xvEPA
                                United States
                                Environmental Protection
                                Agency
                                Municipal Environmental Research'
                                Laboratory
                                Cincinnati OH 45268
                                Research and Development
                                EPA-600/S2-82-027  Sept. 1982
Project Summary
                                                                                             I»
                                Removal of  Organic
                                Contaminants  from  Drinking
                                Water  Supply  at  Glen Cove,
                                N.Y.: Phase II
                                Walter A. Feige and Dominick Ruggiero
                                 Phase II continues pilot plant research
                                to examine treatment alternatives for
                                the removal of organic contaminants
                                from  ground water. The specific
                                processes of resin  adsorption and
                                aeration were evaluated for their
                                ability to remove trichloroethylene,
                                tetrachloroethylene, cis-1, 2-dichloro-
                                ethylene, and 1,1, 1-trichloroethane
                                from the City of Glen Cove's drinking
                                water supply.
                                 The resin used was Rohm and Haas'
                                Ambersorb XE-340®*. Major additions
                                and modifications were made to the
                                resin  testing system investigated
                                during Phase I to facilitate the study of
                                cocurrent and countercurrent flow
                                applications as well as countercurrent
                                steam regeneration techniques and
                                also to ensure the presence of pure
                                steam throughout the regeneration
                                process. In addition. Phase II included
                                an evaluation of the feasibility of
                                regenerating granular activated carbon
                                (GAC) with steam.
                                 Aeration studies consisted of the
                                determination of organic contaminant
                                removal capabilities by different
                                aeration designs. The relative efficien-
                                cies of three aeration methods were
                                compared: diffused aeration vs. packed
                                aeration vs. induced draft cooling. Air-
                               'Mention of trade names or commercial products
                                does not constitute endorsement or recommenda-
                                tion for use.
                                to-water ratios (A/W) were varied
                                with each pilot system.
                                  Flows of 1, 2, and 5 mgd (3785,
                                7575, and 18,925 m3/d) were chosen
                                to obtain a range of costs for a full-
                                scale installation that wishes to
                                consider diffused aeration, packed
                                column aeration, or a resin system for
                                treatment of its ground water.
                                  Project results  are  being used to
                                conduct a third phase in which the
                                technical and economic feasibility of
                                an aeration-adsorption approach will
                                be assessed.
                                  This Project Summary was developed
                                by EPA's Municipal Environmental
                                Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH,
                                to announce key findings  of the
                                research project that is fully docu-
                                mented  in a separate report of the
                                same title (see Project Report ordering
                                information at back).

                                Introduction

                                Background
                                  In 1977, the City of Glen Cove, NY,
                                experienced a water shortage resulting
                                from the closing of  several wells
                                polluted  by the presence of organic
                                contamination. Realizing that the
                                contamination could migrate throughout
                                the aquifer, the city was interested in
                                finding methods for treating its contam-
                                inated water. A research project  was
                                funded with the EPA in  1978 to study

-------
two treatment techniques; adsorption of
the contaminants by synthetic resin and
stripping of the contaminants by diffused
aeration. Pilot plant operation took place
for 9 months. The results indicated that
(1) the resi n was capable of lowering the
contaminants to below 1 microgram per
liter  (Aig/L), producing an acceptable
water quality for several months and (2)
the aeration system, with the proper
A/W, could reduce contaminant levels
below present New York State guide-
lines. These promising results warranted
the continuation of this project with the
overall objectives for obtaining relevant
design  parameters and capital and
operating  costs for both  removal tech-
niques.
         COL
          I
        §!!
         Granular A ctivated
          Carbon Columns
   Rohm & Haas XE-340
      Resin Columns
                                                Adsorption Testing—Flow and Steam Application Modes
Pilot Plant Facilities
  The  pilot  plant consisted of two
separate operations (Figure  1) corre-
sponding to the  two  methods  being
evaluated,  adsorption  and  aeration.
Several changes were made to the pilot
plant equipment used during Phase I
before  Phase II testing began. These
modifications and additions included a
change in the size of columns used for
the resin testing, the  installation of
activated carbon columns,  a larger
steam supply, and the installation of a
packed aeration column and  a cooling
tower  for  air  stripping. The  same
influent well water flowed to  the resin,
carbon, and aeration systems.
  Changes  to the resin system were
made to facilitate the testing  of upflow
and downflow applications, countercur-
rent steam regeneration, and  to ensure
that pure steam  was  present for the
regeneration of the resin. Three new
columns (III, IV, and V), shown in Figure
1, were installed, each  4  in. (0.1 m) in
diameter and 2.2 ft (0.67 m) high. This
height  allowed for 2 ft (0.61 m) of resin
depth and 10% freeboard. Water flow
through the resin was in  a downward
mode for Column III and upward mode
for Columns IV and V. An electric steam
generator, capable  of producing 100
Ib/hr (45 kg/hr), was usedto regenerate
the resin.
  Phase II  included the evaluation of
regenerating  GAC with steam.  To
facilitate this evaluation, two 6-ft (1.8-
m) high columns, which were  used
during  the Phase  I resin testing period,
were left in place and connected to the
new steam system. These  columns
(Nos. land II in Figure 1) were each filled
with a 4-ft depth of activated carbon and
operated in a downward mode. Regen-
                                                           Water In
Air In



O
S Air In ^
£ (NoDiffus)
s Air In %
(Diffused)


kkkk

Water
Out
        COL I                COL II
(Diffused Aeration Column)  (Packed Column)
     Water Out-**   .
                Cooling Tower
        Air Stripping Tests—Flow Application Modes

Figure 1.     Pilot plant testing modes of operation.
eration of these columns was  then
attempted in an upward mode.
  To continue the evaluation of aeration
designs, a second column identical to
that used in Phase I aeration testing was
installed. Six feet of packing material
purchased from  Munters Corporation
was placed in the column. This packing
rested on a ledge 2 ft above the bottom
of the column and air was applied below
the packing. The packing was supplied
in 1 -ft sections and was installed so that
the orientation of the channels in the
packing was altered from layer to layer.
The space between the packing and the
inside of the column.was sealed at each
1-ft interval to prevent air from circum-
venting the packing. Air was supplied to
both the column used in Phase I and the
new column from the  same blower
utilized during Phase I.
  To evaluate the stripping efficiency of
the cooling tower, a small demonstration
model of an induced draft cooling tower,
provided by  Baltimore Air Coil, was
installed. This model is based on a self-
sustaining aerating system requiring no
outside source of energy other than the
water pressure itself.
  Relative  efficiencies  of  the three
methods of aeration were determined.
In addition, the packed aeration column
evaluation consisted of determining the
effect of introducing air into the column
below the  packing  media by two
methods, stone diffusers and a hole in
the air pipe at the center of the media.
The packed column was operated with
the media flooded, partially flooded, and
unflooded. Variables in the  testing
program were the air-to-water ratios
(15:1, 10:1, and 5:1), the water depth in
the packed aeration columns, and the
water flow to the induced draft cooling
tower. The water flow to both aeration
columns was maintained at 28 gpm (6.4
mVhr).
  Required analyses  were performed
onsite with  the  gas chromatograph
system  purchased for Phase I  and the
addition of a new recorder purchased'
from Varian Corporation.

-------
 Results

 Adsorption Studies — XE-
 340® Resin
   A summary curve of the performance
 of the three resin columns appears in
 Figure  2 for the major contaminants
 present. A water application rate of 4
 gpm/ft3 of  adsorbent  (0.42 Lpm/m3)
 was used, which resulted  in an empty
 bed contact time of approximately 1.9
 min. Column III (virgin resin operating in
 a downward mode)  showed longer
 service times than Columns IV and V
 (virgin and regenerated resins operating
 in the upward mode). In  addition,
 tetrachloroethylene was more effectively
 removed than cis-1, 2-dichloroethylene.
 For example, the performance of Column
 III observed from Figure 2 shows the
 following service times to reach  an
 effluent level of 5/yg/L: 43 days for cis-
 1, 2-dichloroethylene, 110 days for
 trichloroethylene, and 142 days for
 tetrachloroethylene. The data indicate
 the importance of establishing  an
effluent target level so  that proper
design, operating procedures, and costs
can be determined.
  Several  steam  regenerations took
place and  the  results showed that,  in
most cases, steam stripping removed
the majority of the organics from the
resins. Mass balances indicated about
90% of total organics by weight were
removed.  To achieve this stripping
efficiency,  approximately 20 to 30 bed
volumes  of steam  were  required.
Methods of condensate disposal were
researched and the results are described
in the complete report. "Superloading,"
a process  whereby the aqueous phase
of the condensate collected from one
regeneration cycle was returned to the
resin column next in need of regenera-
tion, appeared  successful  as observed
by the concentration of organics percent
in the organic  layer of the newly
regenerated resin's condensate.  A
further positive indication of success
was that  the resin's performance
returned to about virgin conditions.
Granular Activated Carbon
Regeneration Studies

  The purpose  of adsorption testing
using activated carbon was to determine
the feasibility of regenerating spent
activated carbon with steam rather than
the adsorptive ability of the  carbon.
Because a hydraulic loading twice the
manufacturer's recommendation was
used to load the carbon in as short a
time as possible, no attempt was made
to evaluate the adsorption results of the
activated carbon or compare them to the
resin.
  Regeneration of  activated carbon
with steam took place twice for each of
two GAC's using the equipment sized
for the regeneration of resin in Phase II
and  no  special considerations were
given to the carbon.  The carbons were
regenerated using the maximum steam
flow available over a 24-hr period. No
attempt was made, however, to achieve
zero contaminants in the steam con-
densate.
i
? Colum
3V/Day - 77
-.BCT- 1.9m









/
6
V
I









/
t /
r
i








;
/
A
Y




1 1ll (Virgin Downflow
n IV (Virgin Upflow) .
n V (Regen Upflow)
.1 •
in




f
/


^









/
f


/
^







/
/



/
/






/
/




^
.J
*^






Cis- 1,2-Dichloroet'hylene
I I






I
I








3 5 tO 20 30 40








L














/


J




/
t

1
/
/
/
/
/
I














/
/
1
/
/











/
'

1













/















.
















Tetrachloroethylene
1 1




































0 5 10 20 30 40
Concentration fug/L)



1









I







I








}
//
J



*
r









A

-------
  Several steam regenerations were
conducted, and the results showed low
regeneration efficiency when compared
to the  resin. Mass balances  indicated
that only 25% to 35% of the organics
were  stripped from the  carbons.  In
addition, the effluent from the regener-
ated  carbon columns exhibited break-
through contaminant concentrations in
approximately half  the service time of
virgin resin or the previous carbon run.
Aeration Studies
  Results  from the diffused aeration
and packed column studies represent
percent removals for each organic
contaminant at the three A/Wevaluated
(Figure 3).  In general, increased A/W
resulted in increased contaminant
removals for the designs tested — the
                           lowest average removals occurred at an
                           A/W = 5:1 and the highest occurred at
                           A/W  =  15:1. The packed  column,
                           operated in the unflooded mode with air
                           introduced through spargers, removed a
                           greater percentage of each contaminant
                           at a given A/W than the other systems
                           evaluated. In addition, removal efficien-
                           cies for both systems  tested were
                           greatest for tetrachloroethylene (overall
                           average  84%) and least for  cis-1, 2-
                           dichloroethylene (overall average 67%).
                           Both  designs, however, resulted in
                           effluent contaminant levels below the
                           present New York State guideline level
                           (50 /ug/L per  contaminant) 98% of the
                           time for all contaminants. The induced
                           draft  cooling tower  was the least
                           effective  removal method evaluated
                           and, in fact, was never able to  reduce
                           trichloroethylene levels below the guide-
                           line level.
Estimated Costs for Full-
Scale Installations

  Figures 4 and 5  summarize  the
estimated capital  and operating costs
for  full-scale design for the  major
systems evaluated during Phase II. The
estimates indicate that the resin system
has the greatest  capital cost and the
diffused  aeration system the least.
Approximately 40% to 65% of the capital
cost  for  the resin system is  for the
required piping and valves, particularly
those associated with steam regenera-
tion.  Operating costs,  however  are
greatest for the diffused  aeration
system and  least for the resin system.
The  greater costs  for  the  aeration
systems are a result of the  electrical
power required to provide the air. These
costs  could be reduced if environmen-
tally acceptable alternative methods of
 2
 o
 I
IUU
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
?n



1
'


t 	 ^
^^,
^


1 ^^"""""^ j
*^~

• Diffused Aeration Column
A Packed Column - S (flooded}
* Packe
D Packe
•" Packet.
d Column - ,5
d Column - r
i Column H (
> (unflooded)
/ (flooded)
unflooded)


t
1





 n>

a!
Figure 3.
                 5:1         10:1        15:1
                       Air:Water Ratio
                   Cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene
                 (Influent Range 28 to 79 ug/L)
IUU
on

Of*

fin

40
in



i
i
*



5:




Lx^'



1 10:

^
^^





1 15

)






:1
/L/C/
90
•35 80
>
o
5 70
*
r-^




j
r^^
•K--'




NKRE







         Air:Water Ratio
        Trichloroethylene
 (Influent Range 117 to

Average percent removals at selected air: water ratios.

                     4
                                                                5:1        10:1        15:1
                                                                      Air:Water Ratio
                                                                     1,1,1 -Trichloroethane
                                                                  (Influent Range 3 to
IUU
90
"(B
I 80
S
3 70
w
c
a> 60
U
a. 50
40
30

i
i





,
^^^—
L^—









|






5:1 10:1 15:1
                                                                                   Air-.Water Ratio
                                                                                Tetrachloroethylene
                                                                           (Influent Range 33 to 297 ug/L)

-------
  7000
                                                ENR  3383
                                                Cost March 1981
   100
                                 3.0       4.0

                                  Flow—M.G.D.
Figure 4.    Capital cost comparison.
air introduction can be demonstrated
and used.

Conclusions

Resin Adsorption Studies
  1.  The test results using Rohm and
     Haas' Ambersorb XE-340® indi-
     cated that this resin was capable
     of reducing the levels of contami-
     nants to very low concentrations,
     and, in most  cases,  virgin or
     freshly regenerated resins achieved
     reductions of each contaminant to
     less than 1 /ug/L These results
     were achieved  for the following
   influent ranges: cis-1, 2-dichloro-
   ethylene, 38 to 79 pg/L; 1, 1, 1-
   trichloroethane, 3  to 7  /ug/L;
   trichloroethylene,  1 1 7 to 277
   //g/L; and tetrachloroethylene, 33
   to 207 /jg/L.
2.  The best mode of operation was
   downward flow application and
   upward steam regeneration.
3.  The ability of the resin  to  be
   regenerated with steam, achieving
   better than 90% of virgin adsorbent
   capacity,  was  conclusively  de-
   monstrated. Steam  regeneration
   techniques, however, require
   further development. Approxi-
     mately 20 bed volumes of steam at
     an application rate of 1 bed volume
     /hr were required to regenerate
     the resin. The collecting of thecon-
     densate, separation of the organic
     phase for disposal,  and recycling
     the condensate to the resin column
     next to be regenerated for treat-
     ment was  determined feasible
     during this phase of testing.

Granular Activated Carbon
Regeneration Studies
   1. The  results  of  the three 24-hr
     regeneration attempts (two on the
     ICI carbon and one  of the Calgon
     carbon) showedthatthe regenera-
     tion of  activated  carbon  with
     steam, utilizing the steam equip-
     ment and conditions designed to
     regenerate  resin, was not suc-
     cessful.

Diffused Aeration Studies
   1. Diffused aeration appears to be a
     viable treatment option  for the
     removal of  volatile  organic con-
     taminants from groundwater, and
     this approach could be  used as a
     pretreatment to  additional treat-
     ment if more  stringent water
     quality  is  required than that
     achievable by diffused aeration.
  2. Aeration can reduce the contami-
     nants present in  the well water at
     Glen Cove to levels below present
     New York State guidelines, and to
     levels that  might be acceptable
     throughout the nation. This was
     true greater than 98% of the time
     for all A/W tested (5:1, 10:1, and
     15:1) and for all contaminants
     involved.

Packed Column Aeration
Studies
   1. Both conclusions made above for
     the diffused aeration studies also
     apply to the packed column aera-
     tion studies.
  2. The use of packing material in the
     unf looded mode produced the best
     results with  a slight improvement
     over those for diffused aeration at
     A/W of 5:1 and 10:1; however, at
     increased estimated capital and
     operating costs.


Recommendations
  1.  Evaluate the combination of aera-
     tion and adsorption as a possible
     method of organic  contaminant
     removal  from groundwater. This

-------
    approach would reduce the major
    portion of  the contamination by
    aeration and polish the water by
    adsorption.
  2. Determine the maximum hydraulic
    loading for the resin  system. To
    date, only one application rate (4
    gpm/ft3) has been used.  Several
    rates should be tested using both
    raw and aerated well waters.
  3. Continue  the  development of a
    practical and economically feasible
    stead regeneration technique. The
    proper  handling and  disposal  of
    the steam condensate need to be
    optimized and  the economics
    established.
  4. Evaluate  the  process of multi-
    stage aeration as an approach to
    achieving  organic  contaminant
    removal.
  The full  report was submitted  in
fulfillment of Cooperative  Agreement
No. 806355-01 by NebolsineKohlmann
Ruggiero Engineers, P.C., for the City of
Glen  Cove, NY, under the partial
sponsorship of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency.
40
                          Diffused Aeration System
                  Packed Column
                  Aeration System
                                                      1.0
                     2.0
3.0      4.0
Flow - M.G.D.
                                        Figure 5.    Comparison of annual operating cost per thousand gallons treated
                                                    (energy cost at 9C/kw-hr).
                                          TheEPA author Walter A. Feige (also the EPA Project Officer, seebelowjis with
                                            the Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, OH 45268;
                                            Dominick Ruggiero is with Nebolsine Kohlmann Ruggiero Engineers, P.O.,
                                            New York, NY 10001.
                                          The complete report, entitled "Removal of Organic Contaminants from Drinking
                                            Water Supply at Glen Cove, N.Y.—Phase II," (Order No. PB 82-258 963;
                                            Cost: $12.00, subject to change} will be available only from:
                                                  National Technical Information Service
                                                  5285 Port Royal Road
                                                  Springfield, VA 22161
                                                  Telephone: 703-487-4650
                                          The EPA Project Officer can be  contacted at:
                                                  Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
                                                  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                                                  Cincinnati, OH 45268
                                                                           •fr U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1982/559-092/0525

-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati OH 45268
Postage and
Fees Paid
Environmental
Protection
Agency
EPA 335
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300

RETURN POSTAGE GUARANTEED
                                                                                                         Third-Class
                                                                                                         Bulk Rate

-------