EPA
         Office of
         Research and
         Development
      Energy,
      Minerals and
      Industry
        Cleaning Up Mixed
        Waste Streams-
        The Tank Truck
        Washing Example
  EP 600/9
  77-007
LIBP A BY
tt, S- Ei,vL. . . -iAL
EDISON, N. J. 08817
                   &TECTION AGENCY

-------
THE INDUSTRY/ENVIRONMENT
R&D DECISION SERIES
   This volume is part of the Industry/Environment R&D Decision Series. The series presents the
findings of EPA's Office of Research and Development (ORD) on a number of key issues in the
Industry/Environment R&D Program in a format conducive to effective information transfer. The
volumes are of three types: summaries—short synopses of larger research reports; issue papers-
concise  discussions of  major  industry/environment  technical  issues;  and executive  reports-
in-depth discussions of an entire programmatic or technical area.
   The Division of Industrial and Extractive Processes within ORD's Office of Energy, Minerals,
and Industry is charged with planning and coordination of the Industry/Environmental R&D Pro-
gram. Areas of research include the entire materials processing and production cycle from extrac-
tion through production, with emphasis on the assessment of pollution from industrial  processes
and the development of effective control technologies.
   The Decision Series is produced for both industry/environment decision-makers and  the inter-
ested public. If you have any suggestions or  questions, please write to Series Editor Richard Laska,
Office  of  Energy,  Minerals, and Industry,  RD-681, U.S. EPA,  Washington, D.C.  20460 or call
(202) 755-4857. Extra copies are available on request.
   Mention of trade names or  commercial  products does not constitute endorsement or recom-
mendation  for use  by EPA. This document is available to the public from the National Tech-
nical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.

-------
  Cleaning  Up  Mixed
  Waste Streams -
  The Tank Truck
  Washing  Example
                 April 1977
                STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
 Pollution threats posed by chemicals manufacturing and transportation involve toxic and highly
variable discharges requiring nontraditional clean-up technologies. As in chemical manufacturing
where discharges vary greatly with different production operations, transportation of the chemi-
cals results in a highly variable waste discharge. Chemical tankers carry wide varieties of products
and must be drained and cleaned between trips. Wastewaters from tanker cleaning, exceeding 50-
million gallons per year, now go to municipal waste streams. Chemically burdened wastewaters
from tanker cleaning operations profile comparable but higher volume conditions that prevail
throughout the chemical manufacturing industry. Demonstration of new and effective technol-
ogies for tanker wastes and wastewater treatment as described in this report portend widespread
application in a broad range of chemicals manufacturing industries.
             LIBRARY

-------
OVERVIEW
   One of the most difficult environmental problems the
transportation industry  faces is the treatment of waste-
waters from tank truck interior washing operations.
   The root of the problem is lack of proven treatment
technologies  which embody  economic  feasibility. Be-
cause hauled materials vary widely in character, washing
operation wastes reflecting these cargoes are also variable
and difficult to treat. The wastestreams primarily  con-
tain oil and organic materials,  many of which, because of
high concentrations or  toxicity,  may upset municipal
waste treatment plants  or physical/chemical treatment
methods.
   In 1974 EPA prepared a Development Document for
proposed  effluent guidelines and standards  for these
wastewaters.  EPA based some of the proposed standards
on treatment techniques which were available but not
demonstrated specifically for the tank truck industry.
The  tank truck carriers requested demonstration  of a
technically and economically viable process for treating
the wastewaters before  promulgation of the effluent
guidelines and standards.
   Matlack Corp., one of the nations largest tank truck
operators, has long recognized  the need for treatment
alternatives and has investigated a number of techniques
since  1966. Last year  Matlack approached  EPA's Office
of Energy, Minerals and Industry, resulting in a joint
venture  into  construction and demonstration of a  full-
scale plant to determine  technical and economic viability
of a treatment system.
             TANK TRUCK TERMINAL
   The system under demonstration involves an integra-
tion of new and state-of-the-art physical, chemical and
biological waste treatment unit operations into a unique
and  promising  hybrid system. Matlack's Swedesboro,
N.J. terminal  cleaning facilities,  which  produce  some
15,000  gal/day of interior tank wash  wastewater, was
chosen as the test site.
   This report presents a perspective  on the problem
posed by the tank wash waters and presents preliminary
data on the treatment system under demonstration.

THE POLLUTION THREAT

   Tank truck carriers  operate  more than 90,000 tank
trucks in the U.S. About one-third of these  are part of
the private fleets such as those operated by major petro-
leum and chemical companies. These fleets  haul prod-
ucts of the parent company, and are generally dedicated
to haul specific  products. The interiors  of  these dedi-
cated tankers seldom require washing.
   The  remaining 60,000  or so tankers  constitute the
industry common carrier fleet and are "for public hire".
Some of these tankers are  also "dedicated" to  carry
specific products, and don't require frequent washing.
   But most of the 60,000 tankers are not dedicated and
their  cargoes can vary from highly  toxic materials to
innocuous materials such as fish oil.

THE VARIABILITY PROBLEM

   The  cargoes  can be chemicals, petroleum, or other
products.  Table  I shows,  through cargoes hauled, the
variability  of  experience  in  one month.  In another
month 550 tank interiors containing 47 different chemi-
cals were cleaned at the same facility.
   Roy F. Weston,  Inc., has studied the variability of
wastes for the National Tank Truck Carriers Association.
The  high degree of variability in "pollutional content"
of these wastewaters is indicated  by the ratio of prob-
able occurrence of high to low values for the  parameters
listed in Table II.
   Variability of volume and  characteristics of waste-
water from the cleaning of tankers can  be attributed to:
   •   the product hauled,
   •   the amount of undelivered product (heel),
   •   the cleaning procedure used, and
   •   the number of tank trucks cleaned daily.
These  wastes contain  materials which  range from high
biodegradable materials, such as sugars, to phenols, plas-
ticizers, oil and acids.

-------
                             TABLE I
       COMMON CARRIER TANKER CARGO VARIABILITY
                          NUMBER OF        POTENTIAL IMPACT ON
CARGO                  UNITS CLEANED       BIOLOGICAL SYSTEM
Cutting Oil
Lube Oil
Toluene
Unidentified Product
Fuel Oil Additives
Carbon Black Oil
Acetic Anhydride
Ammonium Thiosulfate
Naphthalene
Wax
Tall Oil
Phenol
Fish Oil
Sodium Nitrite
Latex
Resin
Plasticizer
Caustic Soda (Liquid)
Lard
Hydrochloric Acid
Fatty Acid
Liquid Sugar

1
366
71
8
2
9
1
22
18
62
1
18
1
44
66
76
348
19
13
1
5
32
1,184
Low
Low
High
—
High
Low
Medium
Medium
Medium
Low
Medium
High
Low
High
High
Medium
High
High
Low
High
Low
—

                             TABLE II
                TANK TRUCK RAW WASTEWATER
               POLLUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS
                               MEAN          ^VARIABILITY RATIO
Flow, Gals/tanker washed               1390                      5
BOD5,Mg/l                         2800                      5
COD, Mg/l                         12000                      3
SS. Mg/l                           4035                     19
Phenols, Mg/l                          29                     12

"Ratio is generated using monthly average values at 5 terminals. Each value is an average of
3-6 daily composite values taken that month. Values at 90 percent level of occurrence are di-
vided by those at 10 percent level of occurrence to produce the variability ratio.

-------
WHY WASTEWATERS VARY
WASTEWATER VOLUME AND FATE
   Heels are the portions of the product not delivered,
but returned to the terminal for disposal. Whenever fea-
sible,  heels are  segregated  from the wash water stream
and sent to approved disposal sites or, if feasible, return-
ed to the  sender. However, heels may be inadvertently
flushed to the treatment system or sewer when a wash-
ing operation  is initiated. Heel volumes range  from
10-500  gallons, and  if discharges  reach downstream
physical/biological  treatment systems they  can exert
significant shock load or toxic impact, thus reducing or
completely eliminating  the  system's  functional capa-
bility.
   Waste treatment procedures vary  with size of trucking
operations, type of cargo hauled and cleaning agent. The
interior tank  washes are usually performed at terminals
equipped with wash racks and lightweight, high-velocity,
omnidirectional  spray  nozzles.  Matlack, for example,
operates 2800 tankers and 52 terminals, 22 of which are
equipped  for interior tank wash operations.  (External
truck washes  are performed at all 52 terminals.) Several
other large tank carriers operate in  this mode, but more
than 5000 carriers operate fleets of 5 trucks or less.
           EXTERIOR WASH STATIONS

   These smaller companies cannot operate such clean-
 ing terminals and some of them discharge their wastes to
 sewers. Also, the tank cleaning methods vary  with the
 type  of cargo hauled. The principal cleaning agents are
 water, steam, detergents, caustics, and other specific sol-
 vents. Use  of these agents,  sprayed into the tanks under
 high nozzle pressure and subsequent physical mixing re-
 sults in highly emulsified waste streams, rich in organics,
 suspended solids and oils.
   The wastewater discharged from interior tank wash-
ing ranges between 600-900 gal/tanker, but can reach
much higher volumes. EPA estimated that less than 10
percent of the terminals surveyed generate more than
15,000  gal/day of wastewater.  These wastewaters are
relatively limited  in  quantity but their environmental
impact can be both highly visible and very significant.
Table III shows some typical flow rates and pollutional
characteristics  that could impose significant  environ-
mental impacts.
   EPA estimates that two-thirds of the tank truck in-
dustry discharges wastes to municipal systems, with little
or no pret.reatment. Where it has  been provided, treat-
                    TABLE III
         TYPICAL FLOW RATES AND
     POLLUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS
       WASHWATER
        EFFLUENT
    CHARACTERISTICS
  ESTIMATED
      RAW
  WASTELOAD
                                                           Typical 'low
                                900  gal/unit washed
                                                           High pH
                                                           lalkaline)
                               10-12
                                                           High in Organic Chemicals,
                                                           •oxic to biological
                                                           ' ystems

                                                             High BOD
                                1465  mg/l
                                  11  Ib/unit washed
                                                             High COD
                              14,920  mg/l
                                 112  Ib/unit washed
                                                           High in Solids Content
                                                           Isuspenced solids)
                               1,000 mg/l
                                 7.5 Ib/unit washed
                                                           High in oils and grease
                                                           content
                               1,000 mg/l
                                 7.5 Ib/unit washed
   High in specific toxic
   material content

      Phenols
      Chromium
      Cyanide
  67  mg/l
 0.05  Ib/unit washed
  5.3  mg/l
 0.04  Ib/unit washed
 0.93  mg/l
0.007  Ib/unit washed
4

-------
ment  has generally  been limited to: sedimentation,
neutralization, evaporation ponds and lagoons and other
relatively  unsophisticated techniques.  The  prevailing
treatment practices observed in the EPA survey for their
development document are summarized in Table IV.

HOPE FOR FUTURE WASTE TREATMENT

   Industry practices and problems in treatment of tank
interior wastewater can be summarized as follows:
   •  The tank interior wash operation has been identi-
     fied as a major source, and as one of the industry's
     waste streams that is most difficult to treat.
   •  While wastewater volumes are relatively small, the
     potential impact of the  materials  in  the  waste
     stream is significant—both to the environment and
     to conventional treatment systems.
   •  State regulatory agencies such as those  in Cali-
     fornia, New Jersey, Connecticut,  Louisiana, Ken-
     tucky, Texas  and  other states, requiring compli-
      IIMTERIOR WASH STATIONS

ance with effluent limits issued  with their own
discharge permits,  are creating impetus  for new
treatment technology.
                                               TABLE IV
                       ERA'S 1974 SURVEY OF PREVAILING TREATMENTS
                              TREATMENT AFFORDED THIS WASTE STREAM


Terminal
Sur-
veyed
by EPA
A
B

C
D
E
F
G
H
1

J
K


Principal
Type of
Materials
Handled1
C, D
C

Asphalt
C
C
C
C, D
D
D.P

B (3)
F (4)
^
CQ £ >-
Gravity Chemi- Filtra- ™ °" c o = £
Oil cal Air tion g> | o s ™ »
Sedimen- Equili- Separa- Neutral- Coagu- Flota- Media Extrac- Clan- B 5 o> £ o » >
Sump tation zation tion ization lation tion Screen tion tier m c/> -J < Z 3 Q
X XX X X 30
X X X (spray) 10-25
in pond
X (spray) N D
X 18
X N D
XXX 35
XX XX X holding 30
X X 80-90
X X 30-40

X 50-60
XX X 80-90

a 15
l°L
o|
1 1-
1200+
500-
800
N D
N D
N D
570
N D
N D
100-
300
N D
200+
           C=Chemicals    (2) N D = no data
           P=Petroteum    (3) B-beef/animal carcasses
           D=Dry bulk    (4) F=foodstuffs (dairy-vegetables)
           CG=Compressed Gases

-------
     The EPA program to define effluent limitations
     for the tank interior wash wastes was delayed by
     lack of data on the industry and the applicable
     control technologies. The  variable nature of the
     waste  stream and the absence of a demonstrated
     control technique were the main hurdles.
     Several attempts are being made to develop tech-
     nically and economically feasible methods to treat
     tank interior wash wastewaters. Table IV lists the
     prevailing treatment  techniques used in this indus-
     try. They include:
       (a)  A sequential air flotation  and biological
           system in Downington, Pa. (Chemical Lea-
           man Corp.)
       (b) A sequential physical/chemical system in
           Louisville, Ky.  (Liquid Transporter Corp.)
       (c)  A modified (bleed in) biological system in
           Deer Park, Texas. (Robertson Tank Lines)
       (d) The  joint EPA/Matlack hybrid system in-
           volving  physical, chemical  and biological
           methods in Swedesboro, N.J.
                               THE EPA/MATLACK SYSTEM

                                  The hybrid system under test by Matlack involves a
                               combination of these seven specific unit operations:
                                  1. Oil separation: to remove oil/grease
                                  2. Air  flotation:  break  emusion  and  remove oil/
                                    grease/suspended solids
                                  3. Chemical coagulation and pH adjustment: to aid in
                                    removal of suspended solids
                                  4. Equilibration/sedimentation: allow separation  of
                                    solids and prepare waste for further treatment
                                  5. Mixed  media filtration (MMF): to further remove
                                    solids/color
                                  6. Carbon adsorption: remove organics which may  be
                                    toxic to biological systems
                                  7. Rotating filter-biofiltration system: to remove de-
                                    gradable organics
                                  The treatment system is operated on a 5-day week. It
                               consists of the above  unit operations as shown in Figure
                               1.  Gravity oil  separation, pH adjustment, cationic and
       TANK TRUCK
WASHING
OPERATIONS
WASTEWATERS
                                               DISSOLVED
                                               AIR FLOTATION UNIT
API GRAVITY
OIL SEPARATOR
            COLLECTION
            TANKS
                    CATIONIC
                    POLYMER
               BATCH
               EQUALIZING
               TANKS!2'
                  SULFURIC
                  ACID
    NEUTRALI-
    ZATION
    VESSEL
                                                ANIONIC
                                                POLYMER
                                                AIR
                                               SLUDGE
                                            STORAGE
                                            VESSELS
                                             	          CARBON
                                            C	_2| SURGE  ADSORPTION TOWERS
                                         r*(      ' TANK          	
                                                      SLUDGE TO
                                                      DISPOSAL SERVICE
                                                                             CLARIFIER
                                              FIGURE 1
             EPA/MATLACK TANK TRUCK WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM

-------
anionic flocculant addition and air flotation operations
constitute the "basic" or primary portion of the system.
In addition to these operations, multi-media filtration,
carbon  adsorption and  rotating biofiltration units  are
used for final wastewater treatment. The system oper-
ates eight hours/day. The biofiltration unit operates con-
tinuously.
   The test system configuration affords maximum flex-
ibility  with respect to the sequence of unit operations
used,   flow  capability  and  evaluation  of alternative
methods. The Swedesboro facility has been in operation
since January 1976. Thus, the results presented here are
"preliminary" and will be reaffirmed and elaborated as
the project proceeds.

THE TERMINAL OPERATIONS

   The Swedesboro Terminal is approximately two miles
east of the Delaware River in Gloucester County, New
Jersey. Effluents from  the plant are regulated under a
New Jersey discharge permit issued for the duration of
the demonstration project. The tankers using this  ter-
minal  primarily haul organic  chemicals and products,
such as those listed in Table I. Heavy metals are rarely a
part of the cargoes at this terminal and consequently are
seldom a problem in  the wastewater to be treated by  the
test system, but they are an industry problem.

WASH FACILITIES AND SYSTEM

   Roofed  and exposed wash  facilities are provided at
this terminal. The wash area is paved and sloped to maxi-
mize wash  water collection but minimize rain fall collec-
tion. Lightweight, omnidirectional, high  intensity nozzles
are used to direct steam or hot caustic solution and fresh
water rinses into the tanks while valves are in the open
position. Any solvents used  for cleaning and product
heels are segregated whenever possible. A central drain
carries the  wastewater from interior and exterior washes
to two collection tanks.
   The wastewater produced in the wash operation is an
emulsion of oils, organic and some inorganic chemicals.
It varies in color from white to various shades of tan and
brown reflecting its variable content and  potential  im-
pacts.  Two collection  tanks receive  the alkaline and
emulsified wastewater, which occasionally contains heels
despite efforts to segregate them. No sanitary wastes are
discharged to the treatment system. Total wastewater to
the system is estimated at 12-18,000 gal/day for a 6-day
collection week.
               SLOPED WASH AREA

OIL REMOVAL

   A diaphragm pump moves the wastewater from the
sump to a 1,640 gal API separator at an average rate of
16 gal/min.  In  the API separator, baffled flow patterns
and a detention time of about 1-2 hr allow free oils to
float to the surface  where they are skimmed and col-
lected. About 500-700 gal/week of oil are recovered and
stored in underground tanks. The recovered oil is sold
for re-refining at a current rate of $0.03/gal. This unit
operation  also produces approximately 4,000 gal/week
of sludge. The 15 gal/min of effluent from this unit,
contains large  quantities of colloidal and dissolved oils
and has a pH of 11.  Other  characteristics of effluents
from this unit operation are shown in Table V.
                                                                         API SEPARATOR

-------
                                              TABLE V
          PRELIMINARY  EFFLUENT DATA FOR EACH OF THE UNIT OPERATIONS
                                                     CARBON ADSORPTION

pH
Color
Turb [a]
COD
BOD5
O&G [b]
Phenols
SS[c]
OIL
SEPARATION
10.5-12.5
Over 500
Over 500
1 ,800-1 1 ,000
600-2,000
110-350
1-250
300-1 ,300
MIXED MEDIA
FILTRATION
6.5-8.0
50-100
5-30
1,100-5,500
-
5-15
1-200
10-20
LEAD
CARBON
6.5-8.5
1-10
5-10
900-1 ,900
800-1 ,500
—
—
—
POLISH
CARBON
6.5-8.5
1-5
1-5
650-1 ,800
550-1 ,300
<1
0.1
0.1
BIOFILTRATION
6.5-8.5
10-50
—
1 25-300
20-100
<1
0.1
_
        [al  Turbidity (mg/l)
        [b]  Oil and Grease (mg/l)
        [c]  Suspended Solids (mg/l)
EQUALIZATION

   Effluent from this process is pumped to one of two
20,000 gal batch tanks and allowed to  "equalize" for
16-24 hrs. This equalization is essential to the air flota-
tion  process downstream. Sedimentation in this tank is
limited due to the emulsified nature of the wastewater.
Approximately 30  gal/min of "equalized" wastewater
plus  70 gal/min of recycle from the flotation unit  goes
to a mix tank.
                  BATCH TANK
CHEMICAL  TREATMENT/PHYSICAL
SEPARATION

   In this tank wastewater pH is adjusted with sulfuric
acid to 6.5-7.5, and cationic polymer is added at the rate
of 1-20 gal/hr. The polymer is added to promote devel-
opment  of  floe (agglomerated particles) which can be
more easily removed in the flotation unit.
   An air eductor introduces 40 psi air into the waste-
water. Anionic polymer is added at the rate of approxi-
mately 7 gal/hr to further promote coagulation and the
pressurized waste stream is then released to atmospheric
pressure in a 2,200 gal dissolved air flotation unit. As the
small bubbles of air form and rise,  the colloidally sus-
pended  materials become attached to the bubbles and
rise with it to the tank surface where it is skimmed and
stored for collection by a disposal service. Heavier floe,
formed by polymer addition, settles to the bottom of
the tank.
   The sludge produced in this process approximates 5
percent of the wastewater volume, or approximately 700
to 1,000 gal/day. Sludge collected from this unit opera-
tion is typically 10 percent solids.
   The dissolved air flotation unit operation breaks the
emulsion of wastewater with oils and solids, and removes
these  materials which could interfere with subsequent
treatment processes. Operation of dissolved air flotation
is still being optimized.  It depends heavily on the segre-
gation and removal of heels and solids settled in the API
unit. Detergents which tend to sustain emulsions,  are

-------
counterproductive in this unit and their presence is mini-
mized when possible.
   Treated  wastewater from the dissolved air flotation
unit is fed to a 2,250  gal storage feed tank for distribu-
tion to the next operation.
         DISSOLVED AIR FLOTATION UNIT

 MIXED MEDIA FILTRATION/
 DISSOLVED AIR FLOTATION

   Effluent  from the  flotation unit feeds the  filtration
 unit at the rate of 30 gal/min. This unit is filled with a
 bottom layer of  40 mm mesh sand and 0.5mm mesh,
 Anthrafilt (coal derivative). The effective bed depth is 18
 inches for each media. The pressure drop across the filter
 under operating condition is 8-15 psi. The filter and dis-
 solved air flotation units reduce the solids  level in its
 effluent to the 10-20  mg/1 range. Other effluent charac-
 teristics are shown in Table V.
   The filter is backwashed when pressure drop across
 the filters reaches 12-15 psi. Backwash is returned to  the
 batch  tanks. The filter is oackwashed on the average of
 once per week under the current operation schedule.
 CARBON ADSORPTION UNITS

   Effluent from the mixed media filter flows to two
 activated carbon  towers  operated in series. These units
 remove organic chemicals which might be toxic or other-
 wise deleterious to the  biological process  that follows.
 Theoretically, complex  organic molecules (typical of
 "toxic" cargoes), are preferentially adsorbed on the car-
 bon. This allows the less complex "non-toxic" molecules
 to pass through  to the  biofilter unit operation which
 follows.
   When breakthrough occurs in the first or lead tower,
wastewater flow is directed to the second tower and the
exhausted carbon is replaced.  The  new adsorbent is
placed on line in  the second or polish tower position.
The  adsorption carbon and  regeneration  services are
rented from Calgon  Corp. The carbon used is a mixture
of Filtrasorb 300 and  400. The system currently uses
about 2,000 Ib. of carbon  per month. The carbon  units
have been performing well.
   A mild caustic soda  treatment can inhibit inordinate
biological degradation  activity  on  the carbon which
could interfere with  the adsorption process.
   The characteristics of effluent  from the carbon unit
shown in Table V indicate the applicability of this  tech-
nique for removal of soluble organics, some  of which
may be toxic to the biological process.

BIOLOGICAL DEGRADATION

   Effluent from  the carbon adsorption unit flows to a
holding tank and then to the biofilter operation. Waste-
water is fed at the rate of 30 gpm. A 40 percent biofilter
effluent recycle during  wastewater feed and 100 percent
recycle at other times maintains the flow into the unit at
50 gpm  and allows  its continuous operation. Because
biotreatment influent is biodegradable, air is introduced
by an  air eductor to the influent to maintain dissolved
oxygen levels.
   This unit combines the principle of rotating disc
systems and trickle bed biofiltration. A 7.5 ft. long x 6
ft. dia. drum-shaped container formed  from perforated
steel is mounted horizontally aand filled with  1-1/2 x 2
inch polyethylene raschig rings. This packing provides 35
sq. ft. of surface per cubic foot  of packing. As shown in
Figure 2, the  basket rotates in an open tank partially
filled with wastewater.
   Preliminary data  shown in Table V clearly demon-
strates that this unit can reduce influent BOD  by as
much as 50-90 percent based on current loads.
                                                                OVERVIEW OF TREATMENT SYSTEM

-------
PROCESS ECONOMICS
   The system at Swedesboro will treat wastewater from
tank interior wash at a cost of approximately $50/1000
gal  or  $7 50/day.   It  should be  noted  that  about
$30/1000 gal  (the  largest single cost) is due to equip-
ment rental. This cost could be substantially reduced by
equipment  purchase  and amortization. At Swedesboro
some 15,000 gal/day of wastewater are produced from
washing 15-20  tank interiors and exteriors per day.
   The present costs of rented equipment and laboratory
support to optimize operating conditions for the system
do not necessarily approximate typical full-scale operat-
ing system economics.  The analysis of costs to date
shown in Table VI  is based on 15,000 gal/day six-day
work week, with five days for treatment operations.
   Similarly  this cost is expected  to  be  reduced  by
equipment purchase and more efficient water use.
                                               TABLE VI
                                    OPERATIONAL  ECONOMICS
                                                               (In Dollars)
                                           Cost/Day
              Cost/1000 Gal.1
OPERATING COSTS-TOTAL
Labor2
Chemicals
Sludge Disposal
Power
$181.62
$ 73.93
57.69
38.46
11.54

4.93
3.85
2.56
.77
$12.11




           RENTAL COSTS-TOTAL                      496.16
           Activated Carbon5                  461.54
           Biofilter6                          34.62

           CAPITAL COSTS-TOTAL                       72.12
           Depreciation7                       72.12

           TOTALS                                     $749.90
                   30.77
                    2.31
                    4.81
                                   33.08
                                   4.81
                                 $50.00
           Notes:
            Per 1000 gallons of treated wastewater
           2One full time hourly worker, 5-day 9-hour day
            Sulfuric acid, cationic, and anionic polymers
            6.25i/gallon of sludge removed
            Rental includes regeneration
           6RBF rental at $900/month
           7Over 8Vi years, building cost is $42,000+
10

-------