Mechanical                                                            35,000
Electrical                                                            10,000
Painting and Miscellaneous                                             5,000
                                                  Subtotal            50,000

Miscellaneous Installed Items

Wastewater Lined Evaporation Pond                                    140,000
Building and Concrete                                                 30,000
Site Work, Fence and Miscellaneous                                    10,000
                                                  Subtotal           180,000
Contingency 10%                                                       36,000

                                                  *Total             380,000

*Engineering, Finance Charges, Real Estate Cost and Taxes not included.

3.3.4  Preliminary Design Revisions

     The  Preliminary  design package (described above)  is  then submitted for
approval prior to proceeding with the Final Design.  This package may require
the approval of regulatory authorities,  as well as  the owner.  If there are any
changes  requested,   the  designer  must  incorporate  them  and   resubmit  for
approval.   Once all  requested changes  are  included and  Preliminary  Design
approval  is received, the designer can proceed with the Final Design.

3.4  FINAL DESIGN

     After completion and approval of the Preliminary Design by  the client et
al,  the designer proceeds with the Final  Design.  This includes  detail design
   '         6                        28
                                     3-17

-------
 of  all  of  the process  equipment  and  piping,  complete process  system  analysis,
 complete detail design of the building including site work,  and a final capital
 costs estimate accurate  to within  ten percent.  The deliverable items are:

     1)    Complete  set of construction plans and  specifications

     2)    Final Capital  Cost Estimate (See Table  3-2)

                 TABLE 3.2.  FINAL COST ESTIMATE-EXAMPLE FOR
                    FLUORIDE REMOVAL  WATER TREATMENT PLANT
 	FINAL CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE 	

 Location:
 Flow Rate:  600 gpm
 Date:

 Process Equipment                                                    Cost, $

 Treatment  Vessels                                                     33,000
 Treatment  Media                                                       20,500
 Process Piping, Valves and Accessories                                16,400
 Instruments and Controls                                               8,300
 Chemical Storage Tanks                                                21,000
 Chemical Pumps, Piping andf Accessories                                6,300
                                                  Subtotal           105,500

 Process Equipment Installation

 Mechanical               .                                             36,000
 Electrical                                                             7,000
 Painting and Miscellaneous                                             4,500
                                                  Subtotal            47,500

 Miscellaneous Installed Items

 Wastewater Lined Evaporation Pond                                    138,000
 Building and Concrete                                                 28,000
 Site Work,  Fence and Miscellaneous                                    n,QQQ
                                                  Subtotal           177,000
 Contingency 4%                                                        17,000

                                                  *Total             347,000
*Engineering, Finance Charges, Real Estate Cost and Taxes not included.
                                     29
                                    3-18

-------
     The designer starts the Final Design with the treatment system equipment
(including the lined  evaporation pond); continues with the building (including
concrete  slabs  and   foundations,  earthwork  excavation/backfill/compaction,
heating, cooling, bathroom, painting, lighting and utilities);  and completes
with the  site work (including utilities, drainage,  paving  and  landscaping).
The latter items apply to every type of treatment plant; but,  though they are
integral with the treatment system,  they are not addressed in this manual.  The
only portions  of  the Final Design that will  be  discussed  are  the pertinent
aspects of the  treatment equipment which  were  not covered in  the Preliminary
Design  sections.   During  the  Conceptual Design  and Preliminary  Design the
designer concentrated  on defining the basic equipment  that accomplished the
required function.   The  decision  was cost conscious using  minimum sizes (or
standard  sizes) and  least expensive  materials   that  satisfied  the  service
and/or environment.  However,  in the Final Design this effort  can be defeated
by not heeding  simple basic cost control principles.   Some of  these are:

     1)   Minimize detail (e.g. pipe supports-use one style, one material and
          components common to all sizes).

     2)   Eliminate bends in pipe runs (some bends are necessary - those that
          are optional increase costs).

     3)   Minimize  field  labor-shop  fabricate where  possible  (e.g.  access
          platforms  and  pipe  supports  can be  supported  by  brackets  that are
          shop  fabricated on vessel).

     4)   Skid mount major equipment items (skids  distribute weight of vessels
          over   large   floor   areas,   thereby  costly   foundation  work  is
          eliminated).

     5)   Use  treatment  vessels  as heat  sink  to  provide building cooling or
          heating  or both.   (Eliminates heating  and/or  cooling equipment in
          addition to reducing energy cost.)

     6)   Simplify everything.

     Besides  holding  down costs  the  designer  must analyze  all subsystems
(refer  to P&ID  in  Figures  3-3.1  and  3-3.2)  and account for all components in
both  equipment specifications and installation drawings.   The drawings must
provide  all  information necessary to manufacture  and  install  the equipment.
The designer must exercise extra  effort to eliminate ambiguity  in detail and/or
specified requirements.  All items must be satisfactory  for  service conditions
besides  being able to perform required functions.  Each  item must be easy to
maintain; spare parts necessary for continuous operation must be included with
the  original equipment.   All  tools required  for  initial startup as well as
operation and maintenance  must be furnished during the construction phase of
the project.   Once construction, equipment installation and check out are com-
plete,  the treatment plant  should  proceed into operation without  disruption.


                                      30
                                     3-19

-------
     When all  components  in each  of  the subsystems have  been selected,  the
designer  should  run  hydraulic   analysis   calculations   to   determine  the
velocities and pressure drops  through the system.   Calculations are to be run
for normal treatment flow  and backwash  flow.  The latter is more severe but of
short duration.  If  pressure  losses are excessive, the designer must modify the
design  by  decreasing   or eliminating  losses   (e.g.,  increase  pipe  size,
eliminate bends or restrictions).

     The designer must  include several functional checkout requirements to be
accomplished upon completion of installation.  All piping must be cleaned and
pressure tested prior  to  startup.  All leaks must  be corrected and retested.
Recommended test pressure  is  150  percent of design  pressure.   Potable water
piping  and  vessels  must  be disinfected prior  to  startup.    All  electrical
systems must satisfy a functional  checkout.  All instruments  are  to be cali-
brated; if accuracy  does not meet requirements stated in Section 3.3.1.3,  the
instruments are to be replaced.

     When the plant  operation begins, a check on actual  system  pressure drop is
required.  If there  is  a discrepancy between design and actual pressure drop,
the cause must be determined (obstruction in line,  faulty valve, installation
error,  design  error,  etc.) and  rectified.   Pressure  relief  valves  must be
tested; if not accurate, they must be adjusted or replaced.

3.4.1  Treatment Equipment Final Design

     This section provides discussion on details that  apply  specifically to
Fluoride Removal Water  Treatment Plants.

3.4.1.1  Treatment Bed  and Vessel Design
     The treatment medium was designed by determination of bed dimensions and
resulting weight  in the  Preliminary  Design  (see  Section 3.3.1.1).    It is
recommended that ten percent extra treatment medium be  ordered.   For lowest
price and ease of handling, the material  is to be ordered in 100 pound bags on
pallets.  The material  specification requires Alcoa F-l, 28+48 mesh activated
alumina, or equal (see  Section 1.2).  If an "equal" is to be furnished, a pilot
test  must  demonstrate  that  the  process  capability  as well  as  the physical
durability  of  the  substitute  material  be  equal to that  of  the  specified
material.

     The vessel design must be simple.   The vessel must have a support system
to transfer its loaded weight  to  the  foundation and ultimately  to  the soil.
The loaded weight includes the  media, the water,  attached appurtenances (plat-
form, pipe filled with  liquid, etc.) as  well as  the vessel itself.  The support
legs should be as short as possible reducing  head room requirements as well as
cost.   The  legs are to be integral with a support  frame (skid)  that  will
distribute the weight over an area greater than the dimensions of the vessel.
This  distribution  eliminates  point  loads of  vessel  support  legs,  thereby
costly piers,  footings, and excavation requirements are eliminated.   The skid

                                     31
                                    3-20

-------
must have provisions  for  anchorage  to  the foundation.   Exterior brackets (if
uniform and simply detailed) are not costly and provide supports that eliminate
need for cumbersome costly field fabrications.  Conversely, interior brackets
though required to anchor (or  support)  vessel  internal distribution or collec-
tion systems must  be held to bare minimum as they  are  very costly to rubber
line.  Rubber lining  is  recommended  over  less costly coatings because of its
resistance  to granular  activated  alumina  abrasion.   Rubber lining resiliency
provides better resistance to abrasion than hard  epoxy  type linings.   Vessel
interior lining is to extend  through  vessel openings out to the outside edge of
flange faces.  Openings in the vessels must be limited to the following:

     1)   Influent pipe - enters vertically at center of top head.

     2)   Effluent pipe  - exits horizontally through vertical straight side
          immediately above false flat bottom in front of vessel.

     3)   Air/vacuum valve (vent) - mounts vertically on top head adjacent to
          influent pipe.

     4)   Media Removal  - exits horizontally through vertical straight side
          immediately above false flat bottom at orientation assigned to this
          function.

     5)   Manway - 16 in.  diameter  (minimum)  mounted on top head with center
          line  located  within  three  feet of center of vessel  and oriented
          towards work platform.  Manway cover to be hinged or davited.

     It is  recommended that pad  flanges be used  for pipe openings in lieu of
nozzles.  Pad  flanges are flanges that are integral with the tank wall.  The
exterior faces are drilled and  tapped  for  threaded studs.  These save cost of
material, labor and are much easier to line;  they also reduce the dimensional
requirements of the vessel.  The vessel also requires  lifting  lugs suitable for
handling the weight  of  the empty vessel during  installation.  Once installed
the vessel  must be shimmed and  leveled.  All  space between the bottom surface
of the skid structure and the foundation must  be  sealed with  an expansion type
grout; provisions must be included to  drain the area under the vessel.

     The type  of  vessel internal distribution and  collection piping used in
operational fluoride  removal plants  is defined in the Preliminary Design (see
Section  3.3.1.1).    Since there are  many acceptable vessel  internal design
concepts, configuration  details will be left  to  sound engineering  judgement.
The main points to consider in  the design  are as follows:

     1)   Distribution  to be uniform

     2)   Provide  minimum  pressure  drop   through  internal  piping  (but
          sufficient  to  assure  uniform distribution)

     3)   Prevent  wall  effects  and channeling

                                      32
                                     3-21

-------
     4)   Collect treated water within two inches of bottom of treatment bed

     5)   Anchor  internal  piping  components  to vessel to  prevent any hori-
          zontal or vertical movement during operation

     6)   Materials of construction to be suitable for  pH  range of  2-13, (PVC,
          polypropylene, stainless steel are acceptable)

     Underdrain  failures are  undesirable;  treatment media loss,  service dis-
ruption and labor to repair problems  are very costly.  A service platform with
access ladder is required for use  in loading treatment media into  the vessel.
Handrail, toe plate and other OSHA required features must be included.

3.4.1.2  Pipe Design
     The designer reviews each piping subsystem  to select each of the subsystem
components  (see  P&ID,  Figures 3-3.1 and  3-3.2).   Exclusive of  the chemical
subsystems, there are five  piping  subsystems which are listed in the Conceptual
Design (see Section 3.2); they are:

1)   Raw water influent main

2)   Treated water effluent main

3)   Wastewater discharge main

4)   Treatment unit branch piping

5)   Sample panel piping

     The designer now  proceeds  with the detail design of each  of those sub-
systems.   First,  the designer  defines  the equipment  specification  for each
equipment component in each subsystem.  This is  followed by a detailed instal-
lation drawing which locates each component and provides access for operation
and maintenance.   As each subsystem nears completion the designer incorporates
provisions  for  pipe system  support  and  anchorage,  as well  as  for  thermal
expansion/contraction.

     The interface where the  concentrated  chemical  and treatment  unit branch
piping join is designated as a mixing tee.  A special detail (see  Figure 3-7)
is required to assure that heat of dilution of concentrated corrosive chemicals
imparts no damage to the piping materials.  The key factor is  to prevent flow
of concentrated chemical when raw water (dilution water) is not flowing.  The
dilution water will dissipate the heat.   The actual injection  must take place
in the center of the raw water pipe through an "injection quill" that extends
from the concentrated chemical pipe.   The quill material must be  capable of
withstanding the high heat  of dilution that develops  specifically with sul-
furic acid and to a  lesser degree with caustic soda.   Type 316  stainless steel
and teflon are satisfactory.  It is also  very  important that the concentrated

                                     33
                                     3-22

-------
RAW
PVC

>(J
(










t
t
c
t




If
1
1'-0 P-L





*




-_


I
I 2'0 P-L




PVC

L
0*

       T'C.S.NPT
1/2"x  .049 tw-316  S/S TUBING
              50% NaOH  «6*Be'H2SO4
                       POLYPROPYLENE ORIFICE RING SPACER
                      316 S/S TUBING
                                    PVC - POLYVINYLCHLORIDE  PIPE
                                    P-L - POLYPROPYLENE LINED PIPE
            FIGURE  3-7 CHEMICAL MIXING TEE DETAIL
                               34
                              3-23

-------
chemical be injected upward from below; otherwise concentrated chemicals with
specific gravity higher than the  water  will seep by gravity into the raw water
when flow stops.  As  described  later, the chemical pumps are to be de-energized
when the well pump is not running.

     The treated water pH must be carefully monitored.  A pH sensor installed
in the treated water main indicates the  pH at  an analyzer mounted at the sample
panel.  This analyzer is  equipped with  adjustable high and low level pH alarms.
The alarms are interlocked with the well pump  control (magnetic starter), shut-
ting it down when out of tolerance pH excursions  occur.  A visual and/or audio
alarm is also initiated to notify the operator regarding the event.

     A  chemical  mixing tee identical  to  those  in the  treatment  unit branch
piping  is employed in the treated water main for  the  injection of caustic to
raise pH in the treated water.  If aeration for removal of CO is used in lieu
of caustic  injection  for raising treated  water  pH,  then system  pressure is
dissipated and the treated water must be repressurized.  If the water utility
has ground  level storage tanks,  the  aeration-neutralization concept  can be
accomplished without need for  a  clearwell  and repressurization.   The aerator
can be installed at an elevation that will permit the neutralized treated water
to flow to storage via gravity.

     Easy maintenance is  an important feature  in all piping systems.  Air bleed
valves  shall be installed at all high points; drain valves shall be installed
at  all  low  points.    This  assists  the plant operator  in both  filling  and
draining pipe systems.  Air/vacuum valve and pressure relief valve discharges
are to  be  piped to  drains.  This  feature  satisfies both operator safety and
housekeeping requirements.  Bypass piping for flow control,  pressure control,
flow meter and other  in-line mechanical accessories is  optional.  Bypass piping
is costly and requires  extra  space.   However, if  continuous treatment plant
operation is mandatory, bypass piping must be included.

3.4.1.3  Instrument Design
     Ease  of maintenance  is  very  important.   Instruments  require  periodic
calibration and/or replacement.  Without removal provisions,  the task creates
a mess.  Temperature  indicators require thermal wells installed permanently in
the pipe.   Pressure indicators  require  gauge cocks  to shut  off  flow in the
branch  to the instrument.  pH  probes require isolation valves and union type
mounting connections (avoids twisting of signal cables).  Supply of pH standard
buffers (4.0, 7.0 and 10.0)  are to be specified for pH instrument calibration.
A  lab  bench  is  to  be located near the Sample Panel.   Lab  equipment  to be
specified  to include  wall cabinet,  base  cabinet with chemical  resistant
counter top and  integral  sink  (with  cold water tap), 110V/10/60Hz 20 amp duplex
receptacle,  lab equipment/glassware/reagents for  analysis  of fluoride  and
other ion.°.

3.4.1.4  Acid Storage and Feed Subsystem
     Operator safety for  work  within close  proximity of highly corrosive chem-
icals takes priority over process  functional requirements.   Emergency shower

                                     35
                                     3-24

-------
and  eyewash must be  located within  thirty  feet of  any work  area at which
operator exposure to acid (or caustic soda) exists.  Protective clothing must
be specified.  Neutralization materials  (e.g.  sodium carbonate) must be pro-
vided to handle  spills.   Potential  spill areas must be physically contained.
Containment volumes must be sufficient to retain maximum spillage.

     To minimize corrosion of acid pipe material, acid flow rate  is recommended
to be less  than  0.1  ft/sec.   Threaded pipe and fittings are not recommended;
tubing and Swagelok fittings  are recommended.   PVC is also adequate except for
its  vulnerability  to  damage from external  loads for which  reason  it is not
recommended.   Positive  backflow prevention   must  be  incorporated  in  each
branch.   Day tanks must be vented to atmosphere, have  a valved drain,  and have
a fill line float valve for fail safe backup control to prevent overflow.

     There  is one acid  feed  pump for each treatment vessel.  Acid pump power
should be interlocked with the well  pump  so that the acid pump is de-energized
when well pump is not  running.   Acid  pumps are  to have ball checks and pressure
relief which  recycles  acid  back to  the  day  tank.    Acid  flow  rate  is  to be
manually controlled to provide  the  required  raw water pH.   If  the feed pumps
are mounted above the day tank,  foot  valves are required.   The designer must
also include anti-siphon provisions in the system.

3.4.1.5   Caustic Soda Storage and Feed System
     The safety  requirements stated  for  acid  (Section 3.4.1.4)  also apply to
caustic   soda.   Vinegar is satisfactory  for - neutralization  of  minor caustic
spills.

     The day tank and pump design  features recommended  for  acid systems also
apply to caustic. The polypropylene day tank should be translucent with gallon
calibrations on  the  tank wall.   The regeneration pump can  be  calibrated by
means of timing  the flow  and  adjusting  as necessary to arrive  at  the design
flow rate.   An optional rotameter can be used,  but varying caustic temperatures
will affect accuracy.    Carbon   steel  threaded pipe  is  recommended  for the
service.  PVC is not  recommended because of  its vulnerability  to damage from
external loads.

3.4.1.6   Wastewater Lined Evaporation Pond
     Pond bottom and top of berm elevations are to be established to provide:

     1.    Positive drainage away from pond.

     2.    Anchorage for pond liner on top of berm.

     3.    Balance of  cut  and fill.   All excavated material  is used to form
          berm.

     4.    Top of berm to provide 1  ft-0  in.  minimun freeboard above top level
          of  pond.    In  high  wind  locations,  the designer  must  provide
                                                   i
                                      36
                                     3-25

-------
          sufficient  freeboard  to  prevent  waves from  breaking over  top  of
          berm.

     The hypalon liner is to be factory assembled for minimum number of field
joints.  Placement of  liner and sealing of  field  joints must be performed under
strict  supervision  of manufacturer's  trained  representatives.   A  steel  or
concrete splash pad  is required  to absorb  impact of wastewater stream entering
pond.  The hypalon  liner  does not require protective gravel,  sand or soil on
its sloped banks; however, in order that the  liner be  held in place, six inches
of water shall be placed in the pond immediately after placement and testing.

3.4.2  Final Drawings

     As stated above,  all of  the  information  required  for  complete installa-
tion of  a fluoride  removal water treatment plant must  appear in  the  final
construction drawing and specification package.

     Isometric drawings for  each piping subsystem are recommended; these views
clarify the assembly for the installer.  Cross referencing drawings, notes, and
specifications are also recommended.

3.4.3  Final Capital Cost Estimate

     Similar to the  preparation  of the  preliminary cost estimate, the designer
prepares the final cost estimate based upon a take off of the installed system.
The estimate is now based upon exact detailed  information rather than general
information which was used  during the  preliminary estimate.   The  estimate is
presented in the same format (see  Table 3-2) and is  to be accurate within ten
percent  (^10%).   Since financial  commitments  are consummated  at  this stage,
this degree of accuracy is required.

3.4.4  Final Design Revisions

     Upon their completion,  the  final  construction drawings and specifications
are submitted  for approval  to the owner and the regulatory authorities.   If
there  are changes  or additional  requirements  requested,  the  designer  must
incorporate them and resubmit for  approval.   If the  designer has communicated
with the  approving  parties, time  consuming  resubmittals  should not be neces-
sary.  Upon receipt of approval,  the  owner  with assistance  from the engineer
goes out for bids for the  construction of  the fluoride removal water treatment
plant.

3.5  REFERENCES

1.   Alcoa Product  Data,  Calculating  Pressure  Drop through  Packed  Beds  of
     Spheres and  Mesh Granular Material,  January 1,  1971,  #GB4A,  Aluminum
     Company of America,  Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
                                     37
                                    3-26

-------
                                  CHAPTER 4

                    CENTRAL TREATMENT SYSTEM CAPITAL COST


4.1  INTRODUCTION

     The designer is obligated to provide his client with the least expensive
central treatment system that  can remove  the excess fluoride from a sufficient
quantity of potable water that will  satisfy all consumption requirements.  The
economic feasibility evaluation  must  include the initial capital  cost along
with follow-up operating and maintenance  costs.  This chapter is devoted to the
capital cost which is affected by many factors including operating costs.

     The amount  of water to  be  treated  is  the most obvious  factor  by which
capital costs are based; but it is never the only factor, and may not even be
the most significant one.  Other  factors which can have  varying impact upon the
capital cost include, but are not limited to, the following:

1)    Raw water quality  (temperature,  pH, fluoride concentration,  alkalinity,
     iron,  manganese, arsenic, sodium, sulfate, etc.)

2)    Climate (temperature, evaporation rate,  precipitation,  wind,  etc.)

3)    Seismic zone

4)    Soil conditions

5)    Existing facility   - number of wells  (location, relative to each other)
            storage, distribution
                         - water storage (amount,  relative elevation, relative
                           location)
                         - distribution  (relative location,  peak flows, total
                           flow, pressure,  etc.)
                         - consumption (daily, annual)

6)    Backwash and regeneration wastewater disposal concept

7)    Chemical supply logistics

8)    Manual versus automatic control

9)    Financial  considerations (cost  trends,  capital  financing  costs,  cash
     flow,  labor rates, utility rates, chemical costs,  etc.)
                                      38
                                     4-1

-------
     Once familiar with  the  capital  cost  impact that each of the above vari-
ables can create, the designer quickly realizes that a cost curve (or tabula-
tion) based  upon flow rate alone is meaningless.   Such a curve is presented
later  in this  chapter,  employing  the  hypothetical  design  example  used in
Appendix B.  A tabulation of the breakdown of these capital costs is provided
in  Appendix  D.   If  the cost  derived  from  that   curve  with  the  influence
associated with the  variables  are  weighed,  the  designer  can arrive  at  a
meaningful Preliminary Rough Project Cost Estimate  (as described  in Section
3.2 - Conceptual Design).

4.2  DISCUSSION OF COST VARIABLES

     Each of  the variables mentioned above has direct  impact upon the total
installed cost for a central treatment system.  Ideally, conditions could exist
Which allow  the designer  to design a minimum cost system.    A hypothetical
example would resemble the following:

1)   Raw  water  quality  presents  no  problem  (moderate  temperature,  low
     alkalinity, etc.)

2)   Warm moderate  climate (no freezing, no high temperature, minimal precipi-
     tation,  no high wind-therefore, no requirement for weather protection)

3)   No earthquake requirements

4)   Existing  concrete  pad  located  on well  compacted high  bearing capacity
     soil

5)   Single well  pumping  to  subsurface  storage reservoir with  capacity for
     peak consumption day

6)   Existing wastewater disposal capability adjacent to treatment site (e.g.
     a large  tailings pond at an open pit mine)

7)   Acid and caustic  stored  in large quantities on  the site for other purposes

8)   Manual operation by  labor that is  normally at  the  site with sufficient
     spare time

9)   Funding, space,  etc. available

     This  ideal  situation,   though possible,  never   exists  in  reality.
Occasionally  one, or more,  of the  ideal conditions occur; but  the frequency is
low.  If  we  revise  the final estimate for the example used  in Appendix B to
incorporate the above  ideal conditions, the cost estimate would be reduced from
$347,000.  to  $132,300  (see Table  4-1).   Conversely adverse  conditions  could
accumulate resulting in a  cost  in excess  of  $500,000 for  the  same  treatment
capability.    The following subsections provide  the designer with  the  basic
insight needed to minimize the  cost impact resulting from the  above variables.

                                     39
                                     4-2

-------
          TABLE  4.1.   FINAL  COST ESTIMATE EXAMPLE FOR  IDEAL LOCATION
                   FLUORIDE REMOVAL WATER  TREATMENT PLANT
	FINAL CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE	

Location:
Flow Rate:  600 gpm
Date :

Process Equipment                                                    Cost, $

Treatment Vessels                                                     33,000
Treatment Media                                                       20,500
Process Piping, Valves and Accessories                                16,400
Instruments and Controls                                               8,300
Chemical Storage Tanks                         ,                            0
Chemical Pumps, Piping and Accessories                                 5,300
                                                  Subtotal            83,500

Process Equipment Installation

Mechanical                                                            30,000
Electrical                                                             5,000
Painting and Miscellaneous                                             4,000
                                                  Subtotal            39,000

Miscellaneous Installed Items

Wastewater Lined Evaporation Pond                                          0
Building and Concrete                                                  3,500
Site Work, Fence and Miscellaneous                                   	0
                                                  Subtotal             3,500
Contingency 5%                                                         6,300
                                                  *Total             132,300
*Engineering, Finance  Charges, Real Estate Cost and Taxes not  included.

4.2.1  Water  Chemistry

     The water chemistry can affect capital as well as operating costs.  With a
clear picture of the raw water quality, its possible variations  and its adverse
characteristics,  the designer can  readily  determine its  effect on the capital
cost.  High water temperature (greater than 100°F) requires  higher cost piping
material and/or pipe support.  Varying water temperature  requires  inclusion  of
special provisions  for thermal expansion and  contraction.   Very high  fluoride
(greater  than 8 mg/1)  may ^require  larger  treatment  units  to  reduce  the  fre-
quency of  regeneration.  High alkalinity requires higher acid  consumption for
pH adjustment resulting in  larger feed pumps, day  tank,  piping, etc.   This
                                      40
                                      4-3

-------
would also probably result in an aeration  step for post treatment pH adjustment
in  lieu of caustic addition.  High arsenic,  iron, manganese, and/or  suspended
solids  can  require  the addition of  pretreatment  steps to accomplish removal
prior to  fluoride removal.

     Each of the physical and chemical characteristics  of the raw water must be
evaluated by the designer.  The technical as well as  the economical  feasibility
for  the entire project could hinge on  these  factors.

4.2.2  Climate

     Temperature  extremes,  precipitation  and  high  wind  will  necessitate  a
building to house the treatment system equipment.  High temperature along with
direct  sunlight adversely  affects   the  strength of plastic  piping  systems.
Freezing  is  obviously damaging to piping  and  in some  extreme  cases also to
tanks.   Temperature  variation introduces  requirements for  special thermal
expansion/contraction provisions.  A building with heating and/or cooling and
adequate insulation will eliminate the above problems and their costs; but will
introduce the cost of the building.   The building cost will reflect wind loads
as well as  thermal  requirements.  Operator  comfort in lieu of economic con-
siderations may dictate building costs.

     The  evaporation rate  will dictate  lined  evaporation pond  disposal of
regeneration wastewater technical feasibility as well as cost.

     The  installed  cost  of building  and  evaporation ponds along  with  their
associated civil work become a major  portion  of  the overall capital cost.  The
designer must exert  great  care in  interpreting the climatological conditions
and  their requirements.

4.2.3  Seismic Zone

     The designer must adhere to the seismic design requirements of  the local
building codes.  Buildings and tall slender equipment are vulnerable to seismic
loads.  The designer  must  determine  magnitude  of seismic  design requirements
and adhere to them.  In zones of extreme seismic  activity low profile  equipment
and buildings are recommended.

4.2.4  Soil Conditions

     Unless soil  boring  data is already  available  for the  treatment system
site, the  designer is advised to require at least one boring in the location of
the  foundation  for  the heaviest equipment item (either treatment  vessel or
sulfuric acid storage tank).  If the quality of the soil  is questionable (fill,
or very poor load bearing capacity),  a soil boring should be obtained  for each
major equipment item.   Poor soil may  require  costly  excavation/backfill  and
foundations.


                                      41
                                     4-4

-------
     Combinations of poor soil with rock  or  large boulders can make foundation
work more complex and costly.  Rock  and  boulders  in combination with extreme
temperatures can result  in very  high installation  costs  for  subsurface raw,
treated and wastewater pipe mains.

4.2.5  Existing Facility

     There are many existing  facility configurations  that can either signif-
icantly increase or decrease the  capital  cost.  The most important factors are
discussed  here.

4.2.5.1  Number and Location of Wells
     When  there  is only  one well,  the  removal of excess  fluoride  must  be
accomplished prior  to  entering the  distribution system.  Theoretically, treat-
ment can occur before  or  after entering storage.  Practically speaking, treat-
ment prior to entering storage is much easier to control because the treatment
plant flow rate will be constant.  If treatment takes place after storage,  or
if  there  is  no  storage,  flow rate  is  intermittent  and  variable.    Then  pH
control  is  only achievable by  sophisticated automatic pH  control/acid feed
systems.   These are expensive and have  difficulty maintaining  the  required
tight pH treatment tolerance.

     When  there  is more  than one well,   the  designer must decide whether a
single  treatment plant  treating  water  from all wells  manifolded  together  or
individual treatment  plants at each well  present a  more efficient  and cost
effective  concept.    Factors  such  as  distance  between wells,  distribution
arrangement,  system pressure,  variation in water quality, etc. must be weighed
in that decision.  If  all  of the wells are in close proximity and pump similar
quantity and quality water, a  single  treatment plant serving the entire system
becomes preferable.  When wells are widely dispersed manifolding costs become
prohibitively expensive thus dictating implementation of individual treatment
plants at each well.  Frequently the distances may be such  that the decision is
not clear cut;  the  designer then has  to relate to other variables such as water
quality, system pressure, distribution configuration,  land availability, etc.

     Systems that  require  multiple treatment  plant installations  can achieve
cost savings by employing an identical system at each location.  This results
in an assembly line approach to procurement, manufacture,  assembly, installa-
tion and operation.  Material cost savings, labor reduction and engineering for
a single configuration will reduce the cost for the individual plant.

4.2.5.2  Storage Facilities
     Similar to the wells,  the number,  size and location of storage tanks can
greatly affect treatment plant size (flow rate) and  capital cost.  If there is
no storage capacity in the system,  the well  pump must  be capable of delivering
a flow rate equal to the  system momentary peak consumption; this could be many
times the average flow rate for a peak day.  The designer will quickly conclude
that if  there  is no existing  storage capacity,  a  storage tank  must  be added
with the treatment system.

                                     42
                                     4-5

-------
     Most systems have  existing  storage  capacity.   The storage may be under-
ground  reservoirs,  ground  level  storage  tanks  or  elevated  storage  tanks
(located on high ground or structurally supported standpipes).  The first two
require  repressurization;  the latter does  not.   The  elevated storage tanks
apply a  back  pressure on the ground  level  treatment system requiring higher
pressure (more costly)  construction of  treatment  vessels  and piping  systems.
If aeration of treated effluent for pH adjustment  is  selected with an  elevated
storage tank, the treated water must be contained in a clearwell and  repumped
to  storage.   However,  the treatment  system vessels  and  piping may be low
pressure construction.   When  ground or  below ground  level  storage,  loss of
system pressure is not a factor.

     The amount of storage  capacity is also a factor  affecting treatment system
cost.  The larger the storage capacity (within limits) the lower the  required
treatment plant flow rate (and resulting  cost).  A minimum storage capacity of
one half of system peak day consumption is recommended.

4.2.5.3  Distribution and Consumption
     These are the factors that  determine the sizing of the treatment system
(including the well pump flow rate, the  storage capacity,  etc.).   Those fea-
tures must be coordinated to provide a capacity to deliver  a peak treated water
supply to satisfy all possible  conditions of peak consumption.   If there is
adequate storage capacity,  the momentary  peaks are dampened out.  The  peak day
then defines the system  capacity.   The well pump  is then sized to  deliver a
minimum of the peak daily requirement.  The treatment system in turn  is sized
to treat a minimum of what the well pump delivers.

     The distribution  system  may anticipate  future  growth  or  increased con-
sumption.  The well pump must  then either pump a flow equal to or larger than
the  maximum  anticipated peak  daily  flows  or be  able to  adjust  to future
increased flow rate.   The treatment plant  in turn must incorporate capacity to
treat the ultimate peak flow rate or include provisions to increase the treat-
ment capacity in the future.

4.2.6  Backwash and Regeneration Disposal Concept

     Depending on discharge  limits established by  the EPA, state  and  local
regulatory agencies,  waste  disposal can be the single most costly item in the
capital  (and  operating)  cost projection.   Requirements  can vary  from zero
discharge to  discharge in an  available existing receiving  facility.   The zero
discharge can be  accomplished by  chemical precipitation  of  either  calcium
fluoride  or  aluminum  hydroxide  with subsequent  dewatering  of  solids  and
adjustment of pH.   The wastewater supernatant is  then fed  back to the head of
the treatment plant.   This has been successfully accomplished on a pilot scale.
However,  this concept  has  not been  incorporated  in  a full scale  treatment
plant.   There a.re  many other methods of  disposal;  however,  as mentioned prev-
iously,  those are  beyond the  scope of  this manual.

                                     43
                                    4-6

-------
4.2.7  Chemical Supply Logistics

     Sulfuric acid (normally 66°B'H2S04) and caustic  soda  (normally 50 percent
NaOH) are readily available  and  are  usually the least expensive chemicals to
use for pH adjustment.  Other chemicals such as hydrochloric acid and caustic
potash are technically acceptable, but  almost  always more costly,  and there-
fore not used.  The  acid  and caustic are much cheaper when purchased in bulk
quantities, usually 50,000 pound tank trucks.  In very small plants, the cost
of storage tanks for those volumes  is not  justified and therefore, higher unit
price, smaller volumes are procured (drums and  carboys).   In very large treat-
ment plants procurement via  200,000  pound railroad  tank  cars present a still
cheaper mode.   This concept, however, requires a rail  siding and rail unloading
facility.  Nevertheless,  it does  present an option  of  lowering the overall
cost.
     A chemical unloading  rail  terminal  presents another intriguing option for
facilities with multiple  treatment  plants.   In this  concept  smaller  site
storage tanks  are supplied via "mini tank  trucks" relaying  chemicals to the
treatment site from the rail terminal.  This brings down the size  (and cost) of
chemical storage tanks at  each site.   However,  this  could increase the truck
traffic of corrosive  chemicals through populated areas, a risk which may not be
acceptable.

4.2.8  Manual Versus Automatic Control

     Automatic  controls   are  technically  feasible.   However,   the  periodic
presence of an operator is always a requirement.  The capital cost of automa-
tion (valve operators, control instrumentation, etc.) as  well  as maintenance
costs are  usually  a burden  which  the client will not  accept.   However,  in
locations where operating  labor rates are extremely high, the client may prefer
an automatic  system.

4.2.9  Financial Considerations

     Many financial  factors must  be considered  by the  designer and his client.
The client can superimpose financial  restrictions (beyond  any of the technical
factors mentioned  above)   upon  the  designer  which   result  in  increased  (or
decreased) capital cost.   These include, but are not limited to the following:
inflationary   trends,  interest  rates,  financing costs, land  costs  (or avail-
ability),  cash flow,  labor rates, electric utility rates,   chemical costs,  etc.
All or part of this  group  of factors could effect  the capital cost of a given
treatment plant. The client  may desire higher capital investment with reduced
operating cost because interest rates are low,  inflation  is anticipated,  cash
is available,  labor  and electric  utility rates are high.   Or the opposite can
be true.   The varying combinations of  these  factors  which  could develop are
numerous;  each one will affect the  ultimate capital  cost.
                                     44
                                     4-7

-------
4.3  RELATIVE CAPITAL COST OF FLUORIDE REMOVAL CENTRAL WATER TREATMENT PLANTS
     BASED UPON FLOW RATE

     The relative  capital costs of  central  treatment plants based  upon the
treated water flow  rate are presented in Figures 4-1  and 4-2.  Both cost curves
are based  on  the  same treatment system design criteria.   Tabulations of the
breakdowns of the capital  costs for both curves  is provided  in Appendix D.  The
curve in Figure 4-1  is  based on the  facility  criteria employed  in the hypo-
thetical design for the 600 gpm treatment fluoride system in Appendix B.  The
curve in Figure 4-2  is  based on the  "bare  bones"  facility requirements pre-
sented earlier in this chapter for the same treatment system (see Table 4-1).
This information demonstrates  the  dramatic differences in capital cost that
can occur for the same treatment plant in different circumstances.  The costs
related to the curve in Figure 4-1 are  representative of average capital costs.

4.4  REFERENCES

1.   Rubel and Hager,  Inc.,  Final Report  - Pilot Test Program  - Removal of
     Excess Fluoride  from Activated Carbon Effluent at Rocky Mountain Arsenal,
     Colorado, April 30,  1980.
                                     45
                                     4-8

-------
       4.0
     n
     § 3.0
      cd
      2
±'<
       2.0
      x
      8
      o
        1.0
          0  100  200      400      600      800      1000     1200
                                                 FLOW . gpm
1400     1600
1800     2000
                     FIGURE  4-1 COST OF FLUORIDE REMOVAL AT AN IDEAL LOCATION

-------
-p-

H-• '

o
    12.0





    11.0




    10.0










     e.o





     7.0





     6.0

X



*t    5.0
a>




8    4-°




     3.0





     2.0





     1.0
     (0
      ,
             0   100  200       400       600       800      1,000


                                                       FLOW, gpm
                                                                1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2,000
                       FIGURE  4-2  COST OF  FLUORIDE REMOVAL FOR A TYPICAL LOCATION

-------
                                  CHAPTER 5

                          TREATMENT PLANT OPERATION
5.1  INTRODUCTION

     Upon completion and approval of the final design package  (plans and speci-
fications), the owner (client)  proceeds  to advertise  for bids for construction
of the treatment plant.  The construction contract is normally awarded to the
firm  submitting the  lowest bid.    Occasionally,  circumstances  arise  that
disqualify the low bidder in which  case  the  lowest qualified bidder is awarded
the contract.   Upon award of the construction contract, the engineer (designer
or his representative) may be requested  to supervise  the work of the construc-
tion contractor.  This responsibility may be limited  to periodic visits to the
site  to  assure the  client that the  general  intent  of  the design  is  being
fulfilled; or it may include exhaustive, day to day inspection and approval of
the work  as  it is  being performed.  The engineer is requested to review and
approve all shop drawings  and other information  submitted by  the contractor
and/or subcontractors  and  material suppliers.  All  acceptable substitutions
are  to  be approved in  writing  by the engineer.   Upon  completion of  the
construction  phase of  the project,  the  engineer  is  normally requested  to
perform a final inspection.  This entails a formal approval indicating to the
owner that all installed items are  in compliance with the requirements of the
design.  Any corrective work required at that time is covered by a punch list
and/or warranty.  The warranty period  (normally one year) commences upon final
acceptance of the project by the owner from the contractor.  Final acceptance
usually takes place upon completion of all major punch list items.

     Preparation for  treatment  plant  startup,  startup and  operator  training
may or may not be included  in the construction contract.  Although  this area of
contract  responsibility is not  germane to this  manual, the  activities  and
events that  lead up to routine operation are.   This chapter discusses those
steps in the  sense  that  the operator is performing  them.   The operator could be
the contractor, the owner's representative or an independent third party.

     System  operating  supplies,  including  treatment chemicals,  laboratory
supplies and recommended spare parts must be procured, and set in place.  The
treatment plant operating  and  maintenance instructions  (O&M Manual)  must be
available at the project site.   Included in  the O&M Manual are the valve number
diagram (see Figure 5-1) which corresponds  to brass  tags on  the valves and a
 Talve directory furnished by the contractor, and a valve operation chart (see
  Me 5-1).
                                      48
                                     5-1

-------
   {XI - Shut-off Valve
   SI - Butterfly Valve
   fXI - Check Valve
   jjq - Pressure Control
        Valve
        Expansion Joint
        Pressure Indicator
                                                                        rWent
CAUSTIC DAY TANK
        Pressure Indicator/
        Totalizer
        Pressure Relief Valve
        Valve Numbers
            DrainSS
CAUSTIC STORAGE  TANK
        Vent
                                                                                    ^~
                                                                     ACID STORAGE  TANT
pH  SENSOR
                                                              Backwash Wastewater
                                                     Regeneration Wastewater
                                  LINED EVAPORATION POND
                         FIGURE 5-1   VALVE NUMBER  DIAGRAM
                                             49
                                             5-2

-------
                            TABLE  5-1.  FLUORIDE REMOVAL WATER TREATMENT  PLANT VALVE  OPERATION CHART
                                            (Refer  to Figure 5~1  for Valve Location)
Cn
Valve
Function
Unit No. 1
Treatment
Drain
Backwash
Drain
Upflow Regen.
Upflow Rinse
Drain
Downflow Regen.
Drain
Neutralization
Treatment
Treatment
Shu toff
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Unit No. 1
Operation
Unit No. 2
Treatment
Treatment
Shu toff
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Treatment
Drain
Backwash
Drain
Up flow Regen.
Upflow Rinse
Drain
Downflow Regen.
Drain
Neutralization
Treatment
11
0
X
0
X
0
0
X
0
X
0
0
0
X.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
0
X
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
13
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
X
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
14
X
X
0
X
0
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
15
X
X
0
X
0
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
16
X
0
X
0
X
X
0
0
0
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
21
0
0
X
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
X
0
X
0
0
X
0
X
0
Q
Unit No. 2
Operation
22
0
0
X
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
23
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
X
0
0
24
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
X
0
0
X
X
X
X
X
25
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
X
0
0
X
X
X
X
X
26
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
X
0
X
X
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Numb e r s
System
Isolation
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
X
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
X
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
X
4
X
0
0
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
0
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
5
X
X
X
X
0
0
0
0
0
0
X
X
X
X
0
0
0
0
0
0
X
6
p
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
p
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
•p
7
X
X
0
X
p
X
X
p
X
p
X
X
0
X
p
p
X
p
X
p
X
Sample
17
P
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
p
p
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
p
18
p
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
p
p
p
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
p
27
P
P
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
p
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
p
28
P
P
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
p
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
p
p
31
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
0
0
X
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Chemical
Shutoff
32
0
0
X
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
0
41
X
X
X
X
0
X
X
0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
42
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
0
X
X
0
X
X
X
43
0
0
X
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
X
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
       Legend:  0 - Valve Open
                X - Valve Closed
                P - Periodic Sample

-------
     The treatment bed material  is then placed in th.e treatment vessels and the
plant is ready to start  operation.

     There are four basic modes  of operation:  treatment, backwash, regenera-
tion and neutralization.  Operating details for each  of these modes are covered
in this chapter.   It  is important to note that each of the above modes uses raw
water during each operation, never treated water.

5.2  INITIAL STARTUP

     The operator  first  thoroughly  reviews  the O&M Manual,  familiarizes him-
self with every component of the plant and  resolves any question that he may
have.

     The placement of the activated alumina in the treatment vessel which takes
place  immediately  prior  to  startup  is a  critical  step  in the  future system
performance.   The  dry material  is delivered  in  100 pound bags  (least expen-
sive),  100  pound  drums,  or 400 pound  drums.   The volume  of  the media  is
determined on a dry weight basis.  The actual density vanies with  the degree of
packing of the bed, (45-55 pounds/ft  ).  Fifty pounds/ft   is recommended.  The
virgin granular material is "coated" with caustic.   There is  a small amount of
fines (less that 1 percent)  that can become  airborne and  are irritating to the
personnel who  are handling them.   Eye,  skin,  and  inhalation  protection are
mandatory during vessel  loading activity.   The vessel  should be half filled
with water prior to placing the  alumina.   As the  alumina  is carefully distrib-
uted into the vessel  from above,  the  water  dissipates the  heat generated by the
heat of wetting of the caustic "coating" on the alumina  grains.  This prevents
cementing of the bed.  The  water also separates the  fines  from  the granular
materials, protects  the underdrain assembly from impact,  and initiates strat-
ification of the bed. It is recommended that the bed be  placed in two or three
lifts.  In treatment  systems with two or more treatment beds,  alternate placing
of media and backwashing steps  can  be worked  together  between  the treatment
units.  Thereby, media placement can be a continuous operation.   The bed is to
be thoroughly backwashed  with raw water after each lift.   During bed placement,
each backwash  step should be  a  minimum of thirty minutes and could extend to
two hours.  The purpose of  this  stringent effort  is  to remove all of the fines
from  the bed.    If  the  fines  remain in  the bed,   possible  problems  such as
channeling, excessive pressure  drop or even cementing can develop.  The extra
backwashing effort during bed placement permits fines at the  bottom of the bed
to work  their  way  up and out  to waste.   Since the  lower portions  of the bed
which  contain  the  largest particles  do  not expand during backwash, fines not
backwashed out of the bed at that stage may be permanently locked  into the bed.
The  initial backwash water  should be directed  to the lined evaporation pond.

5.3  TREATMENT MODE

     Upon completion of backwashing of a virgin bed, the bed  should be drained
and  the vessel opened.  Approximately 1/8-1/4" of fine bed material should be
skimmed  from the top  of  the  bed. This is the finest grain material which tends

                                      51
                                     5-4

-------
to blind the bed causing channeling and/or  excessive  pressure drop.  Once that
material is removed, the vessel can be closed and refilled with water.

     At this point the plant should be cleaned up.  Airborne fines that form a
dust like coating on piping and  equipment must be removed.   Good housekeeping
should begin now and .be continued on a permanent basis.

     The pressure loss checkout mentioned in Section  3.4, Final Design, should
be accomplished at this point,  just  prior to startup.   See Table  5.2  for calcu-
lated pressure drop through the treatment media.  If there is a pressure loss
problem, it should be corrected prior to treatment startup.

              TABLE  5.2.   CALCUALTED DOWNFLOW PRESSURE  DROP DATA
	Alcoa F-l, 28-48 Mesh Activated Alumina	

                                                                 Modified
Water flow rate              Pressure drop in PSI                Reynolds
  gpm/ft                     per foot of bed depth                 number
    2.0                               0.10                         2375
    3.0                              0.018                         3555
    4.0                              0.028                         4735
    5.0                              0.040                         5900
    6.0                              0.053                         7111
    7.0                              0.068                         8291
     Prior to start of operation, the pH instrumentation is to be calibrated.
The most critical requirement for efficient  low cost operation is the control
of  the  raw water adjusted pH.   The optimum environment for fluoride removal
exists when the treatment pH is in the range of 5.0-6.0.   The best results have
occurred when  the pH is  held rigidly at 5.5..  Because  acid feed rates are  a
function of raw water alkalinity, they vary from one water to another.  As  raw
water pH moves above 6.0 or below 5.0 fluoride removal capacity deteriorates at
an increasing rate.  However, when the alkalinity of the  raw water is  extremely
high  and/or  the cost of  acid is very high,  it can be more cost effective to
operate in a pH  range of 6.0-6.5 to reduce the acid consumption (even though
fluoride removal  efficiency is also reduced).

      The downflow treatment  for the  first  (virgin)  run can now begin.    See
Valve Operation Chart (Table 5-1) for valve positions  for this function.   It is
recommended that  one vessel be placed in operation at  a  time.  This allows  the
operator  to  concentrate  on initial raw water pH adjustment on one  treatment
unit until it is in stable operation;  he can then  devote  full concentration to
the  next treatment  unit.  It  is  also  beneficial  to  stagger  treatment unit
operation  so that treated water  from each  unit is at different stages of  its
respective  treatment  run.  That facilitates blending of treated water which
provides the most cost effective operation.  Water flow  rate can be controlled

                                      52
                                      5-5

-------
accurately  through  each treatment vessel by  manually adjusting the effluent
valve (valve numbers  12  and 22)  or the influent valve  (valve numbers 11 and
21).

     The  basic  flow  schematic  for  the  treatment  mode  is  illustrated in
Figure 5-2.

     The initial effluent pH is high with no  fluoride removal  (similar to the
neutralization mode explained later).  After  a short period both pH and  fluo-
ride in the treated water drop  to  anticipated  levels.  At that time  the treated
water  can  be  directed   to  storage and/or  distribution.    Depending  on the
requirements of  the state  or  local regulatory agency, samples may have  to be
analyzed at a certified  testing laboratory prior to  approval of distribution of
treated water.

     The  fluoride  in the  treated water  drops rapidly  to a  very  low  level
(normally less  than 0.2 mg/1) and remains stable until  breakthrough begins.  At
that point, the  fluoride level increases gradually until the  treatment run is
terminated.

     Concurrently,   the  treated water pH gradually drops  to  the adjusted raw
water pH level  where it remains through the duration of the  run. This level is
lower  than the  normally accepted minimum pH of  6.5; therefore,  it  must be
raised  either  by  chemical addition,  aeration or  blending  with  raw water.
Regardless of the method of adjustment,  it must take place and be stabilized at
the  desired  level  prior to  delivering the treated water  into distribution.
High pH in the  treated water is also a concern. Normally  the maximum allowable
pH is 8.5;  however,  there are exceptions where 9.0  is permitted.  Most systems
desire pH in the 7.5-8.0 range.  When the  treated water is  approved and the pH
stabilized  for distribution,  it  flows out of the  plant past  a fail-safe pH
sensor with high and  low level alarms.   If there  is a pH excursion exceeding
the allowable limits,  an interlock (incorporating  the pH alarms with the well
pump(s) magnetic starter) de-energizes the well pump(s).   Simultaneously, the
chemical pumps  shut down  as  their  controls  are  interlocked with  the  well
pump(s) power circuitry.   The  fail-safe pH override automatically prevents any
treated water,  which  is  out of tolerance pH,  from entering  the distribution
system.  In the event  of such an excursion,  the operator manually controls the
well pump(s) to divert the  unacceptable water  to waste, determine the cause of
the deviation and make corrections prior to placing the treatment system back
on line. Probable causes for treated water pH  deviations are:   change in water
flow rate,  change in acid flow rate, change in caustic flow rate, change in raw
water chemistry.

     A treatment run  can be extended by blending  treated  water in which the
fluoride level  exceeds the MCL with treated water  with  a low fluoride level.
This can either  be done  in the effluent main leaving the treatment plant, in
the storage reservoir  or bypassing raw water  to blend with treated.  During a
treatment run there is a long period when the fluoride content of the treated
water is well below the  optimum level (one half of the MCL).   As breakthrough

                                      53
                                     5-6

-------
            Raw Water
                    Acid
           Treated Water
          TREATMENT
            UNIT
                          hrH
TREATMENT AND DOWNFLOW
           RINSE
                                               Raw Water
                                          TREATMENT
                                             UNIT
                                                    Waste

                                 BACKWASH AND UPFLOW RINSE
              Raw Water
          TREATMENT
            UNIT
                           .Caustic
                                               Raw Water
                                           TREATMENT
                                             UNIT
                                                              Caustic
                                                        Waste
                                    DOWNFLOW  REGENERATION
                 Waste
UPFLOW REGENERATION

NOTE:   For Clarity Only Relevant
       Pipes And Shutoff Valves
       Are Shown.
    FIGURE  5-2  BASIC  OPERATING MODE FLOW SCHEMATICS
                               54
                               5-7

-------
occurs, there is a long period of slowly increasing fluoride concentration in
the  treated  water.    Blending in  the  effluent main  entails  staggering  the
treatment cycles of two or more treatment units.  This can be accomplished by
continuing treatment in one unit after its increasing fluoride level has sur-
passed the MCL  and blending  it  with  low fluoride  effluent from one (or more)
unit that is  in the early  stage of a treatment cycle.  The operator can extend
the run until the fluoride level reaches at least  twice the MCL before termi-
nating the run.  As the fluoride level  gets  higher  the operator must reduce the
flow rate to maintain the combined high and low fluoride " levels at an accept-
able average.  The same processes take  place in  the storage reservoir using one
(or more) treatment unit(s).

     This increases the fluoride  loading on the alumina and results in lower
operating cost.   The  loading can significantly  exceed the  2000 grains/ft
mentioned in  the  design criteria in Chapter 3.   Capacities in the 2500-3000
grains/ft   are normal.    Capacities  exceeding  4000   grains/ft   have  been
achieved in certain waters.  It should be noted that the higher the raw water
fluoride  level,  the  greater  the adsorption (driving  force) capacity.   For
example, the alumina capacity for a water with a fluoride level of 3 mg/1 may
only be 2100  grains/ft  while the capacity  for a similar water with a fluoride
level of 8 mg/1 is 3000 grains/ft .   Since there  are many other  factors that
can affect this capacity,  the precise amount  is  difficult to predict.   The
operator must  be  cognizant of the fact  that the  more  water treated during a
run, the lower the operating cost.

     In raw waters where the fluoride  level does not exceed  two times the MCL,
part of the raw water can bypass treatment and be blended back with the treated
water.  Water with higher fluoride levels can also profit from bypassing, but
the economic benefits rapidly diminish.

     The operator can reduce chemical  consumption  by blending high pH with low
pH treated waters.  This is accomplished during the period when one treatment
unit  has  recently been regenerated and treated water  pH  is still high.   A
skilled operator develops many  techniques  such  as this to minimize operating
costs.

     High iron content in the raw water can cause  problems during a treatment
run.   The  ion oxidizes, precipitates, and  is  filtered from  solution  by the
treatment media.  This results in increased pressure drop,  channeling, prema-
ture  fluoride  breakthrough,  and  shortened treatment  runs.   Raw water iron
content  greater than  1.0  mg/1  is  cause  for  concern.  Special  backwashing
procedures during treatment  runs  can  be employed  to cope  with this problem.
Special procedures such as intra-run backwashing are beyond the scope of this
manual.

5.4  BACKWASH MODE

     For two reasons it is important  that the bed  be backwashed with raw water
after each treatment run prior  to  regeneration.   First, any suspended solids
                                      55
                                     5-8

-------
that have been filtered from the raw water by the treatment bed tend to blind
the bed.  Therefore, these particles  must  be removed from the bed.   Second,
even though  filtration  may have been negligible, the downward  flow tends to
pack the bed.  An upflow backwash will then  expand  the bed,  and  break up any
tendency towards wall effects and channeling.  A backwash rate of 8-9 gpm/ft
will expand the bed approximately 50  percent, which is recommended.   As men-
tioned  in prior  sections,  this  rate varies  with  extreme water temperatures.
Care must  be taken  to  avoid backwashing  granular  bed  material  out  of the
treatment unit.   Normally backwashing lasts ten minutes.

     Refer to Table 5-1, Valve  Operation Chart,  for valve positions  for the
backwash mode.  The basic flow schematic for the backwash mode is illustrated
in Figure 5-2.  For most effective backwash,  it is recommended that the vessel
be drained prior to backwash.  As backwash water  flows into a drained bed, it
lifts the entire bed  approximately one foot prior  to the bed fluidizing.  This
a.ction provides an efficient  scouring  action  without excessive abrasion to the
alumina grains.   Backwash water  samples must  be inspected frequently to deter-
mine that filtered material is still being removed and treatment media is not
being washed  out of  the bed.   Excessive backwash causes  abrasion that wears
down the alumina grains.  That also wastes raw water and increases the waste-
water disposal volume.   Therefore, backwash  volume  must  be minimized.  It is
prudent to periodically inspect the media level of each treatment bed.

5.5  REGENERATION MODE

     The most efficient cost effective method of  regenerating a treatment bed
upon completion of a treatment  run  includes  two discrete regeneration steps.
The first step is upflow following draining of the bed after the backwash mode.
The regeneration is followed by an upflow rinse.  The unit is then drained to
the top of the  treatment bed prior  to the second regeneration step (which is
downflow).  Both steps use a 1 percent (by weight) NaOH solution.

     The objective of regeneration is  to remove  all  fluoride  ions  from the bed
before  any part of the  bed is returned  to  the  treatment  mode.  Fluoride ions
lose their attraction  (adsorption  force) and become  repelled by the  alumina
when the pH rises above  10.5.   The higher the  pH,  the faster and more efficient
the  regeneration.   However,   too  high a pH  not  only costs  more  (because of
higher  caustic consumption),  but is also increasingly aggressive  to the alum-
ina.  The above mentioned one percent NaOH solution is the maximum concentra-
tion required for high efficiency  regeneration  (recovery of  total  fluoride
capacity).  A skilled operator can reduce the concentration of the NaOH to 0.75
percent with  the same high efficiency performance.   However, below 0.75 per-
cent,  efficiency deteriorates rapidly.   This lower caustic concentration can
reduce  caustic consumption for regeneration up  to 25 percent.  As  described in
Chapter 3, the dilution of the caustic takes place  at a mixing tee in  the raw
water  branch piping  at each treatment unit.   Both the  raw  water and the 50
percent NaOH  are metered prior to entering  the mixing tee.  The accuracy of the
metering  ranges  from +2 percent to +5 percent depending  on the quality of the
flow meters.  If using  a 0.75 percent NaOH concentration, meter readings that

                                      56
                                      5-9

-------
are low for water and high  for caustic result in a  lower  than planned  caustic
concentration and loss of regeneration efficiency.

     The rule of thumb for the volume of one percent caustic  solution required
per regeneration  step  is  fifteen gallons per cubic foot  of treatment media.
The minimum time recommended for the solution to flow through the bed is thirty
minutes.  The maximum  time  is unlimited; but for practical purposes,  thirty-
five minutes  is recommended.  For  a 5'-0" deep treatment bed  a flow of 2.5
gpm/ft  for a period of  thirty minutes  for each regeneration step  is  suffic-
ient.  This equates to 0.2 gallons 50 percent NaOH per  cubic  foot of treatment
media for each  regeneration  step  (upflow and downflow).

     For the valve positions during each step of the regeneration mode, refer
to  Table  5-1.   The basic   flow  schematics for  the  regeneration  modes  are
illustrated in  Figure  5-2.   After backwash, prior  to  the upflow regeneration
step, the bed  must be drained to remove water which  dilutes the caustic  concen-
tration.  Upon  completion of draining, the  upflow regeneration starts  as des-
cribed above.   Upon  completion of the upflow regeneration,  the  caustic feed
pump is turned  off and the day tank refilled. The  raw  water  continues  to flow
for sixty minutes  at 2.5 gpm/ft  flow rate upward through the bed,  flushing out
the fluoride.   After this  rinse  step  is completed, the vessel is  drained to the
top of the treatment bed,  again  to remove dilution water.  The downflow regen-
eration is followed by draining of the bed prior to the start of  the neutrali-
zation mode.

5.6  NEUTRALIZATION MODE

     The neutralization mode is critical  to  the success  of  the following treat-
ment run.  The object of this mode is  to return the bed to the  treatment  mode as
rapidly as possible without  dissolving  the activated alumina.   The pH of the
treatment media after completion of the  regeneration is 12+.   It  must  be
adjusted down  to  5.5.   Therefore, it must  pass  through pH ranges where ions
that compete for adsorption sites on the alumina will be  loaded  into the bed.
The minimum pH  that can be safely exposed to the granular  activated  alumina is
2.5.  A pH lower than that is too aggressive and is not recommended.

     At the start  of  the downflow neutralization mode the valves are  positioned
per Table 5-1,  and after  fifteen minutes the flow  is  adjusted  to the normal
treatment mode  rate.   The basic flow schematic for  the neutralization mode is
illustrated in  Figure  5-2.   The  acid pump is started;  and the pH of  the raw
water is adjusted to 2.5.  Acid feed rate again varies with the alkalinity of
the raw water.   The raw water flow rate may have to be reduced  to achieve pH 2.5
at the maximum  acid pump feed rate.

     As the neutralization mode proceeds, the pH of the  treated water gradually
drops below 12.  The  rate of pH reduction increases  at an  increasing rate.  As
the treated  water  pH  drops below  10,  the  treated water fluoride level begins to
drop below that  of the raw water.   At that time, treatment begins.   At the point
where the fluoride level drops below the  MCL,  the water becomes usable  and can
                                      57
                                     5-10

-------
be directed to storage.  The pH may still be high (9.5) in the water; however,
this can  be  blended with  treated  water with  lower  pH from  other  treatment
units.   When the treated water pH drops  to 8.5, the raw water pH is adjusted up
to 4.0  as  the bed rapidly neutralizes.   When the treated water pH drops to 6.5,
the raw water pH is  adjusted up  to 5.5 where it remains through the duration of
the run.  The operation is now starting the next cycle in the treatment mode.

     The volume of wastewater produced during the regeneration of a treatment
bed will vary with the physical/chemical characteristics of the raw water.  A
rule of thumb that can assist the operator in his logistical handling is "300
gallons of wastewater is produced per cubic  foot of treatment media during each
regeneration".  Typical volumes of wastewater generated during each regenera-
tion step for a hypothetical treatment bed are as follows:

     Backwash                                           -   60 gallons
     Upflow Regeneration                                -   15 gallons
     Upflow Rinse                                       -   30 gallons
     Downflow Regeneration                              -   15 gallons
     Neutralization                                     -  180 gallons
                                              Total        300 gallons

     Operational experience at a specific treatment plant will present devia-
tions  from these quantities.

5.7  OPERATOR REQUIREMENTS

     A qualified  operator for  a fluoride removal water  treatment plant must
have thorough  fluoride removal process  training,  preferably  at  an existing
treatment plant.  The operator must be able to service pumps, piping systems,
instrumentation,  and electrical accessories.  The  operator must  be totally
informed about the characteristics  of both acids and caustics in all concentra-
tions.   Corrosive  chemical  safety requirements  as   to  clothing,  equipment,
antidotes, and procedures must be thoroughly  understood.   The  operator must be
thoroughly trained to run  routine water analyses including at least two methods
for determining  fluoride  levels.  The operator must be well  grounded  in mathe-
matics for operation cost accounting and treatment  run  record keeping.   The
operator, above  all, must be dependable and conscientious.

5.8  LABORATORY REQUIREMENTS

     In addition to the Operations  and Maintenance  (O&M) Manual,  the  treatment
plant  should have the latest edition of Standard Methods  for  the Examination of
Water  and Wastewater prepared  jointly by the APHA-AWWA-WPCF  (American Public
Health Association  - American  Water  Waste  Association  -  Water   Pollution
Central  Federation).  This  supplies  the  plant  operator with all  necessary
information for acceptable methods for analyzing  water.  A recommended list of
items  for analysis  is illustrated  in Figure  3-1.  The primary requirement is
for  accurate analysis of  fluoride and determination of  pH.   As  long  as pH
meters are  calibrated and cleaned regularly, high precision measurements are

                                      58
                                     5-11

-------
easily  obtained.    Care must  be  exercised  to  prevent  contamination  of pH
buffers.  Fluoride measurement can be achieved in several ways.  Ion-specific
electrodes are accurate and reliable provided that the correct buffer (TISAB)
is employed for the water to be treated.  There are two wet chemistry methods
which are  also  quite  accurate.   They are  SPADNS and  Alizarin.  Distillation
and/or  correction  for  interfering  ions (e.g.   alkalinity,  aluminum,  iron,
sulfate, etc.) are required for accurate results.

5.9  OPERATING RECORDS

     A  system of  records must be  maintained on file  at  the  treatment plant
covering plant activity, plant procedures, raw water chemical analyses, plant
expenditures, and inventory of materials (spare parts,  tools, etc.).  The plant
operator should have the responsibility of managing all aspects of the treat-
ment plant operation.   The operator is accountable  to the water system manage-
ment.  The recommended record  system should include, but not be limited to the
following items:

5.9.1  Plant Log

     A daily  log in which  the plant operator records  daily activities at the
plant.  This  record should include a listing of scheduled maintenance, unsched-
uled  maintenance,  plant  visitors,  purchases,  abnormal  weather  conditions,
injuries, sampling for  state  or other regulatory agencies,  etc.   This record
should  also   be  used  as  a  tool  for  planning  future  routine and  special
activities.

5.9.2  Operation Log

     The operator should maintain a log sheet for each treatment run for each
treatment unit. Thereby, a permanent plant performance  record will be on file.
Figure 5-3 illustrates a copy of a suggested form.

5.9.3  Water Analysis Reports

     The plant  operator should run  an  analysis  of raw  and treated fluoride
levels once each day for each unit.  He should run a total raw water analysis
once per week.  Changes in raw water may necessitate changes in the treatment
process.  Figure 3-1  illustrates a  copy of a suggested form.  A permanent file
of these reports will be a valuable tool.

5.9.4  Plant Operating Cost Records

     Using accounting  forms supplied by the water  system's accountants,  the
plant operator should keep a complete record of purchases of all spare parts,
chemicals, laboratory equipment and reagents, tools, services, and other sun-
dry items.  This should be supplemented by a file  of  up-to-date  competitive
prices for items that have been previously purchased.

                                     59
                                     5-12

-------
                              FIGURE 5-3
                 FLUORIDE REMOVAL WATER TREATMENT  PLANT
Unit # Run #
SERVICE TO RESERVOIR
Meter End
BACKWASH TO SEWER
Meter End
REGENERATION SOLUTION TO
Upf low:
Meter End
Down flow:
Meter End
RINSE TO POND
Meter End
OPERATION LOG
Date Start Date End
Meter Start Total Treated M-Gal.
Meter Start Total M-Gal.
POND
Meter Start Total M-Gal.
Meter Start Total M-Gal.
Meter Start Total M-Gal.
NEUTRALIZATION RINSE TO POND
Meter End
TOTAL WASTE WATER SUMMARY
Total to Pond
Total to Sewer
Total to Waste

Meter Start Total M-Gal.
gal. TOTAL WATER USED Gallons
qal .
!_ PbRCbNI WASIb %
TREATED WATER LOG
Date
















Meter
Read! ng
M-Gal















(A)
M-Gal
















Total
(oj
-ua I















FR
Raw
Fl uor Ide
FR (mg/ll















FT
Treated
Fl uor i de
FT (mg/1)















(A) FTAvg.
















Z(A)FTAvg.*
0















*Average Treated  Water  Fluoride
                                         60
                                         5-13

-------
5.9.5  Correspondence Files

     The plant operator should retain copies of all correspondence pertaining
to  the treatment plant  in chronological  order.    Included would  be intra-
departmental  notes  and  memos,   in  addition  to  correspondence with  other
individuals and/or organizations.

5.9.6  Regulatory Agency  Reports

     The  plant operator  should  maintain  a complete  file  of copies  of all
reports received from  state,  county,  or other  regulatory agencies pertaining
to the treatment plant.

5.9.7  Miscellaneous Forms

     The operator should  have  an adequate  supply  of accident,  insurance, and
other miscellaneous forms.

5.10  TREATMENT PLANT MAINTENANCE

     The maintenance concept for  the  fluoride removal water  treatment plant is
to isolate the equipment  to be serviced  by  means  of shutoff valves, vent and
drain  lines  (as required),  repair  or  replace equipment,  fill  lines,  open
valves, and start service.  To  accomplish this, all equipment items are equip-
ped with isolating  valves, and  all piping systems have vents  at high points and
drains at low points.

     Equipment manufacturer's recommended spare parts  are  to be stocked at the
treatment plant to avoid  lengthy maintenance shutdowns.

     If the entire  treatment plant needs to be shutdown, the plant itself can
be bypassed.  This can be done by  closing the butterfly  valves in  the raw water
and treated water line  and then opening the butterfly valve in the bypass line.
This would  result  in  untreated  water with excessively high fluoride  being
pumped to distribution, an event  that should not occur  without the approval of
the water system manager.

     In the  event  the  entire  treatment plant must  be shut down,  the  local
regulatory agency must be notified immediately.

5.11  EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE

     Equipment manufacturer's maintenance  instructions are  to be included in
the Suppliers Equipment Instructions  Section of the O&M Manual.

5.12  TREATMENT MEDIA MAINTENANCE

     Plant operator should inspect the surface  of each treatment  bed at least
once every three regenerations.  If  the  level of a bed lowers  more than eight

                                     61
                                     5-14

-------
inches, makeup  activated alumina  must  be added.   Makeup alumina  should be
evenly distributed.  There should be a minimum  depth  of  l'-0" of water above
the surface of the existing bed.  The vessel should be closed immediately and
backwashed at flow rates varying between 8 and 9  gpm/ft  for at least one hour.
It is very important to flush the fines  out of the virgin activated alumina as
soon as it is wetted.

     It is important that the treatment beds should not remain in the drained
condition  for more than  an  hour.    Treatment units not  in  use  must  remain
flooded.

5.13  TREATMENT CHEMICALS SUPPLY

     The operator should carefully  monitor the consumption of liquid chemicals
and reorder when necessary.   He must have a method of determining the depth of
liquid in the storage tank (e.g.  dip  stick) and  equating that to the volume of
liquid in the tank.  Figure 5-4 illustrates a liquid depth versus volume curve
for a 6,000 gallon horizontal cylindrical tank with dished head.

5.14  HOUSEKEEPING

     The plant operator should wash down all equipment at  least once per month.
Floors should be  swept daily.   Bathroom and  laboratory  fixtures  should be
cleaned once per  week.   All  light bulbs should be  replaced  immediately upon
failure.  Emergency shower and eyewash  should be tested  once per week.   Any
chemical spill  should  be neutralized and cleaned  up immediately.   Hardware
should be  polished once per month and  lubricated per manufacturer's  direc-
tions.  Equipment should be repainted at least once every five years.
                                     62
                                    5-15

-------
9i-g
£9
LIQUID VOLUME (1,000 GALLONS)
O -» N CO *» Ol 0>






-^:






^






X






X





/






X





y
X





X






X





X
r





X






X



x"



^



^—"


\






Horizontal Cylindrical Vessel
8'-0"£x 11'-6"S/S With Flanged
And Dished Heads























6   12   18   24   30  36  42  48   54   60  66  72   78   84   90  96
                        DEPTH OF LIQUID (INCHES)

FIGURE  5-4  5,000 GALLON CHEMICAL STORAGE TANK-LIQUID VOLUME

-------
                                  CHAPTER 6

                    CENTRAL TREATMENT PLANT  OPERATING  COST
6.1  INTRODUCTION
     The prime objectives in central treatment plant design are to provide the
client  with a  low-capital  cost  installation   that  works  efficiently  and
reliably;  is  simple to  operate;  and above  all,  is inexpensive  to  operate.
Operating costs  are  normally passed directly onto the water user in the monthly
water bill.  These costs include the following:

1.   Treatment chemical costs

2.   Operating labor costs

3.   Utility costs

4.   Replacement treatment media costs

5.   Replacement parts and miscellaneous materials costs

     As the bill is  normally based on metered water consumption, the costs for
treatment  are  prorated  on  the unit  of volume  measurement.   The units  are
usually 1,000 gallons,  and occasionally 100 ft (750 gallons).  Some systems do
not meter consumption; instead they  charge a  flat monthly rate based upon size
of branch connection to the water main.   Though  this latter mode of distribu-
tion saves  the  cost of meters as well as  the reading of meters,  it  does not
promote water conservation.  Therefore,  far more water is pumped,  treated and
distributed, resulting in a net  increase  in  operating cost.   The accounting/
billing  methods  are handled  in many  ways;  that  subject,  however,  is  not
addressed  in this  manual.   The  common  denominator that applies  to  both the
operating cost  and the  bill  for water consumption is the  unit of volume,  1,000
gallons.   Each  operating cost  factor  can be reduced to  cost/1,000  gallons.
Each of  the above mentioned  operating  costs is  discussed in  the  following
sections.  The sum total of the annual operating costs based upon total  water
production yields the cost per 1,000 gallons (the unit  cost  to be applied to
the consumer's bill).
                                     64
                                     6-1

-------
6.2  DISCUSSION OF OPERATING COSTS

     Similar to capital cost,  there are  many  variables  that affect operating
cost.   Operator attitude  is  a key  intangible which  has  an  impact  on  the
ultimate cost.  The conscientious  operator  strives  to  improve  plant perform-
ance and reduce  operating cost.  In contrast, the disinterested operator is not
concerned with plant performance or cost.  The  following  subsections delve into
each of the operating costs previously listed.

6.2.1  Treatment Chemical Costs

     The treatment chemicals discussed herein  are  limited  to sulfuric acid and
caustic  soda.   There  are other acids  and bases  than can be  substituted  for
those chemicals; but  they  are  more costly which  defeats a prime objective of
this process. Other chemicals could also be used for  special requirements such
as:   corrosion  inhibition, precipitation of  regeneration wastewater solids,
dewatering of precipitated solids  in wastewater, etc.; however, these are site
specific requirements that are not covered in this manual.

     Since these  chemicals  are being used  in treatment of water  for public
consumption,  it is recommended  that  samples of each  chemical delivery  be
analyzed  for chemical content.   It  is  also  recommended that  the  chemical
supplier be required to certify that the containers used to store and deliver
the chemicals have not been used for any  other chemical; or if they have, that
they have been decontaminated according  to procedures required by the govern-
ing regulatory agency.

     Chemical costs are variable.   Like all  commodities, they are sensitive to
the supply and demand  fluctuations of the marketplace. The geographic location
of  the  treatment  plant site in relation to that  of the supplier has a major
impact  on  the delivered cost.   In many cases,  the delivery costs  are much
greater  than  the  cost  of  the  chemical.   The commodity price of each chemical
can vary dramatically from one  region  of  the country  to another.  The designer
in his conceptual design must evaluate the chemical logistics and determine the
most cost effective mode of procurement.

     The  chemistry of the  raw water  to be treated is the most significant
factor affecting treatment chemical consumption and cost.   Fluoride and alka-
linity are the key ingredients in the raw water;  the higher  that each of these
are, the higher the chemical cost.

6.2.1.1  Acid Cost
     The most cost effective  commercially  available chemical  available for
lowering  pH is concentrated  sulfuric acid.   The  commercial  designation is
66°B'H SO,;  its concentration is 93.14 percent.  The remaining 6.86 percent is
water tplus  other  constituents).   The other  chemicals  that could  be present
must be  evaluated.  Frequently,  these are  small  quantities of iron and trace


                                      65
                                     6-2

-------
amounts of heavy metals.  For potable water service,  there are stringent limits
on the levels of contaminants in the acid which must and rigidly enforced.

     The acid usually is a byproduct of the copper smelting process.  Sulfide
in the ore is oxidized to sulfur dioxide which  is  then converted to sulfuric
acid.  Some  sulfuric acid supplies  are  only  suitable for  commercial applica-
tions; not potable  water  treatment.  These  are designated as  "dirty acid".
Reputable suppliers screen the chemicals when they are advised of the service
requirements.   Therefore,  when  placing an  order  for  acid,  "Potable  Water
Service" must be designated.   The most economical method of procuring acid is
in tank truck quantities (50,000 pounds)  which are 3,200 gallons  each.   The
tank trucks are loaded at the acid manufacturer's site and delivered directly
to the  treatment plant where  it is  transferred to  the  acid  storage  tank.
Transfer is accomplished by means of compressed air which is  provided by an air
compressor on the truck.  In addition to  the  lower  commodity  price resulting
from minimum handling and storage of the chemical,  there is minimum chance of
contamination.  At  large  treatment  plants  where there  is potential for high
acid consumption, rail tank car quantity  (200,000  pounds)  delivery, which is
still cheaper,  may  be justified.   Capital expenditure  for a  16,000 gallon
(minimum)  storage  tank and  a rail spur with  unloading  equipment  are  then
required.

     The delivered  cost of  tank  truck quantities of  sulfuric  acid presently
ranges from $30-$125/ton depending on  the geographic  location of the treatment
plant.   Rail tank car delivered costs  can provide savings ranging up  to 40
percent.

     The acid  is consumed  in  two  phases  of  the treatment process at  every
fluoride removal plant.  First,  it  is used to adjust  the  raw  water pH to the
treatment requirement  (5.5);  secondly,  it  is used  to  rapidly  neutralize the
treatment bed immediately after regeneration.   At  some locations,  it is also
used  to  neutralize  the high pH  of  regeneration wastewater for discharge to
sewers or other receiving facilities.   This latter application does not apply
to treatment systems that discharge regeneration wastewater to lined evapora-
tion ponds.  The raw water alkalinity dictates the weight of acid required for
the  pH  adjustment  step.   The activated alumina  fluoride  removal process has
been employed on natural waters with alkalinities ranging from 10-1,500 mg/1.

     The acid  consumption  for pH adjustment  can be  accurately  projected by
running a titration on a raw water  sample.  The  cost of acid  required for pH
adjustment is  then  determined  by extending the  acid  addition  in mg/1 to the
weight (Ibs.) required  per 1,000 gallons and multiplying by the commercial rate
for  the acid.

     The acid consumption for neutralization after regeneration is  a  function
of the  caustic  concentration employed during regeneration  and  the raw water
alkalinity.  Once again, even though small, this quantity does vary consider-
ably  from  site  to  site.   The consumption is  also a function of the raw water
fluoride level which dictates the frequency of regeneration and the volume of

                                      66
                                     6-3

-------
water over which  this  cost  is  dispersed.   The higher the fluoride  level,  the
less gallons treated per regeneration.  A rule of thumb to employ when project-
ing chemical costs and volumes  is  10,000 gallons of treated water per cycle  per
ft  of treatment media with 6 mg/1 raw water  fluoride (this decreases to 4,000
gallons/ft  at 20 mg/1 fluoride and increases to 16,000 gallons/ft  at 3 mg/1
fluoride).  This  rule  of  thumb information is presented in  Figure  6-1.    The
weight of acid required for neutralization after regeneration should be in  the
range of 1-2 Ibs/ft  of treatment media.

     The actual acid cost  will  normally  fall  in  the range of $0.02  to $0.08  per
1,000 gallons of  treated water.

6.2.1.1  Caustic  Cost
     Caustic  soda (sodium hydroxide)  can be procured  in either  solid  (100
percent NaOH)  or liquid (50 percent NaOH or lower).   The  50 percent NaOH is  the
most practical concentration to obtain  for water treatment applications.  That
concentration  is  a  byproduct  of  the chlorine manufacturing  process.   There-
fore, it requires minimum handling to place  it into a 50,000 pound  tank truck
(4,000 gallons) or  a 200,000 pound rail tank car.   At  plants  where tank  car
delivery of  caustic is feasible,  a 20,000  gallon  (minimum) storage  tank is
required.  The main problem with  the 50 percent NaOH concentration  is that it
freezes at 55 F;  it  is also very  viscous at temperatures below 70  F.  There-
fore, it frequently requires heating.  Also,  since  it  is  50 percent water by
weight, the  freight  is a  major cost factor.  Solid caustic  in bead or flake
form is also readily available in drums or bulk.  Its freight cost  is roughly
half that  of  the  liquid,  but  getting  it  into solution  is  difficult and dan-
gerous.  Regardless  of  the economics, solid caustic  is not recommended for this
application.   Caustic  in  the  20  percent  NaOH concentration  which  is commer-
cially available  has a freezing  point  of -20 F; however,  freight  costs  for
shipping this material are very high (80 percent water).   Capital cost for much
larger storage and pumping requirements  are also increased.   Even though heat-
ing  and  temperature protection are  required,  the  50 percent  NaOH  is  recom-
mended.  Transferring caustic from tank trucks to storage tanks is accomplished
with compressed air similar to the method  for acid.

     The delivered cost of tank truck quantities of 50 percent NaOH presently
ranges from $150-$350/ton depending  on  the geographic  location of  the treat-
ment plant.   Rail  tank  car delivered  costs can  provide  savings  up  to  25
percent.

     The caustic is  consumed in two phases of the treatment process.  First, it
is used to raise  the pH of the  raw  water  to  the level  required for treatment
media regeneration; secondly,  it  is used  to raise the pH of  the treated water
back to the level desired  for distribution.  The latter phase may be replaced
by aeration of the treated water to strip  the free carbon dioxide.   The volume
of 50 percent NaOH  required  for a  1 percent  NaOH  concentration regeneration
(includes upfLow and downflow requirements) is 0.4 gallons (5  Ibs.) per ft  per
regeneration.   As with the acid required  for neutralization,  the causti  con-
sumption is  a function of  the raw  water fluoride level which dictates  the
                                     67
                                     6-4

-------
   16
   14
J   12
UJ   ' ^

Ul
_J

UI
Q
oc   10
O
D
oc
111    fi
t-    8
              \
                      6        8       10       12       14      16       18

                       THOUSAND  GALLONS OF  TREATED  WATER  / cu ft Media
20
     FIGURE 6-1 CURVE ILLUSTRATION RULE OF THUMB  FOR VOLUME OF  WATER TO  BE
                  TREATED  PER CYCLE VS.  RAW WATER  FLUORIDE  LEVEL

-------
frequency  of regeneration  and  the volume  of  water over which  this cost is
dispersed.  This varies from site  to site.

     The caustic consumption for treated water pH adjustment is also a function
of raw water alkalinity.  The  concentration of  free  CO  in the water  after the
initial pH  adjustment with  sulfuric  acid  will  determine the caustic require-
ment.  High C0~ concentration  (or community objection to addition of  sodium to
the  water  supply)  could  dictate  the aeration method  for pH adjustment.  In
general, when  cost dictates the method,  caustic pH adjustment is  recommended
when alkalinity is  less  than 100 mg/1 and aeration is recommended when alkalin-
ity  is over 200 mg/1.   In the alkalinity range 100-200 mg/1, a general recom-
mendation  is difficult; other  factors  such as  storage  tank elevation must be
considered.   If caustic  is used  to  raise  the  pH of  the treated  water, the
quantity will be small.  The consumption requirement is  again accurately deter-
mined by continuing the  original titration required for  acid  to  lower the  pH to
the treatment  level of 5.5; then adding the 50 percent NaOH required to  raise
the  pH  to the  desired  level  (7.5).    The cost  of  caustic   required is  then
determined by extending the caustic addition in mg/1 to  the weight required per
1,000 gallons  and  multiplying by  the  commercial  rate  for  the caustic.   The
actual caustic  cost  will  normally fall in  the  range of $0.02 to  $0.12/1,000
gallons.

6.2.2  Operating Labor Costs

     This area of operating labor cost  is  the most difficult to quantify.  The
operator is required  to be dependable and competent.   However,  it is not a full
time position, and the educational and experience requirements for  this posi-
tion does not dictate a high salaried  position.   It is impractical to establish
this as a full-time position for a highly skilled operator.   Depending on the
size of the system and  the  other  duties available  for  the operator, his  time
should be  spread  over  several  accounting  categories.   Except for days  when
regeneration takes place, the  treatment  plant  requires 1-2  hours  per  day of
operator attention.   During regeneration,  the operator is  required to spend
approximately 6-8 hours over a  twelve  hour  period.   On the  routine operating
days, he merely checks the system to  see that pH is being controlled,  takes and
analyzes water  samples,  checks  instrument  (flow,  temperature,  pressure), and
makes entries in daily logs.  During the remainder of the time, he is able to
operate and maintain other  systems (distribution, pumps,  storage,  etc.),  read
meters or handle other municipal responsibilities (e.g. operate sewage treat-
ment plant).  The salary  for a  qualified  individual for  such a position  will
range from $12,000-$30,000 per year depending upon the  size  and economic  con-
ditions in the community.   There should always  be a second operator available
to take over in case  of an emergency, that  is an  individual well versed in the
operation of the plant.

     Using the  example  treatment  plant presented in the  design  section, the
cost of operational labor will be as follows:  (it  is  assumed  that the hours
not  used  for  treatment  plant  operation  will  be  efficiently  used  on  other
duties).
                                     69
                                     6-6

-------
Given
     flow rate                          =    600 gpm
     annual average utilization         =    40%
     number of regenerations per year   =    50
     operator annual salary             =    $18,000
     overhead and fringe benefits       =    30%
     available man hours per year       =    2,000/man

Then:

     number of hours on regeneration/year 50 x 8                 400 hours
     number of hours on routine operation/year (365-40)     =    472.5 hrs.
     Total plant operator time                                   872.5 hrs.
     Operator hourly rate - 18,000/2,000          -    $9.00/hr.
     30% (overhead and fringe benefits            -    $2.70/hr
     Operator Rate                                     $11.70/hr

     Total operator cost 872.5 hours x $11.70/hr. = $10,208

     Total gallons water produced =  .4(600  gpm)  x 1440 min/day x 365 days/year
     = 126,144,000 gallons/year

     Labor cost/1000  gallons $10,200/126,144 (1000 gallons) = $0.08/1000 gal

If  the  operator had  no other  responsibilities and his  entire   salary  were
expended  against  this  treatment plant  operation,  the operating  labor  cost
would become $0.18/1,000 gallons.   As the  reader can  readily  see,  there are
many variables  which  can be  controlled  in different  ways.  Depending on the
motivation of  the  designer/planner/manager,  the operating  labor  cost  can be
minimized  or  maximized over a very broad  range.  In the case  of  a very  high
production plant, the reader will see that the operating labor requirement is
not significantly larger than that for a very small  treatment plant. Therefore,
depending on relative salaries,  the  resulting  cost per  1,000 gallons can range
from a few cents to a dollar.  In proper  perspective, the operating labor cost
should always fall in the $0.03 to $0.10/1,000 gallon range.

6.2.3  Utility Cost

     The utility cost is normally electric utility.  However, there can also be
telephone and natural gas (or oil).  Telephone service  to the treatment build-
ing  is  recommended as  a safety  precaution  in case  of accident  as  well as
operator convenience.   Cost  for  that  service  should be the minimum available
monthly rate.  Depending upon the local climate, the cost for heating can vary.
The purpose  of  the  building  is to protect the  equipment  from elements (pri-
marily freezing) not for operator comfort.  Normally the treatment units act as
heat sinks maintaining an insulated  building at  a temperature near that of the
raw water.  In cold climates, the building must have an auxiliary heat source
to prevent freezing of pipes  in the event that  the water is not flowing.  If the

                                      70
                                      6-7

-------
client determines  that  the treatment building  is 'to  serve  additional func-
tions, heating to a comfort temperature could be an additional required cost.

     Electric power must be provided for the following functions:

1.   chemical pumps

2.   pH controls

3.   caustic storage tank immersion heater

4.   lighting

5.   convenience receptacle

6.   (optional) aeration unit blower

7.   (optional) repressurization pump

8.   extra load on well  pump  for regeneration/backwash wastewater, and loss of
     head through the treatment system

     Items 1, 2, 4 and 5 are negligible.  Item 3 is a function of the climate
and the heat  losses  through the  insulation.   The designer  must incorporate
provisions to conserve energy for this  function.   Item  6 is a relatively small
load (1-2 HP blower motor).  Item 7 is potentially  the biggest electrical load.
This requirement only exists when aeration is used  to adjust treated water pH,
and the water must be pumped to  an elevated storage  tank.  This electrical load
can be equal to the original well pump motor load.  However,  when repressuri-
zation is a  requirement,  then  the original well  pump  should be  modified  to
reduce its discharge  pressure capability to only that which is required to pump
the raw water through treatment into the clearwell in lieu of the pressure to
pump to the elevated storage tank. Then the net increase of electrical energy
consumption is nearly negated.   Item 8 amounts to 3-5 percent  of the well pump
electrical energy consumption.

     The electrical utility rate also varies considerably from one geographic
location to another.   In,  March 1983 rates vary from $0.03 to $0.12/KWH.  The
electrical utility cost  will  range from $0.005 to $0.02  per 1,000 gallons under
normal conditions.  Under  abnormal conditions, it could be 5<:/l,000 gallons or
higher.

6.2.4  Replacement Treatment Media Cost

     The  consumption  of treatment media  should be  close  to zero  in  a well
operated activated alumina fluoride removal water  treatment  plant.   However,
there are ways" in which the media can be expended.


                                     71
                                     6-8

-------
     The most obvious loss of media occurs during backwash.  Excessively long
backwash periods will cause the granular particles to wear down and leave the
bed.  This is defined  as attrition; it can be minimized.  An excessive backwash
rate can expand the treatment media out of  the  vessel resulting in a massive
loss of media.  Monitoring the backwash water will prevent that.

     During  regeneration  and  neutralization,  excessively high  and/or  low pH
exposure  will attack  the treatment media.   If  the  pH of  the regeneration
solution exceeds 1.5  percent  NaOH,  the  solution becomes increasingly aggres-
sive  to  the activated alumina.   Similarly,  if  the pH  of  the neutralization
solution is  lower than pH 2.0, a more drastic dissolving of the alumina takes
place.   Samples taken during  the  regeneration  cycle should  periodically be
analyzed for aluminum.

     A final way for the alumina to be  lost is through the effluent underdrain
(collection  system) within the bed.   If alumina  grains  ever  appear  in the
treated effluent, the  treatment unit should immediately be taken out of service
for inspection (and repair) of the collection system.

     Media  replacement costs  are  extremely hard  to predict.   The only known
instance of  significant media replacement has  occurred at  a  treatment plant
where extensive backwash has been required to remove  filtered solids from the
media.  The plant is also a high production plant requiring frequent extended
backwashing.

     A conservative bed replacement estimate  is 10 percent per year.  In our
previous example where two 300  ft  beds are  used, the media replacement will
be:

                   .10(600 ft3)  x 50  lb/ft3 =  3,000 Ib/year

     Assuming media cost to be $0.70/lb. (see Table 6-1 for current activated
alumina costs), the annual cost will be $2,100.00/year and the cost per 1,000
gallons will be:

     $2,100/126,144 (1,000 gallons) = $0.015/1,000 gallons

	TABLE 6.1.  PRICE FOR ALCOA F-l, 28-48 MESH ACTIVATED ALUMINA	

Quantity                                                           Price*


2,000-10,000  Ibs.                                                $0.697/lb.
12,000-20,000 Ibs.                                                0.594/lb.
22,000-38,000 Ibs.                                                0.548/lb.
40,000 Ibs.  and over                                              0.516/lb.
    	—. ..-.T: '::   "' ~~    " " ~"   \ _ 	--  - -- - - -     .--—-i--.--.-i         	_ 	 -   -:-^          	_

*  100 pound  bags, 2,000 pounds/pallet, FOB Bauxite, Arkansas

                                      72
                                     6-9

-------
     The projected cost for treatment media  replacement  is $0.005 to $0.03 per
1,000 gallons of treated water.

6.2.5  Replacement Parts and Miscellaneous Material Costs

     This is  a  very  small operational  cost item.   Replacement  parts (e.g.,
chemical, pump  diaphragms,  seals  and replacement pump  heads)  should  must be
kept in stock in the treatment plant,  to  prevent  extended  plant  shut  down in
the event a part is required.  Also included are consumables  such as laboratory
reagents  (and  glassware),  record   keeping  supplies,  etc.    An  operative
allowance of $0.01/1,000 gallons of treated water is conservative.

6.3  OPERATING COST SUMMARY

     The  range  of  fluoride  removal  water  treatment  plant  operating costs
discussed above are  summarized in Tab/le 6.2.   As  has  been pointed  out,  the
range of costs is very broad.

	TABLE 6.2.  Operating Cost Tabulation	
Operating cost items
 Dollars/1000 gallons treated water
min.          max.        average
  $              $
Treatment Chemicals

Operating labor
Utility
- acid
- caustic


Replacement Treatment Media
Replacement Part &
TOTAL
Misc. Material

0.02
0.02
0.03
0.005
0.005
0.05
0.085
0.08
0.12
0.10
0.05
0.03
0.1
0.39
0.05
0.05
0.06
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.20
     The  designer and  treatment plant  operator are  the keys  to continued
improvement in   plant   performance   and  reduction   in   operating   costs.
Their  close  liaison is necessary  to  achieve and maintain minimum operating
cost performance.
                                      73
                                     6-10

-------
                                 APPENDIX A

                  SUMMARY  OF  SUBSYSTEMS  INCLUDING  COMPONENTS
     The items  that  are  designated as "optional" are  not  mandatory require-
ments.   Some  of those items  may already be  included  in  systems  other than
treatment and therefore,  would be  redundant.   Other items, though desirable,
are not mandatory.  And, finally as  in the  case  of backwash water and regenera-
tion wastewater disposal, only one of the optional methods would be used.

     For Schematic Flow Diagram,  see Figure A-l.

1)   Raw Water Influent Main (manifold)
     a)  Flow control (optional)
     b)  Flow measurement (optional)
     c)  Temperature indicator (optional)
     d)  Pressure indicator (optional)
     e)  Pressure control (optional)
     f)  Pressure relief (optional)
     g)  Backflow preventer (optional)
     h)  Sample piped to  sample panel (optional)
     i)  Isolation valve

2)   Treated water effluent main (manifold)
     a)   Caustic injection for pH adjustment  (optional)
     b)   pH measurement, indicator, alarm and fail-safe control
     c)   Sample (after pH adjustment) piped to sample panel
     d)   Pressure indicator (optional)
     e)   Flow rate indicator (optional)
     f)   Flow totalization (optional)
     g)   Aeration subsystem (optional)
           i)  Air blower (optional)
          ii)  Clearwell  (optional)
     h)   Booster or repressurization pump (optional)
     i)   Disinfection injection (optional)
     j)   Isolation valve

3)   Wastewater discharge main (manifold)
     a)   Backflow preventer
     b)   Process isolation valves


                                      74
                                     A-l

-------
PVC
c.s.
s.s.
LEGEND
Polyvinyl Chloride
Carbon
Steel
Stainless Steel
Shut-off Valve


Butterfly Valve
Check Valve
Pressure Control Valve
Expansion Joint
Pressure Indicator
Temperature Indicator
Pressure Indicator/Totalizer •.£
rressure rseiier vaive a



-*w-

O

£i (ji)
_jXr t iS^ f
Raw Water

i Sample ^
«*-J>f i
m ft
L











2
<

— C

4
k
V


»
to
3
CO
O

i
A
tx»N*
Treated Water f
To Indicator
1 — Alarm Automatic
	 1 ^Vent ^
«
pH Sensor _E *Q-







^- — — -^ =
/-* \ a
1 I OT
| TREATMENT @ 4
To UNIT NO. 1 lL I
Waste
-
*-
(^cT^^1"
s. .X 4- i- .
*














*Mixt-L-

A i
.£







	 r
l-^








-1
1
mi

t
M /
CAUST.C rjl | /
PUMPS T T > \
• i '.i k^MKM-X

— T
r> Vent
1 1 	 1
, \
1 )
> 1
o /
/
I *~* i Drain
OAIIOTI/^ OT/-IDA/5C TAVI1/
CAUSTIC DAY TANK

ACID
PUMPS




t-i f*
1 (
(^
XfN^j

fe
X







r
ale-
«J
af
I I
> (
ntk*t>4-\
,P Vent
^
>- 1
° /
V i

ACID DAY TANK
CID STORAGE TANK
— j| Future Conn.


~\ 	 i Future Conn.


Automatic
Vent LI
r * '
oA **!
E
CO
CO
A
i

"!
->
T
-{X-
• t
^-- — — ^
^^ >.
X^ ^s.
(Pi) TREATMENT
^ UNIT NO. 2
^__
i.
2.
-txK
^—
t* T:
r \. ^

To
Waste

                                                      Future Conn.
                                                  Sample
                                                        -> Backwash Wastewater
                                              Regeneration Wastewater
                                  \
                                   LINED EVAPORATION POND
                         FIGURE A-1 SCHEMATIC FLOW DIAGRAM

                                           75
                                           A.-2

-------
     c)   Acid injection for pH adjustment (optional)
     d)   Coagulation chemical injection (optional)
     c)   Sample (after chemical injection) piped to sample panel

4)   Treatment Unit Branch Piping
     a)   Isolation valves (influent and effluent)
     b)   Process control valves (manual or automatic)
     c)   Acid injection (lower pH for treatment)
     d)   Caustic injection (raise pH for regeneration)
     e)   Pressure indicator (influent and effluent)
     f)   Flow rate indicator
     g)   Flow totalization
     h)   Sample (influent after pH  adjustment  and effluent)  piped to sample
          panel
     i)   Connections to influent, effluent and wastewater discharge manifolds
     j)   Pressure relief (optional)
     k)   Air/vacuum valve

5)   Treatment Unit
     a)   Pressure vessel
     b)   Treatment media
     c)   Internal distribution and collection piping
     d)   Operating platform and/or ladder (optional)

6)   Sample Panel
     a)   Manifolds
            i) Influent manifold  (influent main sample and raw water samples
               from each treatment vessel after pH adjustment)
           ii) effluent manifold  (effluent main  sample  after pH adjustment,
               treated water samples  from each treatment vessel and wastewater
               manifold sample after pH adjustment and chemical injection)
          iii) pH  indicator (influent  sample  manifold  and  effluent sample
               manifold)
           iv) sample collection spigots with drain
     b)   Wet chemistry lab bench with equipment, glassware, reagents, etc.

7)   Acid Storage and Feed Subsystem                   ,
     a)   Emergency shower and eye wash
     b)   Acid storage  tank (outside treatment building)
            i) fill, discharge, drain, vent, and  overflow piping
           ii) liquid level sensor (optional)
          iii) Desiccant air dryer in vent (optional)
           iv) weather  protection (optional)
            v) diked containment area (optional)
     c)   Acid day tank (inside treatment building)
            i) fill pipe float valve
           ii) drain valve
          iii) curbed containment area  (optional)

                                      76
                                     A-3

-------
      d)   Acid  pumps
             i)  treatment unit  pH  adjustment  (one  pump  for  each  unit)
            ii)  wastewater  pH adjustment  (optional)
      e)   Acid  piping  (interconnecting piping)
             i)  between storage tank  and  day  tank
            ii)  between feed  pumps and  injection points
          iii)  between  feed  pump  and  wastewater  main   injection   point
                (optional)

            iv)  backflow prevention

 8)    Caustic Storage and Feed  Subsystem
      a)   Emergency  shower and eye wash
      b)   Caustic  storage  tank (outside  treatment building)
             i)  fill, discharge, drain, vent,  and  overflow  piping
            ii)  liquid  level  sensor (optional)
          iii)  immersion heater with temperature  control
            iv)  weather protection (optional)
             v)  diked containment  area  (optional)
      c)   Caustic  day  tank (inside treatment building)
             i)  fill  line  float valve
            ii)  drain valve
          iii)  curbed  containment area (optional)
      d)   Caustic  piping  (interconnecting piping)
             i)  between storage tank  and  day  tank
            ii)  between regeneration  feed pump and  injection  points  in  treat-
                ment  and branch piping
          iii)  between feed pump and treated  effluent main injection  point
                (optional)
            iv)  backflow prevention

 9)    Non-toxic  Backwash Water  Disposal System
      a)   Surge tank  (optional)
      b)   Lined evaporation pond  (optional)
      c)   Unlined  evaporation  pond (optional)
      d)   Sewer (optional)
      e)   Drainage ditch  (optional)
      f)   Other discharge  method  (optional)

10)    Toxic  Regeneration Wastewater Disposal  System
      a)   Surge tank (optional)
      b)   Lined evaporation pond  (optional)
      c)   Wastewater reclamation  system (optional)
      d)   Other discharge  method  (optional)
                                       77
                                      A-4

-------
                                 Appendix B

                       Treatment System Design Example
Given:    g (flow rate) = 600 gpm
          N (number of treatment vessels) = 2
          Raw water fluoride level =5.0 mg/1
          Treated water fluoride level =1.0 mg/1
          Treatment media fluoride removal capacity = 2,000 grains/ft
          Pipe material - Type I schedule 40 PVC,
          v pipe velocity = 5'/sec.  (max.)
               for higher velocities shock preventers are
               required to eliminate water hammer
          P (Pressure) = 50 psig (max.)
          T  (Ambient temperature) = 95°F (max.)
          Ta (Water temperature) - 85°F (max.)
           w

I    Vessel and Treatment Bed Design

     Solve for:     h (Treatment bed depth)
                    d (Treatment bed diameter)
                    V (Treatment bed volume)
                    N.Mw (Total weight of treatment media)
                    D (Vessel outside diameter)
                    H (Vessel overall height)

     Reference;     Figure 3-4

     First, q/N = 600 gpm/2 treatment beds = 300 gpm/treatment bed
     Then, using one ft  treatment media  per  gpm  treatment-flow we require 300
     ft  treatment media per treatment bed or, V = 300 ft  = -rd h/4
     Then, try h = 5'-0"       ^                    „
     Then, d  = 4V = 4 x 300 ft 1(5 ft) x TT = 240 ft Iir
     Then,  d =  8'-9", D  must  employ  the  next  even  multiple  of  6" or
     D = 9'-p" >8'-9"
     Then, d = D-(l") = 9'-0" - (1") = 8'-ll" >5'-0"  OK
     Then, h = 5';rO" and d  = 24" (standard dished head)
     Then, V = 7rd"h/4 = ^18.92') /rr = (5')/4 = 312 ft-
     Then, N.Mw = N.V.Md = 2 x 312 ft  x (50 Ib./ft ) = 31,200 Ib
     Then, H = 1" + 2 (dR)  + (h/2) + (6") = 1"  + 2(24") + 60" + 30" = 6" = 12'-1"

                                      78
                                     B-l

-------
II   Pipe Sizing

     Solve for:
                    A) Sizes of raw and treated water pipe mains
                    B) Sizes of treatment unit branch piping
     A) Mains;      q = 600 gpm
                    Try 6", v = 6.8'/sec.  > 5'/sec.,  therefore NG
                    Try 8", v = 3.9'/sec.  > 5'/sec.,  therefore OK
                    Use 8" schedule 40 PVC
     B) Branches
      	    qB = q/2 = 300 gpm
                    Try 4", v = 7.7'/sec. > 5'/sec., therefore NG
                    Try 6", v = 3.4'/sec. > 5'/sec., therefore OK
                    Use 6" schedule 40 PVC
                                        N
     Note:          During backwash  of one  treatment  bed the  flow  rate can
               increase up to 600  gpm.   Backwash rate is not  to exceed rate
               required for 50 percent treatment bed expansion.  This rate is
               sensitive to raw  water  temperature.   Lab bench tests determined
               that 9.5 gpm/ft backwash flow rate with water at 104 F expanded
               the  specified  bed  material 50 percent.   Since  bed expansion
               will  increase  as  water temperature  decreases,  an 8  gpm/ft
               backwash rate  for   the  95  F  water used  in this  example will
               expand the bed material 50 percent.

Ill  Acid System Design

A)   Storage Tank Size

     Storage  tank  size is  based   upon logistical  requirements  which  are  a
     function  of  treatment   plant acid  consumption  rate  and   tank  truck
     deliveries of bulk acid.   The tank truck can deliver up to 50,000 Ibs. of
     66° B'  H SO, .   The density  of  this liquid is 15.5 Ibs/gallon.  Therefore,
     a delivery contains 3,250 gallons.

     In this example the peak treatment  flow is  600 gpm,  and we shall assume
     that the acid  consumption is  0.10  gallons/1,000 gallons treated water (an
     above  average acid  requirement).   Then   the  acid  consumption is  3.6
     gallons/hour,  and a tank truck load would supply a minimum of 900 hours of
     treatment operation.   Acid consumption for raw water pH reduction,  which
     is a function  of total alkalinity and free carbon dioxide, is discussed in
     Appendix C.

     A 5,000 gallon storage tank provides capacity for lh bulk tank  truck loads
     of 66  B' H SO, .  Therefore, when  half a  truckload is consumed, there is a
     minimum of a 450 hour (18.75  day) acid storage available before the acid
     supply is-expended.  In practice it would  probably be at least two times
     that minimum.   At any  rate, the 5,000 gallon storage capacity will easily
     maintain operation while awaiting delivery.

                                      79
                                     B-2

-------
B)   Day Tank Size

     The storage tank supplies a polypropylene day tank located inside of the
     treatment building.  A 100  gallon day tank will satisfy acid requirements
     for 1,000,000 gallons of treated water  which exceeds  the treatment flow
     for one day.

C)   Acid Pump Size

     The maximum acid feed rate required for the treatment mode feed rate for
     each pump is:  300 gpm x 60  min/hr x 0.10 gallons acid/1,000 gallons water
     = 1.8 gph

     The acid feed rate must be increased during the neutralization mode (see
     Section  5.6)  to  adjust raw watfer  pH  to  2.5.   Positive  displacement
     diaphragm type metering pumps with materials  of construction suitable for
     66  B' H^SO, service rated at 5.0 gph and a 10:1 turndown rate are suitable
     for acid feed to the  mixing tee where dilution takes  place in the influent
     branch to each vessel.

IV   Caustic System Design

     A)   Storage Tank Size

          Given:    Raw water fluoride - 5.0 mg/1
                    Treated water fluoride -1.0 mg/1                  „
                    Treatment media Fluoride capacity - 2,000 grains/ft
                    Density of 50 percent NaOH-12.6 Ib/gal
          Find:     Frequency of Regeneration

          Amount of fluoride removed = 5.0 - 1.0 = 4.0 mg/1

          Converting mg/1 to grains/gal multiply by .058 = (4.0) x (.058) = 0.23
          grains/gal
                                                                         3
          Quantity  of  water  treated/treatment  run  =   2,000 grains/ft   x
          312 ft /0.23  grains/gal = 2,700,000 gal

          During maximum treatment flow continuous operation minimum regenera-
          tion frequency would be  six days per bed. Using the two bed system in
          this example, the maximum regeneration frequency could be as often as
          once  every  three  days.   The amount  of  50  percent caustic  soda
          required  per regeneration is  as follows:   Weight of regeneration
          solution = 2 x (15 gallons  1 percent NaOH/ft  bed)  x  (312  ft  bed) x
          (8.4  Ib/gal)  =  78,600  Ib

          Weight  of 50 percent NaOH/regeneration  =  1,572/lbs = Volume of 50
          percent NaOH/regeneration = 1,572  lbs/(12.6  Ibs/gal) = 125  gallons

                                      80
                                     B-3

-------
     A tank truck 50 percent NaOH delivery contains 50,000  Ibs or approxi-
     mately 4,000 gallons, enough to supply 32 regenerations (neglecting
     caustic feed requirements for neutralization of treated water).

     For sizing of the caustic storage tank in the  example, we are using a
     50 percent  NaOH  feed rate of .02 gallons/1,000  gallons  of treated
     water.  This requires 50 percent NaOH  feed rate  of 0.72  gph. (or 17
     gpd).  When adding  this maximum caustic  feed rate for neutralization
     to the maximum required for regeneration (17 gpd + 125/3 days) = 76
     gpd, if we employa 5,000 gallon  storage tank  identical to that used
     for  acid  storage  in  this  example,   we  find  that  a 40,000  gallon
     delivery allows a 1,000 gallon maximum supply in storage at time of
     delivery.   The 1,000 gallons will supply  the treatment plant for a
     minimum of  13 days during periods  of  maximum caustic  consumption,
     which is adequate.   Therefore, the 5,000 gallon caustic storage tank
     can be used.

     In cases where the  raw water  fluoride is higher and/or the treatment
     flow rate  is  higher,  the rate of caustic  consumption  will require
     larger storage capacity.

B)   Day Tank Size

     The  tank  a  polypropylene day tank  located inside  of the treatment
     building.   A  100 gallon  day  tank will satisfy caustic  requirements
     for one of  the two phases  of the regeneration.   This size day tank
     will require  refilling  during  the  upflow rinse after  the  upflow
     regeneration.  A 150 gallon day tank will satisfy  the  entire regener-
     ation plus  the caustic  required for neutralization  of  the treated
     water.  Therefore,  use the 150 gallon day tank.

C)   Caustic Pump Sizing

     A positive  displacement  diaphragm caustic feed  pump  with materials
     of construction  suitable  for 50 percent NaOH service,  sized for a
     miximum flow  of 2.5  gph  with a  10:1 turndown ratio,  will be satis-
     factory for the treated  water neutralization caustic feed require-
     ment (0.72 gph).

     For the neutralization step a 2 gpm metering pump with materials of
     construction  suitable for 50 percent NaOH service  is satisfactory.
     Each  regeneration  step  (upflow  and  then downflow)  requires  62.5
     gallons of 50 percent NaOH to be  fed  into the mixing  tee where it is
     diluted to  1  percent NaOH.   Each regeneration  step  is designed to
     last between 30 and 35 minutes.
                                 81
                                B-4

-------
V    Lined Regeneration Wastewater Disposal Evaporation Pond Design

     A)   Assumptions:

          1)   Average treatment plant average utilization = 40 percent

          2)   Annual average net evaporation (less rainfall) rate = 6'- 0"

     B)   Find;     Evaporation pond size

          Total annual  volume of water treated = 40  percent (600ggpm) = 240 gpm
          (240 gpm) (1,440 min/day) (365 days/gear) = 126 x 10  gpy         &
          Number of  regenerations:   126 x 10  gpy  treated  water/(2.7  x 10
          gal/regeneration) = 47 regenerations/year

          Experience dictates that 300  gallons of wastewater per cubic foot of
          treatment  media are  produced per  regeneration.    Therefore,  each
          regeneration  yields 312  ft   x  300  gal/ft  =  93,600  gallons  of
          wastewater.

          The   total   wastewater   produced   per   year   is:      (93,60Q
          gallons/regeneration)  x .,(47  regenerations  year)  =  4.4  x  10
          gallons/year =  586,000 ft /year.
          Using an average annual net  evaporation of 6'-0" and deducting I'-O"
          for  deviation  from  average  we  have (6'-0")-(1'-0")  =  5'-0"  net
          minimum evaporation rate per year.

          To  determine the  required  pond areas we divide  the  total annual
          wastewater produced by the net evaporation.

          Pond Area =  586,000 ft3/5 ft = 117,200 ft-

          Pond Depth to be 8' (minimum)
                                      82
                                      B-5

-------
                                 APPENDIX C

               DISCUSSION OF ACID CONSUMPTION REQUIREMENTS FOR
                          pH ADJUSTMENT OF RAW WATER
     The practical method described in the text which is used  to determine the
acid feed requirement for lowering the raw water pH  to 5.5 is acid titration.
However, this can also be accomplished theoretically  when  a raw water analysis
is available and raw water samples are not.  This method requires the pH, the
total alkalinity (M as ppm CaCO.,), and/or the  free carbon dioxide CO. as ppm)
from the raw water analysis in addition to the graph illustrated in Figure C-l.
If only two of the three raw water analysis items are available,  the third is
determined  by  the  graph.    The  pH  curves  illustrated   in  Figure  C-l  were
developed from theoretical chemical formulae which integrate  the relationship
between pH, alkalinity and free C0_ .   This theory is beyond the scope of this
manual.  Trial and  error usage  of these curves rapidly leads the designer to
the acid feed requirement for the desired pH adjustment.  The objective is to
determine the amount of alkalinity reduction that is required to lower the pH
the  desired amount, and  then to  convert the  alkalinity reduction  to  acid
addition.   The  designer must  be aware  of  the  fact  that the  reduction in
alkalinity  coincides with the corresponding  increase in  free  carbon dioxide.
The following examples best illustrate this method:

Example 1:

     Given:    Raw Water pH = 8.0
               Raw Water M  = 220 ppm as CaCO-
               Raw Water CO = 4 ppm

     Find:     a) M and free CO   for pH adjusted to  5.5
               b) 66°B' H SO,  required feed rate to  adjust pH to 5.5

     a)   Try reducing M by 200 ppm (as CaCO ) to 20 ppm (as  CaCO ).

          Then, increase in free CO  (M multiplied by 0.88),  200 x 0.88 = 176
          ppm

          Then, total free CO  =  176  + 4 = 180 ppm

          Then, using graph we find that the pH is 5.4 when:

                                      83
                                     C-l

-------
1000
                        10                  100

                    TOTAL ALKALINITY AS CaCO3-p.p.m.
1000
  FIGURE C-1  GRAPH OF pH AS A FUNCTION OF TOTAL ALKALINITY AND
              FREE CARBON DIOXIDE
                               84
                               C-2

-------
               1)   M = 20 ppm (as

               2)   CO  = 180 ppm        Therefore, NG

          Therefore, too much alkalinity was removed.  Try reducing M by 196 ppm
          (as CaCO ) to 24 ppm (as CaCO )

          Then, increase in free Co2 = 196 x 0.88 = 172.5

          Then, total free C02 = 172.5 + 4 = 176.5 ppm

          Then, using graph we find that the adjusted raw water pH is 5.5 when:

               1) M   =24 ppm CaCO

               2) C02 = 176.5 ppm         Therefore, OK

     b)   For each 100  ppm (as  CaCO,)  reduction of total alkalinity,  105 ppm
          66 B1 sulfuric acid must be  added.   Therefore,  reduce M by  196 ppm
          (as CaCO ) by feeding 1.96 x 105 ppm = 205.8 ppm 66-B' sulfuric acid
          to adjust raw water pH to 5.5.  If we desire to find what acid feed
          rate would be required per thousand gallons of treated water,  we find
          that:

  Feed rate = (205.8 x 10~6ppm) x (1,000 gal x 8.34 lb/gal)/(15.5  Ib/gal) =
                        0.11  gal  H2S04/1,000 gal water
Example 2;
     Given:    Raw Water M - 100 ppm (as CaCO )
               Free CO     =  6 ppm

     Find:     a)  Raw Water pH
               b)  M and free CO. for pH adjusted to 5.5.
               c)  66 B1 H SO,  required feed rate to adjust pH to 5.5

     a)   From graph we find raw water pH to be 7.5

     b)   Try reducing M by 80 ppm (as CaCO,) to 20 ppm (as CaCO )

          Then, increase in free CO  = 80 x 0.88 = 70.4 ppm

          Then, total free CO  = 70.4 + 6 = 76.4 ppm

          Then, using the graph we find the adjusted pH to be 5.75 when:

               1)M   =20 ppm (as CaCO,)


                                      85
                                     C-3

-------
               2)   CO   =  76.4  ppm        Therefore,  NG

          Therefore,  too  little alkalinity was removed,  try  reducing M by 87
          ppm (as  CaCO )  to 13 ppm (as CaCO ).

          Then,  increase  in free CO  = 76.5 + 6 = 82.5 ppm

          Then,  using  the graph we find the adjusted pH to be 5.55 when:

               1)M   =13 ppm (as CaC03)

               2)   C02 =  82.5  ppm       Therefore, NG

          Therefore,  too  little alkalinity was removed,  try  reducing M by 88
          ppm (as  CaCO.,)  to 12 ppm (as CaCO.,)

          Then,  increase  in free CO  = 88 x 0.88 = 77.5 ppm

          Then,  total  free CO  = 77.5 + 6 = 83.5 ppm

          Then,  using the  graph we  find  the  adjusted raw water  pH to be 5.5
          wh en:

               1)   M   =12 ppm (as CaCO )

               2)   CO  =83.5 ppm       Therefore, OK

     c)   Therefore, reduce M by 88 ppm (as CaCO  ) by  feeding 0.88 x 105 =  92.4
          ppm 66—B1 sulfuric acid to adjust raw water pH to 5.5

Acid feed rate = (92.4 x 10~6ppm) x (1,000 gal x 8.34 Ib/gal)/(15.5  Ib/gal)  =
                       0.05  gal H2S04/1,000  gal  water
                                      86
                                      C-4

-------
                        APPENDIX  D

TABULATIONS OF CAPITAL COST BREAKDOWNS FOR CENTRAL FLUORIDE
    REMOVAL WATER TREATMENT PLANTS BASED UPON FLOW RATE



H
z
E-
i
< Q
ll
l§
. w
Ig
go
^ o
Q Q-
2 gS
a 2 o
§§°,
§ §£
t. w >
* 3t
O ° -H

gg5
" 3
<= S
iE
gz
M g
sS
K ^
TABULATI
1ASED UPC







P3

















O
C
o
CM
O
CO
O
o

o
o
— <
o
o
CM

O
O
o

o
o
CO

o
o


o
o

o
o
co

o
o
CM

o
o






e
a


s


$
5





i
Jj
rt
0>
p
0s. O en ^ CM ^-< sj r— -^ CM O CMlACMO
CM -H ^J LA
O O co CM r-* — oo m o cc fi IA m m un
CM m OiT3C
a>S&, AJ3r-( ft G r-« --I CCOr-'
• -I 'HUWprfCO -H r-tr-fcoro »-* PTO tO
3 4JUfx cp-r-t^ e s-i-'S^
co u i-i a P •!-!•»-( D m « u aj n M 01*0 9
to cccOy-uEgw » ^UCW *j —< ft) O5
ly Q> r-*TO O C03-H
O HHfrf en
CM 
C 4J
*u 5 J

CM H
o c o
rj [t] E-J




                          87
                          D-l

-------
'05
, O3
                        TABLE D-2.  TABULATION OF ESTIMATED CAPITAL COST* OF MINIMUM FLUORIDE REMOVAL CENTRAL WATER TREATMENT PLANTS
                                        BASED  UPON  TREATMENT FLOW  RATE  IN  DOLLARS  ROUNDED  OFF TO THE NEAREST THOUSAND
                                                                    (Multiply by ?1,000)
Treatment Flow Rate ( gpra)
Process Equipment
Treatment Vessels
Treatment Media
Process Piping, etc.
Instrument and Controls
Chemical Storage Tanks
Chemical Pumps, Piping, etc.
Sub to ta 1
Process Equipment Installation
Mechanical
Electrical
Painting and Miscellaneous
Subtotal
Misc. Installed Items
Wastewater Pond
Building and Concrete
Site Work and Miscellaneous
Subtotal
Contingency 5%
Engineering Fees 10%
TOTAL
100

14
4
10
6
—
5
39

20
2
3
25

_..
2
—
2
4
_7
77
200

16
3
12
6
—
5
47

22
3
3
28

..
2
—
2
4
_8_
89
300

21
11
14
7
—
6
59

25
4
3
32

„
3
—
3
5
	 9
108
400

25
14
16
7
—
6
68

28
5
3
36

__
3
—
3
5
11
123
500

33
21
16
8
—
6
84

30
5
4
39

..
3
—
3
6
13
145
800

40
27
17
9
—
7
100

35
5
4
"44

„
4
—
4
7
15
168
1000

45
34
18
9
—
7
113

42
5
4
51

„
4
—
4
9
17
194
1200

50
41
20
9
—
8
128

47
6
5
58

_.
5
—
5
10
20
221
1400

bO
48
22
10
—
9
149

55
6
6
67

__
5
—
5
11
23
255
1600

70
54
25
12
—
10
171

58
7
7
72

_
5
—
5
13
26
287
1800

80
60
28
12
—
11
191

63
8
9
80

__
6
—
6
14
29
320
2000

90
66
32
14
	
12
214

68
9
11
88

„
7
—
7
16
32
357
        *March  1983 prices.

-------
              APPENDIX E


ENGLISH  TO METRIC  CONVERSION TABLE
English
Inches (in)
. 2
in
. 3
in
Feet (ft)
ft2
ft3
Gallon (gal)
gal
gal
Grains (gr)
gr/ft3
pounds (Ib)
2
Ib/in (psi)
lb/ft2 (psf)
C/1000 gal
Multiply by
0.0254
0.000645
0.000016
0.03048
0.0929
0.0283
0.2642
0.0038
0.0038
0.0649
2.2919
0.4545
0.00689
4.8922
0.2642
Metric
meter (m)
m2
3
m
m
2
m
m3
liters (1)
3
m
kiloliter (kl)
gam (g)
g/m3
kilograms (kg)
megapascals (MP)
kg/m
C/1000 liters
                   89
                  E-l
                                            • US GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1984- 759-102/10648

-------