-------
         <


         CJ
ZOO

r-   ~Z.  Ul

    f 5
         Q     <5
         "-1-1
    CO
    o
         ui
         C/l
_J
1-
o


in
CO

^
00


00
Ol
^~

CM
00
en


^
00
*~


o
00
o>


Ol
r~
en






(ft
O
Z




LJ
1—
10

oo
in
CM
oq
in
r.
01
to
tO_
o

in
0
Ol
0
to
in
o"
O)
r-.
0
to

o
c
c

O



0


o


o



o



o




o


o








>
o
c
.2
<

tO
to
o"
IO
oq
to"
o
IO
in
c"
en
o
10
0
S
o
lO
in
o"
en
(V-
o
lO
to"
00
00
CN
O)
CN"
ro
Ol
to
«—
CM
-
to
CN
IO
in


V

'tn
"t
1
"S
00

E
E
o
CJ
'o
£
00
0



o


0


o



o



o




o


0
£
£
0
o
	
"5
£
00
XI
"o
.?
'5
o
c
z>

«
o
.8
O
.-
rO
01"
^_
"
3
5"
CM
b

tO
^
o
-"
CN
— "
O
in
in"
-
m
CM"
O)
Ol
o
0)
00
m
to
IO
oq
O)
00
q
*~







O)
^
*v
00
<
"^x.


01
o
to
co
CN


o


0



0



0


0


o


o
to
00"
to
CN






in
C
U-
XI
0)
'o
O1

•j:
O
C
D


Ol
o
to
CO
to
CM


0


o



o



0


o


o


Ol
o
oo"
to
CM









CO
rO



O






O





O




o


CM
rO
oo
co"
CM"



o



CM
00
in"
01
to
—







novol
c

'£
e
CO
g
g
£
01
in
rx
01
^-
00
CN



O






0





o




o


CM
O
oq
Ol
to



o



in
Ol"
Ol

—










^
oq
m"
Ol
in
CM
CM
^


Q)

in
^
1
"5
00

E
E
o
o
"5
oo






o









0






0





0




o


o



o




o


E
E
o
o
__
"5
E
00
T3
"o
.!?
15
o
c
13







00
*—
O
rv
•o
0"
~s|
C1
T"
o
-n
en
o"
01
o
in

Unobiligote

g
•-•i
•«
O
o;
Ol
lO
Ol
ro"
tO

to"
o
]J
CM"
O
O
O
.
tO
Ol
O
CN
0
q
CM
to
-.
CN
CN
r--"
00
oo
CM
8
01
00
^
o
uo
to
Ol








_.
1
I
"5
00
•X-
^s.
o






0



o


o



o
o


0


o







in
TJ
C
D
LJ_
V
"5
CT>
O
13
O






0



0


o



o
o


0


o










.1
Innovo

o






0



o


o



o
o


o


o










1
Alterno

01
to
r-
• —
CM
co"
o
T
CN
0
q
0
CM"
O
q
0
CN
o
q
CN
10_
^
to
to
Ol
CM"
00
-'
rO
01
*
tO
Ol
o
o
ro
Ol
5


O
•D
05
*t
1
"S
\tf

E
&
o
o
"5
E
00
o






c



o


0



o
o


o


o

£
£
o
o
	 .
"o
co

T5
JU
"3
o>
Unobili

d
-0
"o
tf
0
CO
                                                                                                                                                         cn
                                                                                                                                                         '7")
                                                                                                                                                          >
                                                                                                                                                          O
 c
 o

"o

 E
                                                                                                                                                          c
                                                                                                                                                          o
                                                                                                                                                          a
 o
.a


_OJ

J3
 O
                                                                                                                                                          >
                                                                                                                                                          O
                                                                                                                                                          o

                                                                                                                                                          "5
                                                                                                                                                          Q

-------
         <
ZOO
ao
















or
i
O
CZ
























CO
•*"


O
00
0>
^


o>
0)







^i
in
0
•z.
u.



Ul
i—
t—
in


in
*»•
in
CN
O
•3-
ID
to"
""
0
TJ-
to
o
o"
"»
o
CN"
CM
o
•*•*.
>o
^
o
in
CN
0
00
^-
5








Q,
'if
1
"l
tn
—
n

o
CN


O



o
o


o
o


o
8
CN

*~

00
to
O)





in
c
3
LL.
T3
"a
_g
15
o
c
^
00
ID
O)


0



O
O


o
o



o



00
to
0









>
Innova1

o
o
00
CN


0



O
o


o
o


o
o
, —
"


o











0
in
CN
a>
o_
CN
O
O
ID
in
ID
m_
CN


Q)
•g
10
^
I
cu
in
£
E
o
o
"o
E
to



0






o






o






o







o




o






o



£
£
o
o
	
"5
E
in
\
Unobilii

cu
03
03
£
cu
EN
«-
CN
to"
3
CN
O
CN
^
^
to"
o
CN
,_
ro"

O
CN
, 	
to"
CN
in
CN"
CN
•<*•
CN
o"
CT)
CN
rO
to
oo
en
in"
0
CN
CN
CN
tv.
5
to







111
tr
—



o!



5
i

i
o i



o




o



o


0






o




o






-lojo|ololc
o
o_
o
o
iD

in
00
1
o
o
ID
in
in

o
o
ID
in
in

o
CN
CN
o_
0>
tD
oi
oo
CN
O
00
5




CD
1
1
"33
tn
<
—




'


c;c:otc c

[


0




o



o

o
o




o



(0
T3
c
D
u.
CU
"a
o
c
^



o|o





olc

i
!

C



o

o
o




o





a>
nova1
c


O



O

0
o




o





a>
"c
c
I.
a
<


o



01

0
o




0
•g
in
^
1
tn

E
E
o
u
"c
E
tn
c



c

^"^
0




o
Comm |
	
"c
E
tn
^
(
1
J
c
1


^
rv.
rO
C7>
in"
o
o
CN
o
^N
01
ID
rO
fO
o-
rO
O
.
to
to
o
CN
ID
rO
fO
*
*'
CN
00
D

7)

00
0>
CN
fO







1
"5
in
"^s.
to
* —
•vt
in
. —
•—



o



0

o
CO
in
en"
in
to
to
00
in"


o



o




0






in
T3
C
D
Lj_
T3
"c
.C
15
0
c
D
iclo
.—
•
CN
IO
tD
pS.
in
DO
tO

in
(D


i>
.^
<
"5
in
E
£
c
"o
E
tn
01
TJ-
in
00
in
rO



o



o


0


Ol
in
oo"
in
tO


^



o




0

E
E
o
o
"o
E
tn
•n
Unobiligatec

O
"^
                                                                                                                                                                D
                                                                                                                                                               Q
                                                                                                                                                                CL!

                                                                                                                                                               "o

-------











<
zo
ooO
z:
P °
CN
ill
~Z- £) C_)
h1** ^^ ^^ ^>
Z> * / rt i j
[ y J U*J
^ h- LJ a
LJ ^^

h~ f**) ,
1 1^ J
1 if ^^
r— ^
""^ 1 i
^™ (/")
i . .
— 1 LJ
QQ C£
O
Z UJ
^j

tf\








.
^
O



00
cn

00
cn

ao
cn

CM
00
cn


00
o>



0
ao
"


cn
cn







7r>
Q
Z
U-



i—
^.
V
CM
OO"
D
-'
CM
71
00
°°.
iri
o
cn
in
O
cn
CM
cn
00
30_

IO
in
in
cn"
cn
^
•—

•<*•
cn
00
cn
00
CD
in
to"
to
•-






U
1
1
"5
00
<
—
o



o



I
I



o

o

o


o


o



o



0






TD
c
Lu
I
O
U
o
c
D
o

o

0


o






0

0

0


o|o


o



o



0










15
c
_
>o
tO
cn
tO
o

iO!
.— i
00

ID
CM"
00
ou

0
cn
O
cn
to
Tr-
cn
CM
0
m
CM
cn
rv
o>
CM
IO


0


0








VI
•o
r
T
U.

CO
<
—
o
90

CM
f
in
•~
o
00
in
cn"
in


o



o

o
CM"
(V
V
O
CO"
rO
C7>
O
in
co"
CM
o
00

^-
"*






ff)
T3
c
D
u.
T3
4J
a
c
c
13
tO
CN
CM
co"
•—
to

o
00
m
cn
in


O



0

o
m
o
cn"
in

CM
cn
ro"
to


CM"
tD
in

in
to"
o








novative
c

rv
in
in
•*"
04
CM
»~

0


o



0

m
to
ro"
•3-
to
00
^r
IO
CM
00
IO
to"
oo
in
to
to
o
^—
ro







ternative
<

0







o


o



o

o


o



o


0




(U
•o
55
^
1
"5
CO
E
E
"5
E
CO
o







0


o



o

o


o



o


o


E
£
o
o
	
"c
CO
a
'c
c
c
c


G
O
•1
eo
CJ
iO
tD
^
10
CD
iD
o"
00
00
ID
00"
-"
CM
O
^J-
-"
CM
' —
o"
<*•
-'
CO
00
ID
CO"
^

Q
in
cn"
to
iO
-
CM"
cn
CM
in
00
to"
f)_








(13
13
'42
1
—






o
CM
rv
rv
to
ID
*~
!


0


o


o
00
*o
cn
IO
oo
CM
T

CM

cn
to_
cn
o

o
rO
O
ro
IO






•a
c
LL.
"0
9)
"5
.g
'.5
o
c
3






CM
00
• —
cn
ro
IV.

1


O


O


o
00
rO
•yj
rO
00
CM
.
CM

a>
cn
-
CM
CM

O
in
rv
IO_
to
CM









Innovative

D
5-
£
03
OJ
Sfc
00
•o
in
oo
CM
cn




0


0




O



o


o
to

m
00

o
oo
CM
cn
to"
(V









Alternative

1





CM)
in
• —
10
in
m
2
00
00
tO
ao"
rv
CM
rv
O
TT
rv
CM
rv
< —
o"
TT
rv
00
00
(D
OO"
^.

to
o
to
CM
00
CM
CM
0
00
O
rv
rv"
O
O
iO


fl)
T3
1/3
^
1
cn

E
£
c
"5
E
CO






„.
to
tO
to
rv
CD




o


O




O



°



c


o
to
to
to
E
£
o
o
	
"c
E
GO
•£
Unobiligate







V,
D

__~
C1
>o
to"
r-* i
3
m"
s
CM
O
3
m"
ID
CM"
O
0
in"
to
CM
ID
cn
m
o








o




o




o





CM| O
oo_
3
D

•*-
„.
0

IV
0
oo
m"
to
CM"
O
CO
iri
ID
CM"
0
o
iri

CM
•»*•
oq
o

.
CM
00
o
—
r_*
IO
CM
IO


4)
-c
'v
^
V
00
E
E
o
o
"o
E
CO
o








o




o




o





0


o




0






0



E
£
o
o
_
I
•D
<
"c
cr
'2
o
c


•0
O
U
0)
 o
 c
 D
a:
 c
 o
 V
 c
 o

 "o
 E
 c
 o
 CL
 3
 0)
 l/l
 O
 _OJ
 _a
  o
  
-------
<

o

















or
_j
CJ
V)
u.


















i

O
h-



CO
cn
»—


CO
cn
CO
cn
CM
00
CTl
00
cn
*~


O
00


cn
cn
«—







ir
0
2
u.




Ud
*—
>—
VI
7)
O
cn"
to
tO

o
to"
cn
00
0
to
to"
o
-3-
to
to"
O
CN"
r^
CM
0
•^
tO
0)
o
m
oo"
CN
0
CO
•
o
c
c

lO
•^
^
>}•"
.—
cn
in"
o
00
^o"
—
•—
o
00

Alterna



5
o

to
cn
CM
cn
o
to
cn
o
tn
o
to
a>
m
0
cn
in
00
00
CN
to"
to
to
in
m
oo"

CM
O

OC
O
m
CC
to


a
<
1
"a
00
E
E
0
o
"5
E
00



O)
* —
to
to
CN
CM
O
to
0)
o"
tn
o
to
cn
O
m
o
to
O)
in
CM
o
f^
m"
10

o
oc



o

0

E
E
c
"o
E
CO
X)
a
"c
a
Unobili




•^
o"
t
o
Tj-
00
^
00
o
^>
CO
^
00
o

CO
X.
00

CN
o
CO"
m
en
in
^~
to"
*
OC

T
r-
*
CO
^\
c
,_
m







Q>
T
'o
1
'fl
00
<
—
in
IO
CO
to
to
0
00
01
o"

0

oo
v
00
o

00
^
00

CM
O
oo"
in
cn
in
^"
co"
*
CN
O
*-
to
CN
00
CN
0
,_
m





a
C
u.
jl
"o
c

•^
c
3
to
10
o
^
o
00
a>
o"

o
oo
o>
o"

o
00
cn
o"


cn
to
CM
•

10
^
"

^
CN
lO
O

^
in

CN








>
"c
o
c
c

m
fO
r-
cn
CM
O

0

j •

0 O


o
to
00
CO"

o
to
CO
to"
r^

to
00
o"
in
to
r^
oo"
K)
in

r~
in"

^
r^
CM
oo"
fO







^>
o
c
01
,.
<


0




o




o



o



o




o




o




V
^
<
j
"v
CO
E
E
c

—
0
E
oo



o




o







o




o




o


E
E
o
o
"5
£
CO
T3
<
"c
cn

c
c


O
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                O
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                a
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 0)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                -t—f
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 o
-------
(J
00
00 Cv
£85
O CN «
"- oo f
£§<
en ,0
- £ ;

slj
2S^

o o
K) 00 O
00 CN CN
C7> if) K
"~ CN C
"5"
00 "> if)
^^ T—

*-
5 en 2
01 •«•
*• o ^
e •"
c o?S
3 00 ro (x
i en -
• •— r> ^
O) T-
•<*• •*
en 2 «o
r^ ri 1*1
^ in ID
«- »-






in
w 1
to 3
0 a, u.
Z -a
? « "S
^ < Ji!
1 0
w-J1
00 -5
•p^
\ °
Z3
c
bJ
1—
^
S *

•1 00 T C
1 0) f>
5 •* •-
• ^ iv"
> CN n
1 — (N
i
) O
> <0
> <£> 0 C
> in

o
<£>
. 
•*
^.00
^~
1- O
S S o
00 10
CN 00


Q?
•D
V)
<
1
'v
CO

a> « E
> •— c
^: — c
0 ° 0
II-
: 3 o
~ E
00
O
t
0)
"«I
k}
&3
•^
) 0

1
!
i
10
1
1
i
I
jo
i
i
0

1
10


o

o


0


£
£
o
o
	
"5
£
00
•o
V
o
01

£i
O
£
•3






                                                                                                                                       O
                                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                      o
                                                                                                                                      Q.

                                                                                                                                      C
                                                                                                                                      o

                                                                                                                                     "o
                                                                                                                                      £
                                                                                                                                      C
                                                                                                                                      o
                                                                                                                                     JD
                                                                                                                                      o
                                                                                                                                     T3
                                                                                                                                     a)
                                                                                                                                     "O
                                                                                                                                     >
                                                                                                                                     o
                                                                                                                                     \_
                                                                                                                                     Q.

                                                                                                                                     O

                                                                                                                                     "o
                                                                                                                                     Q
                                                                                                                                     0)

                                                                                                                                     O
-------
        lini
         o
                  |00


                   o
                   'J-

                   01

                   o

                   en
                      0>
                   CO
               to
               oo
                  O)

                  s
        o
        0
                  oo
               ^ CO
00
Q
Z
ID
u_

>
o
o
        UD
           to

           csi
           0°
                         5
        cr>
                  00
              *?
a
<

LJ
              _
              O)
                    M
                    UN

 O

 _l
 OQ

 O
 Z
 Z>

 _J
 <
 I—
 O
f—


>-
_J
a:
    0

    §
       ro
       oo

   o.
       «>
       "
                 »?
                 
                 m
                    oo   •

                   r*
                   k>
                «>.
                to
                <£i
                           !S
                           g

      <

       1
      OT
                  XI
                   (/)
                   O
                                                5-  CT
                                                jo
                                                O
                                            o
                                            c


                                                       o
                                                       Ol




T3
.2
o
en
5
o
c
1)
T3
(/)
O
1
^J
10

<
\
'o

"c
D
o
E
o
"o
"o
10
c:
0)
^i
OJ
Q.
o>
c
OJ
o
V
a.
•o
v
"3
g>
to
a>
T3
a>
^J
$
x:
u
~3

Q.
"D
^)
"o
C
.
5
o
c
D

O

"c
Z}
o
E
o
to
~*z
v
C
3
E
E
o
f )
\— /
—
0
e
CO
"o

c
3
o
E
o
2
'o
(O
c

a.
                                                                                                                                    o
                                                                                                                                    c
                                                                                                                                    o

                                                                                                                                   "5
                                                                                                                                    E
                                                                                                                                    c
                                                                                                                                    o
                                                                                                                                    a>
                                                                                                                                    01
                                                                                                                                    O
                                                                                                                                          JD

                                                                                                                                          O
                                                                                                                                         T3
                                                                                                                                          (U

                                                                                                                                         ID

                                                                                                                                          >
                                                                                                                                          O
                                                                                                                                          ^_

                                                                                                                                          Q.


                                                                                                                                          O

                                                                                                                                         "o

                                                                                                                                         o
                   CO
-------
   UJ
   K

   <


   CO


   Q

   Z
   o

   o
   UJ
   cc


   a
   ai
   CO



   Q
   Z
   D
   U.


   UJ


   oc
   UJ
   00
   Ul
ooc
t™


UJ -
   m
   o
   UJ
   tr
    u.

    oc
    o
    u.

    Q
    UJ

    OC
    o
    a.
    UJ
    oc

    V)

    o
    (0
    <
    UJ
    oc
S1VIO1
B|U|6J|A »8«M
00 'uo|6u|i
-------
                         SECTION VI:

          EFFECTIVENESS OF THE I/A TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM
BACKGROUND

The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972
(PL 92-500) clearly established the intent of Congress to
promote the construction of wastewater treatment facilities
which recycle wastewater pollutants, reclaim wastewater,
provide for the confined and contained disposal of pollutants
not recycled and provide for the ultimate disposal of sludge in
an environmentally sound manner.  The law also makes clear the
intent of Congress to promote development and application of
cost effective alternative wastewater systems for rural areas.
PL 92-500 directed EPA to require applicants for construction
grants to consider and utilize, to the extent practicable,
technology which provides for reclaiming or recycling of  water
or which otherwise eliminates the discharge of pollutants.
However, the law did not provide for any type of financial
incentive to promote alternative type technology.

Despite the requirement that alternative types of technology be
considered, the early years of the construction grants program
were marked by an emphasis on large regional treatment
facilities employing conventional technology.  An EPA survey of
completed facility plans in the mid 1970's found that, even in
small communities, the most common recommended alternative was a
conventional collection system and treatment plant.  The  study
found that, in many cases, little serious consideration was
given to alternative technology.

Congress, recognizing the need for bold action to promote the
development and application of alternatives to conventional
wastewater treatment, included provisions in the 1977 Clean
Water Act establishing the Innovative and Alternative
Technology Program.  These provisions, together with their
implementing regulations, required that all communities
receiving federal construction grants must consider I/A
technology, in their facility plans and, as a definite
incentive to select I/A technology these provisions provide for
I/A technology incentive grants and for those projects not
performing to design expectations, the possibility of up to 100
percent modification/replacement grants.

PROGRAM OBJECTIVES

The overall objective of the I/A program is to encourage  the
planning, design, and construction of co-st-effective municipal
treatment works that maximize the recycle and reclamation of

                                   63
-------
water, nutrients,  and energy while minimizing adverse
environmental and  public health impacts.   In addition to
offering financial incentives to promote  development  and use of
I/A technology the program has also pushed technology
development and application through a vigorous research and
development effort and a wide range of technology transfer
activities.

How effective has  the I/A program been in meeting its overall
objective?  This question will be addressed by reviewing:
1)  the program's  effectiveness at promoting alternative
technology; 2) the program's effectiveness at promoting
innovative technology; and 3) the effectiveness of the
program's technology transfer efforts.

EFFECTIVENESS AT PROMOTING ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGY

The I/A program has been a tremendous success at promoting the
use of alternative technology.  During the period from 1979
through 1987, EPA invested approximately $3.3 billion in about
2100 alternative technology projects.  During the same period
EPA invested, in total, nearly $23 billion in about 6750
municipal wastewater treatment projects.   Thus, 14 percent of
the total dollars invested by EPA in all types of municipal
wastewater systems from 1979 through 1987 have been for
alternative projects.  Alternative projects have represented
just over 30 percent of the total number of projects funded
during this period.

Alternative technology has been a particular boon to small
communities.  Of the 2100 alternative projects funded through
1987, nearly half were sized for communities of less than  3,000
people; nearly two-thirds were sized for communities of  less
than  10,000.

However, the success of the I/A program in promoting the use of
alternative technology can only partially be measured by
statistics, such as numbers of projects funded and total dollar
investment.  An additional, and potentially more significant
impact of the I/A program, involves what  it has done to  advance
the level of professional and public acceptance' of alternative
technologies.

The I/A program has been extremely successful  in moving
technologies, such as,  land treatment of wastewater,  land
spreading of  sludge, alternative collection  systems,  sludge
composting, and on-site systems  from  relative  obscurity  to
widespread  acceptance  and application.  As  a  result  of  the
program, engineers and  local  officials are  now much  more likely
to consider and implement alternative technologies than  they
would have  been prior  to the  program, even  for projects  built
without federal funds.

                                   64
-------
One measure of the extent to which the I/A program has  advanced
professional and public acceptance of alternative technology is
the extent to which individual alternative technologies are now
being used compared to the extent of their use prior to the I/A
program.

Land treatment of wastewater provides a graphic example.   In
its 1968 inventory of Municipal Waste Facilities in the United
States, the Federal Water Quality Administration reported that
approximately 500 land treatment projects were in operation.
In 1980, EPA, in its Needs Survey Report to Congress, reported
that approximately 760 land treatment projects were in
operation or under construction.  Thus from 1968 to 1980, about
260 new land treatment projects were initiated, or about 19 per
year on average.  However, EPA's 1986 Needs Survey Report to
Congress shows about 1100 land treatment systems in operation,
or under construction.  Thus in six years some 340 new land
treatment projects were initiated, or about 57/year on average.
Most of these were I/A projects.  Clearly land treatment of
wastewater enjoys the level of professional and public
acceptance it does today largely as a result of the I/A
program.

Similar stories can be told for other alternative technologies.
The number of sludge composting projects increased from about 15
in 1980 to nearly 200 today.  The number of land spreading of
sludge projects increased from 1700 in 1980 to 2700 in 1986.
While not all of these projects were funded under the I/A
program, the program's active R&D and technology transfer
efforts greatly facilitated many of those that the program could
not fund.

Alternative collection systems are perhaps one of the most
dramatic examples of the I/A program's success.  Prior to the
program, pressure sewers, small diameter gravity sewers, and
vacuum sewers were nearly unknown in the United States.
However, by the end of 1987, a total of about  400 such systems
were in some stage of development, nearly all  of which were
funded under the I/A program.

Perhaps one of the best indications of the degree to which  the
profession has accepted and embraced alternative technologies
can be seen in the technical publications of the Water
Pollution Control Federation, one of the wastewater treatment
industry's major professional associations.  For nearly  fifty
years the Federation has originated and produced manuals of
technical practice related to wastewater technology.   In the
Federation's 1977 manual on wastewater treatment plant design
(500 pages) approximately 10 pages were devoted  to  land
treatment of wastewater.  Today  the Federation is developing a
new 300 page manual solely on natural treatment  systems, which

                                   65
-------
will be largely devoted to land treatment systems and other
natural types of treatment systems which have been promoted by
the I/A program.

Similarly, a 1969 Federation Manual on sewer system design and
construction contained virtually no mention of alternative
sewer systems.   However, in 1986 the Federation published an
entire manual devoted solely to these systems.

The I/A program has also helped to generate substantial
independent interest in many alternative technologies on the
part of other federal agencies and foreign governments.  For
example, the Tennessee Valley Authority has undertaken an
active program to demonstrate the simplicity and cost
effectiveness of constructed wetlands systems for wastewater
treatment in small, rural communities.  Recently EPA cooperated
with TVA in sponsoring a conference on constructed wetlands
technology which attracted over 600 professionals from all over
the nation and several foreign countries.
Foreign governments and professionals have also expressed great
interest in alternative technologies.  Japan is greatly
interested in alternative conveyance systems.  Many developing
nations are interested in land treatment technology.

EFFECTIVENESS AT PROMOTING INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY

The I/A program has also been successful at promoting the
development and use of innovative technology.  During the
period from 1979 through 1987 EPA invested approximately $1.1
billion in about 600 innovative projects involving, all
together, some 120 different technologies.  Nearly 5 percent of
the total dollars invested by EPA from 1979 through 1987 in all
types of municipal wastewater systems have been for innovative
projects.  Innovative projects have represented nearly 9 percent
of the total number of projects funded during this period.

Not surprisingly, innovative technologies tend to be more
popular among communities larger than those favoring
alternative systems.  About half of all  innovative projects are
sized for communities of more than 10,000 people; with only 20
percent of innovative projects being sized for communities of
under 3,000 people.

However, as with alternative technology, the success of the I/A
program in promoting innovative technology can only be
partially measured by program statistics.  The true long-term
impact of the innovative part of the program relates to the
technologies like ultraviolet disinfection and sequencing batch
reactors which  it has moved from research and development toward
relatively widespread, full-scale application.

Ultraviolet disinfection, at the beginning of the I/A  program,

                                   66
-------
was generally considered a promising experimental technology.
Over the course of the program, nearly 50 ultraviolet
disinfection projects were funded.   Over the years the I/A
program documented the successes and problems experienced with
its ultraviolet disinfection projects so that succeeding
projects could benefit from that experience.

Today ultraviolet disinfection is a state-of-the-art municipal
wastewater disinfection technology and is routinely considered
as an alternative to chlorination,  especially where there is
concern regarding the toxic effects of residual chlorine.  The
status of ultraviolet disinfection as a demonstrated technology
and viable alternative to chlorination was documented by the
Water Pollution Control Federation's Disinfection Committee in a
paper published in the October, 1987 issue of the Federation's
journal.

Sequencing batch reactors are another example of the I/A
program's success.  The basic concept of the sequencing batch
reactor had been around for most of this century.  However, the
process had never gained popularity because it was difficult to
control. However, under the I/A program, the ability of modern
electronic and mechanical hardware to greatly simplify process
control was demonstrated.  About 20 sequencing batch reactor
projects have been funded under the I/A Program.  The sequencing
batch reactor is now generally considered a viable wastewater
treatment option for small to mid-size communities.

I/A PROGRAM TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER

From the outset technology transfer has been an integral aspect
of the I/A Program.  Good communications have been largely
responsible for the progress to date in acceptance and use of
I/A technologies.

The cornerstone of the I/A program's successful technology
transfer efforts has been a network of EPA Regional and State
I/A coordinators.  These individuals are responsible for
promoting the program and serving as information resources in
their States and Regions.  In turn these State and Regional
coordinators are served by a National I/A coordinator at EPA
Headquarters and a staff of I/A technology experts at EPA's
Water Engineering Research Laboratory in Cincinnati, Ohio.
This network of individuals effectively collect and disseminate
information about I/A technologies.

The I/A program has produced a legacy of outstanding technical
literature which could serve a continuing role in promoting I/A
technology long after the grants program ends.  Of particular
note are several dozen major I/A technology research reports and
Process Design Manuals as well as nearly 50 brochures and
booklets describing various I/A technologies.  Through the

                                   67
-------
diligent efforts of the I/A coordinators  network,  thousands of
copies of these documents have been distributed to engineers,
community officials,  and interested citizens.

The National Small Flows Clearinghouse has  also played a role
in I/A technology transfer.  The clearinghouse maintains the
I/A database which contains key information about  grant funded
I/A projects.   They also maintain bibliographies of information
on some I/A technologies.

EPA has also conducted or participated in numerous national and
regional meetings and seminars related to I/A technology.
These meetings have greatly facilitated the exchange of
information and have been a key vehicle for promoting I/A
technology.

SUMMARY

The I/A program has been tremendously successful at promoting
the development and application of more cost effective,
environmentally sound, wastewater treatment technology,
especially in small communities.  Through financial incentives,
an active research and development effort and an aggressive
technology transfer program the I/A program has significantly
advanced the professional and public acceptance of I/A
technologies.  The program has also generated substantial
independent interest in I/A technologies on the part of other
federal agencies and foreign governments.  Additionally, the
private sector has responded vigorously to the program with the
development of new companies and venture investments for
research and development of I/A technologies.

Thus, the I/A program,  in addition to directly helping nearly
3000 communities effectively solve their wastewater treatment
problems, leaves a legacy of technical understanding which will
continue to benefit many additional communities,  in the  nation
and around the world,  for years to come.
                                   68
-------
ISSUES

During the preparation of this report three major issues which
relate to the phase out of the I/A program were identified.
This subsection of the report presents a detailed discussion of
these issues.

Issue Number One

The Clean Water Act of 1977, in establishing the I/A program,
authorized EPA to provide both increased grant percentages for
I/A projects and grants for up to 100% of the cost of modifying
or replacing failed projects (M/R grants).  Although the law and
EPA, through its regulations, did not guarantee the availability
of M/R grants, the potential for them has often been cited to
encourage communities to select I/A technology.  Under the
current Title II program the decision to fund an M/R grant is
left up to the States.  States vary in their positions on
funding M/R grants.  Those who choose to fund M/R grants do so
through their construction grants allotment.  Under Title VI
(State Revolving Fund Program) there is no provision for making
M/R grants.

The potential need for modification/replacement  (M/R) grants
for failed I/A projects will continue until the  last I/A funded
project successfully completes two years of operation, most
likely sometime in the mid-1990's.  The two-year limit on M/R
liability was established by EPA in the construction grants
regulations.  The Agency felt that any inherent  technological
flaws with an I/A project would become manifest  during the first
two years of operation.  The Agency concluded that problems
experienced by I/A projects after two years of operation would
not be due to inherent technological flaws, but  rather to long-
term operation and maintenance problems.  EPA estimates that up
to 1600 I/A projects will commence operation between 1988 and
the mid 1990's.  Projected potential M/R needs over the life of
the I/A program are approximately $100 to $200 million, although
this is a very gross estimate based on limited experience.
Under Section 205 of the Clean Water Act, a State's deobligated
funds are added to the State's last construction grants
allotment and are available  for obligation  in the same manner
and to the same extent as that last allotment  (i.e. for two
fiscal years only).  Deobligated funds will continue to become
available after construction grants allotments cease in 1990 and
would appear to offer  States that wish to fund M/R grants a
source for doing so.   However, due to the maximum useful  life of
two years the amount of deobligated funds available within any
given State  at any time may  exceed, or fall short of,  the M/R
grant need at that time.  Furthermore, as the  years pass, the
amount of deobligated  funds  becoming  available each year,
within any given State, will rapidly  dwindle.
Indications  are that the  amount of deobligated funds available

                                   69
-------
to States will be sufficient to meet short term needs.   The
issue of availability of long range funding for 100 percent M/R
grants will need to be considered at the time the Clean Water
Act is reauthorized, based on data available at that time.
Issue Number Two

The I/A program has been very successful in fostering
innovation and prudent risk taking in the development of new
wastewater treatment technologies.  The program has provided a
framework within which promising new technologies could move
from research and development to full scale utilization.  The
early years of the construction grants program were marked by a
lack of technological innovation.  It was not until incentives
for I/A technology were established under the 1977 and 1981
amendments to the Clean Water Act that rapid technological
innovation occurred.  EPA and the States are concerned about the
future of innovation in wastewater treatment technology after
the I/A program ends.

Under Title VI of the Clean Water Act States will receive
grants to capitalize State Revolving Funds  (SRF's).  The SRF
program does not provide for grants to support testing and
demonstration of promising new innovative wastewater treatment
systems.  EPA does not presently have the resources to conduct
technology demonstrations outside the framework of the
construction grants program which will soon end.  States are
concerned that they will have insufficient  resources on their
own to fund such testing and demonstration  projects and that,
as a result, innovation in municipal wastewater technology will
slow considerably, especially in the area of small community
technology.
Issue Number Three

From the outset technology transfer has been an integral aspect
of the I/A Program.  Good communications have been vital to the
progress to date in acceptance and use of I/A technologies.

The cornerstone of the I/A programs's successful technology
transfer efforts has been a network of EPA Regional and State
I/A coordinators.  These individuals are responsible for
promoting the program and serving as information resources in
their States and Regions.  In turn these State and Regional
coordinators are served by a National I/A coordinator at EPA
Headquarters and a staff of I/A technology experts at EPA's
Water Engineering Research Laboratory in Cincinnati, Ohio.
This network of individuals was able to effectively collect and
disseminate information about I/A technologies.
                                   70
-------
States are concerned about how, as the construction grants
program winds down, they will be able to effectively benefit
from the experiences of other States.
The following recommendation is offered for addressing Issue
Number Three.  No recommendations are being offered for Issues
Number One and Two.

Recommendation for Issue Number Three

EPA plans to continue promoting technology development by
providing a reliable, unbiased source of technical information
and expertise for States and communities through the
cooperative efforts of the Office of Water, the Office of
Research and Development's new center for Environmental
Research and the Cincinnati laboratory, the Agencywide
Technology Transfer Staff, and the Regions.  This coordinated
effort will maximize the benefits of existing technology
activities and would allow EPA to serve as an authority to
which States and communities could turn with requests for
technical information and assistance.

EPA is already conducting or may undertake the following
activities to encourage the continued development of I/A
technologies:

1)   Work closely with external organizations such as the
     Water Pollution Control Federation, the American Society
     of Civil Engineers, the Association of Metropolitan
     Sewerage Agencies, and others, to leverage Federal
     resources and avoid duplication of effort.

2)   conduct technology transfer and training seminars for
     those who need information about municipal wastewater
     technology.

3)   Conduct, publish, and distribute evaluations of the
     performance of I/A wastewater technologies.

4)   Prepare, publish, and distribute informational reports
     and newsletters about municipal wastewater technology.

5)   Provide peer matching among States.  For example, EPA
     could match States with a need for certain expertise with
     States, external organizations, or EPA personnel having
     such expertise.

6)   Provide information or referral in response to specific
     inquiries or to assist in solving specific problems.

                                  71
-------
7)    Conduct an awards program to recognize innovation in
      wastewater treatment technology on the part of States,
      communities, and consulting engineers.

These activities are paiL of an Agencywide effort to more
effectively identify the technology needs of municipalities and
the role that EPA, in both the short and long-range, should
assume in meeting these needs.
                                   72
-------
           APPENDIX A

INNOVATIVE/ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGY
           CATEGORIES
                    73
-------
                          APPENDIX A
                INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY CATEGORIES
WASTEWATER TREATMENT

Aeration/Mixing

Aeration and Mixing are essential components of wastewater
treatment technologies to provide oxygen for aerobic microbial
biodegradation of wastes.  Innovative aeration/mixing processes
include:

Aerated mixing chamber and blower
Aeromod system
Aspirating propeller pump
Counter current aeration
Draft tube aeration
EDI aeration systems
Fine bubble diffusers
Intermittent cycle extended aeration
Submerged mixing of equalization tanks
Submerged propeller mixer

Clarifiers

Clarifiers are tanks or basins used to settle out suspended
solids from wastewater.  Various types of Clarifiers are
presented below:

Aerated clarifier
Cantilevered clarifier
Combined secondary sedimentation/chlorination
Flocculating clarifier
Fixed media clarifier
Integral clarifier
Intrachannel clarifier
Plate settlers

Disinfection

The following technologies utilize various physical or chemical
processes to destroy bacteria and other pathogens from
wastewater prior to discharge.

Combined secondary sedimentation/chlorination
Flow-paced sulfur dioxide and chlorine additives
Ozonation

                                   74
-------
Pre-ozonation
Ultraviolet (UV) disinfection

Elnergv Conservation and Recovery

A wide rar-ge of technologies is used to conserve energy or to
allow for energy (heat) recovery and reuse.  These energy
saving technologies are listed below:

Blower heat recovery system
Digesters heated by geothermal heat
Earth sheltering and passive solar design
Energy recovery from sludge treatment
Energy recovery/heat pumps
Incinerator with heat recovery
Sludge heat exchangers
Sludge used to generate electricity
Solar power systems
Waste heat used to power steam generators

Filtration

The following innovative technologies utilize various filtering
mechanisms to remove suspended solids and other solids from
wastewater.

Automatic  low head filter
continuous cleaning sand filters
Floating dredge sand filters
Innovative sand filter
Microscreens
Primary effluent filtration
Sand filter
Upflow sand filter

Fixed—Film Biological Reactors

Secondary  treatment of wastewater  is achieved by  fixed-film
biological contactors which feature a microbial biomass
attached either to rotating discs  or fixed media  that
aerobically break down organic matter in the wastewater  flowing
over the disc surface.  Types of biological reactors are
presented  below:

Activated  biofilter
Air driven rotating biological contactor
Biological aerated filter
Underflow  clarifier/rotating biological contactor

Lagoons

Various types of lagoons and ponds provide clarification and

                                   75
-------
some anaerobic digestion for the treatment and disposal of
septage.   Often lagoon effluent is filtered or passed through a
treatment system prior to discharge.   The innovative lagoon
technologies include:

Aquaculture
Baffle system in lagoon, with duckweed cover
Complete mix lagoons
Controlled discharge stabilization ponds
Deep cell lagoon
Duck weed cover in lagoon
Earthen pond system
Facultative lagoon
Facultative lagoon with reed filter system
Hydrograph controlled release lagoons
Permafrost construction
Single cell lagoon with sand filters

Land Treatment

Land treatment refers to wastewater treatment systems which
rely on soil or natural vegetation for wastewater treatment.
In these systems, screened, primary or secondary wastewater is
either applied to the soil surface or discharged through a
subsurface drainage network.  The wastewater receives further
treatment while flowing over the vegetated soil surface or
while percolating through the soil.  Land treatment systems
include spray irrigation, and subsurface filter/surface
discharge systems.

Oxidation Ditches

The following innovative technologies are variations of the
activated sludge process in which a continuous loop reactor is
used to provide a bioreactor where mixed liquor is recirculated
continuously through a closed aeration channel.

Anoxic oxidation ditch
Benthal stabilization oxidation ditch
Carrousel oxidation ditch
Oxidation ditch with centrally  located clarifiers

Nitrification

Nitrification is the process in which toxic  ammonia  is  oxidized
by bacterial populations to  less  toxic nitrate.  The various
nitrification processes are  listed below:

Fixed growth biological nitrification
Nitrification enhanced  by  aerated polishing  pond
Pure oxygen/single  stage nitrification
Rotating biological contactors  for nitrification

                                   76
-------
Specialized bacteria
Upflow packed bed nitrification

Nutrient Removal

The following technologies utilize biological or chemical
processes to either remove or transform nutrients to less
harmful compounds prior to discharge.

Allied process for phosphorus
Anoxic/Oxic Systems
Bardenpho process
Biomedia filter treatment for TKN reduction
Breakpoint chlorination for ammonia removal
Chemical addition to lagoon
Phostrip process
Sludge digester supernatant for treatment for ammonia Nitrogen
reduction
Waste pickle liquor use for phosphorus removal

Miscellaneous Wastewater Treatment Systems

Very specific innovative technologies, ranging from aeration
devices to grit removal processes are utilized in various
systems to aid in the treatment of wastewater.  These various
technologies are listed below:

Captor biological treatment plant
Combined sewer overflow - swirl concentrators
Constructed wetlands for lagoon effluent
Dissolved air flotation thickener
Eductor-induced vacuum chemical feed system
Enclosed impellor screw pump
Fluidized bed treatment of digestor supernatant
Sewage application to peat filter cells
Marsh/pond/meadow
Powdered activated carbon/regeneration
Pressure leach fields
Primary treatment facility
Pure oxygen fluidized bed reactor
Sanilogical system
Sequencing batch reactor receiving septic tank effluent
Shallow-bed plastic media biofilter
Slow rate-dual water system for urban irrigation
Soil treatment systems
Centrifugal gyro-type grit separator
Tubular screw pumps
Unique circular pump station
                                   77
-------
SLUDGE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES

Composting

These sludge composting technologies utilize aerobic
microrganisms to decompose complex organic components of sewage
sludge into simpler compounds which can be used as a soil
amendment or conditioner.

Aerated static pile composting
In-vessel composting
Aerated windrow composting

Digestion

Sludge digestion utilizes either aerobic and/or anaerobic
digestion to decompose sludge to a stabilized state.  The
various technologies are as follows:

Aerobic digestion
Anaerobic digestion
Dual anaerobic/aerobic digestion
Egg-shaped anaerobic digester with gas utilization

Drying Beds/Land Application

Small to medium sized wastewater treatment plant often dewater
wastewater treatment sludges (for volume reduction) by applying
them to sand drying beds.  In these beds, sludge is uniformly
applied to a depth of 12 to 18 inches; free water in the sludge
is then removed either through gravity or through application
of a vacuum.  Dewatered sludges are often disposed of by direct
application to agricultural or forested lands or land filling.

Incineration

Incineration provides a reduction in the volume of dewatered
sewage sludge by drying and combustion.  This results in a
relatively inert ash which is disposed of by landfilling.  The
various types of incinerators are listed below:

Co-incineration
Starved air combustion of sludge
Thermal process with production of construction aggregate
                                  78
-------
Miscellaneous Sludge Treatment Technologies

A wide range of technologies is used to dewater, dry,
stabilize, and thicken sludge to reduce volumes and reduce
environmental risks prior to disposal.  These technologies are
presented below:

Belt filter press
Belt filter press with lime feed
Carver - Greenfield Sludge Drying
Facultative sludge basins
Freeze/thaw sludge drying/dewatering
Lateral flow sludge thickeners
Sludge cake conveyance system
Sludge drying bed mixing system
Vacuum assisted sludge dewatering beds
Vacuum de-odorization of digested sludge
Wedgewire sludge filter beds
                                   79
-------
                          APPENDIX A

                      ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES
ON-SITE TREATMENT

Aerobic Units

Aerobic units are used for pretreatment in single or
multi-family soil absorption systems to provide partial
treatment of wastewater prior to discharge to soil absorption
systems.

Evaporation/Evapotranspiration Beds

In evaporation beds partially treated wastewater is discharged
to shallow earthen basins filled with porous soil where
evaporation occurs.  In evapotranspiration beds wastewater is
discharged to vegetated bed; transpiration by the vegetation in.
conjunction with evaporation facilitates wastewater volume
reduction.

Mound Systems

This technology is an adaptation of the conventional
residential septic tank and leach field in that wastewater from
several sources is collected and pretreated in a centralized
location followed by uniform distribution and additional
treatment in an above ground absorption field constructed of
earthen fill material.

Sand Filters

Partially treated wastewater is applied to a bed of granular
(sand)  filter material.  During passage through the filter, the
wastewater is treated further by biological and physical
processes.

Septic  Tank/Soil Absorption  (Single family/MuIti  family)

Septic  tank/soil absorption systems are used both  for
individuals and small communities.  Solid wastes  are settled  in
a septic tank, while  liquid wastes are discharged  to a soil
absorption area and are treated during passage through natural
soils.  Typically, absorption areas are designed  for single
family  use; however,  in areas of soils not suitable  for
wastewater percolation,  larger absorption beds may be  developed
for multi-family use.
                                   80
-------
LAND TREATMENT

Aguaculture/Wetlands

This process utilizes either natural or constructed ponds or
wetlands to biologically achieve secondary or tertiary
wastewater treatment.

Overland Flow

In overland flow, wastewater is applied to gently sloping grass
fields.  Wastewater is  biologically treated as it flows down
slope.  It is subsequently collected and discharged.

Rapid Infiltration

Rapid infiltration is a technology for land treatment of
wastewater in which wastewater is applied to sandy soils.
Wastewater is naturally treated as it passes rapidly through
soil materials.

Slow Rate Land Treatment

Slow rate land treatment processes involve the passage of
partially treated wastewater over the soil surface, relying
upon infiltration of wastewater in the soils to provide
wastewater treatment.

Preapplication Treatment and Storage

In this technology, partially treated wastewater is either
pretreated (e.g., primary clarification) or stored (for
settling) prior to land application.

Other Land Treatments

Methods such as spray irrigation and subsurface discharge of
wastewater are also used for land treatment of wastewater.
COLLECTION SYSTEMS

Pressure Sewers/Effluent Pumps

Pressure sewer systems pump effluent from a septic tank or
collection basin through a pressure main to a treatment
facility or large collection system.
-------
         Sewers/Grindt

Grinder pumps are used to grind and pump household wastewater
through a pressure main to a treatment facility or a large
collection system.

Small Diameter Gravity Sewers

Small diameter gravity sewers convey wastewater through small
diameter (3-6 inches) gravity mains.  Smaller diameter gravity
sewers are used in areas of low wastewater flow.

Vacuum Sewers

In contrast to pressure sewer systems which transport the
wastes by pumping, vacuum sewers rely upon vacuum created in
small diameter collection mains to transport wastewater to a
treatment facility or larger collection system.
ENERGY RECOVERY/SLUDGE

90% Methane Recovery/Anaerobic Digestion

This alternative technology utilizes anaerobic microorganisms
to reduce raw sludge solids volume while recovering methane
gas, a by-product of the conversion process, for reuse.

Self—Sustaining Incineration

Self-sustaining incineration is the incineration of sludge
which relies upon the fuel value of the sludge to eliminate the
need for auxiliary fuel following incineration start-up.


SLUDGE TREATMENT

Compost, ing

This technology involves the aerobic microbial decomposition of
the complex organic components of sewage sludge producing a
stabilized organic residue which can be used as a soil
amendment or conditioner.

Land Spreading of POTW Sludge

This technology involves the land application of sludges from
wastewater treatment facilities.
                                  82
-------
Fre-application Treatment

Pre-application treatment typically involves the addition of
chemicals (e.g., lime,  ferric chloride,  polymer)  to  facilitate
sludge dewatering.   Dewatered sludges can then be land applied
or otherwise disposed of.

Other Sludge Treatment or Disposal

Sludges may be pellitized, or similarly treated to provide a
degree of stabilization prior to disposal.
MISCELLANEOUS ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES

Aquifer Recharge

In this technology, treated wastewater is discharged to the
soil surface, or through a subsurface drainage system for
recharge of ground water systems and potential reuse down
gradient.  With aquifer recharge wastewater is further treated
as it travels through the aquifer.

Direct Reuse

In this technology, disinfected wastewater is reused for
non-potable purposes (e.g., irrigation).

Septage Treatment and Disposal

Septage management options include land disposal, co-treatment
and  independent treatment.  Land disposal options are
trench/lagoon/landfill burial, and subsurface incorporation;
co-treatment options include addition of wastes to the liquid
and/or sludge streams of a POTW;  independent treatment includes
disposal  in a stabilization lagoon, composting, biological
treatment, aerobic and/or anaerobic digestion, lime
stabilization and chlorine oxidation.

Total Containment Ponds

Total containment ponds, often referred to as complete
retention or evaporation ponds, are wastewater
treatment/holding ponds which rely upon evaporation  and  some
seepage  for disposal of wastewater, with no  formal discharge.
                                   83
-------
             APPENDIX B




SUMMARY DATA SHEETS ON M/R FACILITIES
                      84
-------
              APPENDIX B.I
      I/A TECHNOLOGIES THAT FAILED
AND WERE AWARDED A 100 PERCENT M/R  GRANT
                        85
-------
                         APPENDIX B.1

                 FALLEN  LEAF LAKE, CALIFORNIA
Subject:   Failure of an Alternativp Combined Vac'ium/Air
Ejection Collection System.
Summary of Problem:

o     The problem involved magnetic controllers, pneumatic
      valves, and solenoid controls resulting in repairs and
      replacements causing operation and maintenance costs to be
      over the predicted costs.

o     The failure was discovered within the 2-year limit.
Summary of Solution:

o     The grantee attempted to correct the failure through
      repairs, substitution of parts and recourse to equipment
      warranty.
Current Status:

o     The grantee requested a 100 percent M/R grant for the
      modification of the system.

o     The 100 percent M/R grant was awarded.
                                   86
-------
                         APPENDIX B.I

                      MANILA, CALIFORNIA

Subject:  Innovative Sonic Level-Sensing Controls in a Septic
Tank Effluent Pump Collection System.

Summary of Problem;

o     These controls were one of three types used in the first
      low pressure sewer project funded in the State.

o     The project had specific features to allow direct
      comparison of three types of control devices when the
      project went into operation in July 1979.

o     Of 253 septic tank effluent pump installations, 73 were
      equipped with sonic devices and 180 were equipped with
      float or bubbler type devices.

o     Emergency service calls on the sonic devices were 2.5
      times more frequent than those for the float or bubbler
      devices when problems were identified and assessed in
      early 1981.

o     The sonic device problems were related to printed circuit
      boards not readily correctable by District maintenance
      personnel.

o     The high frequency of emergency service calls and the high
      cost of correction was judged to be a problem requiring
      corrective action which fell within the 2-year limit  for
      award of a 100 percent M/R Grant.

Summary of Solution:

o     New equipment has been installed to correct controller
      problems.

Current Status:

o     Costs for replacement of M/R grant eligible detectors were
      determined to be approximately $34,900

o     The 100 percent M/R grant was approved by EPA Region  IX,
      not to exceed $34,900.

o     The equipment manufacturer was to buy back usable
      equipment with a value of $4,453 to be subtracted from  the
      amount $34,900.
                                   87
-------
o     Equipment supplier was to provide a field engineer at no
      cost to supervise installation of new equipment.
                                   88
-------
                         APPENDIX B.I

                       PORTAGE, INDIANA


Subject:   Failure of Vacuum Assisted Sludge Drying Beds.


Summary of Problem:

o     During winter, the sludge froze.

o     Adequate separation of the sludge could not be achieved.
      The sludge was being mixed too much on the bed.

o     The distribution of polymer in the sludge was inadequate.
Dewatering was difficult and took longer due to the properties
of the sludge chemical mixture.

Summary of Solution:

o     Field tests have been performed with different chemicals
      and sludge proportions to give the best flocculation
      results.

o     The grantee has requested a 100 percent M/R grant for the
      modification of the failed system.

Current Status:

o     A 100 percent M/R grant has been awarded  for the
      modification of the polymer distribution  system and for
      the deployment of heaters to  stop  freezing  in the winter
      months.
                                   89
-------
                         APPENDIX B.I

                      KALAMAZOO, MICHIGAN
Subject:   Powdered Activated Carbon Treatment (PACT) System-
C'arbon Regeneration Unit

Summary of Problem;

o     Problems with the carbon regeneration system have resulted
      in a build-up of ash and subsequently increased mixed
      liquor suspended solids.  In addition build up of ash in
      the secondary aeration tanks has resulted in overflow of
      the final clarifiers and sand filters and therefore
      effluent degradation.

Current Status:

o     A grant amendment has been awarded to install secondary
      sludge thickening and dewatering equipment.  The system
      manufacturer is funding the installation of a carbon ash
      separation unit.
                                   90
-------
                         APPENDIX B.I

                    INCLINE VILLAGE,  NEVADA
Subject:   Constructed Wetlands

Summary of Problem:

o     A wetland was constructed next to a natural wetland to
      provide for wastewater treatment.  The constructed wetland
      was separated from the natural wetland by a dike.

o     Soil conditions in the area of the constructed wetland
      were not as expected.   The dike separating the natural and
      constructed wetland developed a leak and allowed
      wastewater to flow into the natural wetland.
Current Status;

o     A 100 percent M/R grant was awarded to repair the dike.
                                   91
-------
                         APPENDIX B.I

                     SANTA FE, NEW MEXICO



Subject:   Failure of Innovative Draft Tube Aerators.


Summary of Problem;

o     The original design required two draft tubes, but to
      achieve sufficient oxygen transfer,  operation of three
      tubes was necessary,  causing increased energy costs.

o     With all of the available draft tube aerators running, the
      facility is still unable to meet its nitrogen discharge
      requirements.

o     Mechanical problems with the gear boxes and replacement of
      the impeller sand vortex control veins has increased
      operation and maintenance costs.


Summary of Solution:

o     Manufacturer modifications to improve energy efficiencies
      have caused excessive down time, resulting in increased
      operation and maintenance costs.

o     The Region has declared the Draft Tube Aerators at
      Santa Fe a failed technology.
         ' ; <'-'';

Current Status:

o     A 100 percent M/R grant has been awarded.
                                   92
-------
                         APPENDIX B.1

                      LAWRENCE, NEW  YORK


Subject:   Failure of an Alternative Community Mound System.


Summary of Problems:


o     The mound system was a tiered mou:id with four beds on the
      lower tier and four on the upper tier.  The effluent would
      flow out the sides and top of the mound system.

o     The problem was due to lack of knowledge and proper
      guidance when the system was designed.


Summary of Solution:

o     The failure occurred only a few months after the start-up.

o     The system was declared a failure by the State.


Current Status:

o     The grantee requested a 100 percent M/R grant and was
      awarded onp after thp TPVIPW.
awarded one after the review,
                                   93
-------
                         APPENDIX B.I

                    CLIFFORD, NORTH DAKOTA



Subject:  Failure of an Alternative Community Mound System.


Summary of Problem:

o     Effluent was flowing out the sides and the top of the
      mound.

o     The problem is attributed to the lack of knowledge when
      these mound systems were designed and built.  Sufficient
      soils investigations to determine soil percolation
      information were not performed prior to construction.

o     The mound system was designed and built according to the
      old EPA guidelines; in fact, an additional fifty percent
      was added to the design specifications for a more
      conservative project, yet it still failed.


Summary of Solution;

o     The mound system was declared a failure by the State.

o     Proposed solutions are to eliminate the mound and
      construct a two-celled storage system prior to land
      application by irrigation.


Current Status;

o     A 100 percent M/R grant has been awarded  for the
      replacement of the mound system.
                                   94
-------
                         APPENDIX B.I

                    CRANSTON, RHODE ISLAND



Subject;   Failure of Innovative  Draft  Tube Aerators.


Summary of Problem:

o     The Draft Tube Aerators were not performing up to design
      specifications due to inadequate oxygen transfer.

o     The impellers had mechanical problems which caused the
      draft tube aerators to be  less efficient in oxygen
      transfer than originally designed.

o     The impeller malfunctions  were discovered within the
      two-year limit.


Summary of Solution:

o     The manufacturer of the draft tube aerators worked on the
      impellers and the draft tubes without success.


Current Status;

o     The technology was declared a failure by the Region.

o     A 100 percent M/R grant was awarded for the replacement of
      the impellers.

o     Replacement of the impellers is being conducted  at this
      point.
                                   95
-------
                         APPENDIX B.I

                        EL PASO, TEXAS



Subject:   Failure of Innovative Draft Tube Aerators.

Summary of Problem;

o     The original design required an Alpha factor of 1.0 to
      achieve sufficient oxygen transfer for a 12 MGD facility.
      This design did not provide for adequate oxygen transfer
      resulting in operation of the facility at one-half
      capacity.  A Comprehensive Performance Evaluation (CPE) of
      the facility revealed that the design Alpha Factor should
      have been 0.5.

Current Status;

o     A 100 percent M/R grant has been awarded.
                                   96
-------
                         APPENDIX B.I

                       ELBE, WASHINGTON



Subject:   Failure of an Alternative Community Mound System.

Summary of Problem:

o     The effluent,  upon start-up,  would flow out the sides of
      two of the three mound systems.

o     The design criteria originally followed were state-of-the-
      art but failed when they were scaled up for the proposed
      system.

o     The failure of the mound system was discovered well within
      the two-year limit.

Summary of Solution;

o     The regional office declared the technology failed.

Current Status:

o     The 100 percent M/R grant has been awarded for the
      Facility Planning phase.
                                   97
-------
                         APPENDIX B.I

                   CAMPBELLSPORT, WISCONSIN



Subject:  Failure of an Alternative Rapid Infiltration System.


Summary of Problem:

o     The Rapid Infiltration technology failed due to
      restrictive soils not allowing the water to percolate at
      design rates.

o     Initial soil borings showed the site to be acceptable for
      the land application process; however, soil borings
      conducted following start-up revealed a clay layer which
      was causing the percolation failure.


Summary of Solution;

o     The State declared the technology at Campbellsport a
      failure.


Current Status:

o     A 100 percent M/R grant has been awarded for the
      replacement of the system.
                                   98
-------
           APPENDIX B.2

   I/A TECHNOLOGIES THAT FAILED
    FOR WHICH A  REQUEST  FOR A
100 PERCENT M/R GRANT IS IN REVIEW
                    99
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                      PARAGOULD, ARKANSAS



Subject:   Innovative Duck Weed System


Summary of Problem;

o     Duck weed was added to a lagoon system to reduce suspended
      solids created by algae.  However, duck weed growth can
      not be readily maintained.  Suspended solids removal and
      therefore effluent permit limitations have not
      consistently been met.


Current Status:

o     A comprehensive performance evaluation has been conducted
      and the system has been declared a failure.  The grantee
      has applied for a 100 percent M/R grant; the grant is
      currently under review.
                                  100
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                    NEVADA CITY, CALIFORNIA
Subject:   Failure of the Innovative Vacuum Assisted Sludge
Drying Beds.
Summary of Problem:

o     The drying beds were designed and constructed to be open
      to the air.

o     During rain or snow, the sludge cakes crack and cannot  be
      lifted off the drying beds.

o     Electrical and mechanical failures of the drying beds were
      also caused by the freezing conditions,  resulting in
      increased O&M costs.

o     The polymer feed pump was undersized, so modifications
      were made to the pump to adequately provide enough polymer
      for sludge thickening.


Summary of Solution:

o     The grantee requested a 100 percent M/R grant for the
      construction of a cover for the drying beds.
Current Status:

o     The request for the 100 percent M/R grant is in review.
                                  101
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                    SAN LORENZO, CALIFORNIA



Subject:  Pressure Leach Field for Effluent Disposal


Summary of Problem:

o     The leach field is designed to provide final treatment of
      effluent from a package extended aeration plant.  The
      distribution system has clogged and corroded resulting in
      system failure.

Current Status:

o     The grantee has applied for an M/R grant.  The application
      is under review by the State and Region.
                                  102
-------
                         APPEND IX B.2

               VENTURA, NORTH COAST, CALIFORNIA
Subject:   Failure of controllers and pumps of an Alternative
Septic Tank Effluent Pump and Collection System.
Summary of Problem;

o     The septic tank effluent pumping system collects
      wastewater from four seaside neighborhoods and conveys it
      to Ventura's Eastside (regional) system.

o     This facility has pump and controller problems.

o     The pumps were not the right size for the collection
      system, causing increased operation and maintenance costs
      for the repair of these pumps.

Summary of Solution;

o     The facility was declared a failure by the State.

o     The grantee has requested a 100 percent M/R grant for the
      modifications needed to the pump controls and pumps.


Current Status:

o     The request for the 100 percent M/R grant is in the
      process of review by the State.
                                   103
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

              VENTURA, NYELAND ACRES, CALIFORNIA
Subject:  Failure of the controllers and pumps of an
Alternative Septic Tank Effluent Pump Collection System

Summary of Problem:

o     The septic tank effluent pumping system conveys flow to an
      RBC treatment plant within the community.

o     The effluent pumps wore out sooner than the predicted life
      expectancy.

o     The controllers and other equipment had mechanical
      problems due to corrosion from environmental conditions.

o     These problems increased operation and maintenance costs.

o     The plant influent was found to have extremely high
      sulfide concentrations, which necessitated a complex
      series of processes to strip the influent.
Summary of Solution:

o     The controllers and pumps of the Septic Tank Effluent
      Pump Collection System have been declared a failure.

o     Repairs have been made to the pumps and controllers.
Current Status;

o     The grantee requested a 100 percent M/R grant for the
      replacement of the pumps and controllers; the request is
      in review by the State.
                                  104
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                       ELKTON, MARYLAND



Subject:   Aerated Window Composting


Summary of Problem;

o     Process generates odors which  are resulting in citizen
      complaints.


Current Status:

o     The State has declared this a  failed project.   The grantee
      has applied for a 100 percent  M/R grant to provide
      adequate odor control.  Steps  being considered include the
      construction of lime addition  facilities, enclosure of the
      composting pad and sludge holding tanks, and installation
      of ventilation and off gas odor controls for the enclosed
      sludge holding tanks.

o     The grant request is currently under State/Regional
      review.
                                  105
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                      RISING  SUN, MARYLAND
Subject:  Failure of the Innovative Activated Ozone
Disinfection System.


Summary of Problem:

o     The ozone disinfection system was not performing up to the
      design specifications.

o     The system had problems with the ozone generation units,
      thus increasing the operation and maintenance costs to the
      point where operation of the system was no longer
      cost-effective.
Summary of Solution;

o     The effluent receiving stream for Rising Sun is classified
      a trout stream.  Chlorinated discharges are prohibited in
      Maryland trout streams.  The city is therefore considering
      a proposal to reclassify the effluent receiving stream so
      that it is no longer classified as a trout stream.  The
      facility would then be able to disinfect the discharge
      using chlorination in lieu of ozonation.

Current Status:

o     The 100 percent M/R grant is currently under review.
                                  106
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                   FALL RIVER, MASSACHUSETTS
Subject:   Failure of the Innovative Self-Sustaining
Incinerator's Dewatering Device.
Summary of Problem:

o     The Lasta Plate and Frame device for the sludge dewatering
      system was funded as an innovative technology but failed
      to meet design performance specifications.

o     The Lasta Plate and Frame press was designed to be fully
      automated but has actually required operators to run it,
      resulting in increased operation and maintenance costs.
      Excessive down time due to repairs and modifications also
      added to these costs.
Summary of Solution;

o     The manufacturer has been working with the grantee on
      repairs and other designs to alleviate the problem but has
      had no success.
Current Status;

o     The grantee requested a 100 percent M/R grant which is  in
      review.
                                   107
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                 NORTH KOOCH1CH1NG, MINNESOTA



Subject:   Ultraviolet (UV)  Disinfection

Summary of Problem:

o     The ultraviolet disinfection (UV) unit of the North
      Koochiching wastewater treatment facility does not
      effectively kill bacteria at design flows.  Coliform
      discharge standards are therefore being exceeded.

Current Status;

o     The grantee has requested a 100 percent M/R grant for
      installation of additional UV units or replacement of the
      UV disinfection system with chlorination.  The grant
      request is currently under review by the State.
                                   108
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                     NORTHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Subject:  Failure of the Innovative Ultraviolet (UV)
Disinfection system.
Summary of Problem:

o     The UV Disinfection tubes are not effectively killing the
      bacteria at the design flow; therefore, coliform standards
      are being exceeded.

o     The inefficiency of the UV tubes may be due to the amount
      of solids in the secondary wastewater.

o     A further problem is the unforeseen build-up of calcium
      carbonate on the containment glass for the UV tubes,
      thereby decreasing the effectiveness of the disinfection
      system.

o     With the rapid rate of calcium carbonate build-up, the UV
      disinfection tubes cannot be kept clean, which increases
      operation and maintenance costs.

o     The UV Disinfection system also has electrical problems.

Summary of Solution;

o     The grantee performed continued repairs to and cleaning of
      the units.

o     The State declared the technology a failure.
Current Status:

o     Grantee requested a 100 percent M/R grant, but the project
      is too low on the State's priority list to be funded.
                                  109
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                       GALLATIN. MISSOURI
Subject;   Intrachannel Clarifiers

Summary of Problem:

o     A combination of innovative features at the Gallatin
      facility (e.g., short detention time) has created
      operational difficulties.  The plant does not consistently
      meet discharge permit limits.

Current Status;
o
The grantee has requested a 100 percent M/R grant and is
currently preparing a corrective action report for State
review.
                                  110
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                       BOZEMAN, MONTANA
Subject:   Rapid Infiltration

Summary of Problem;

o     The rapid infiltration system has been unable to provide
      adequate control of fecal coliform during warmer months.
      The reason for the failure is not completely known;
      however, EPA guidance documents appear overly optimistic
      regarding the capability of rapid infiltration systems for
      removing coliform and other organisms.

Current Status:

o     The State declared the project a failure.  The grantee has
      requested a 100 percent M/R grant for modification of the
      wastewater treatment system; the request is currently
      under review.  Several alternatives are being considered
      for modification/replacement including the use of
      chlorination/dechlorination following the rapid
      infiltration process.
                                  Ill
-------
                         APPENDIX 13.2

                     SCOTTS BLUFF, NEBRASKA



Subject:   Failure of the Innovative Microscreens.


Summary of Problem:

o     Structural failure of the microscreens caused performance
      to be less than design specifications.

o     The facility's effluent is not meeting the BOD and
      suspended solids standards.

o     The facility is also having problems with the diffused
      aerator system, as it is not working up to its designed
      performance level.

o     The failure of the microscreens was discovered within the
      2-year limit.


Summary of Solution;

o     The manufacturer of the microscreens has attempted to
      alleviate the problem by repairs and modifications but has
      had no success.


Current Status;

o     The M/R grant request is undergoing the formal review
      process.
                                  112
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                     PLATTSBURGH, NEW YORK
Subject:   In-Vessel Composting

Summary of Problem:

o     The in-vessel composting process generates significant
      ammonia odor.  However, the odor control system at the
      facility is not designed to remove ammonia, only hydrogen
      sulfide.

Current Status:

o     The State has declared the odor control system a failure,
      the grantee has applied for 100 percent M/R grant to
      upgrade the odor control system.  This request is under
      State/Regional review.
                                  113
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                   BURLINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA
Subject:  Failure of the Innovative Powdered Activated Carbon
Treatment System.
Summary of Problem:

o     The Powdered Activated Carbon system is not adequately
      mixing the mixed liquor suspended solids witli the
      activated carbon.

o     The ash removal system does not adequately remove the ash;
      therefore, some of the ash is returning to the basin.  The
      ash settles out at the bottom because of poor mixing.

o     At times the facility is not meeting its effluent
      standards for BOD, ammonia, and suspended solids.

o     The overall problem is due to unforeseen factors including
      the characteristics of the sludge, carbon and ash mixture
      and the dimensions of the basin.

o     The facility's problems were noticed and documented
      within the 2-year limit.
Summary of Solution:

o     The manufacturer of the treatment system worked with the
      grantee in an attempt to improve the efficiency of the
      process.
 urrent Status:
      The facility's Innovative technology has been declared
      failed.

o     The grantee has requested a 100 percent M/R grant which is
      in the review process.
                                  114
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                  GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA
Subject:   Failure of the Innovative Starved Air Incineration
Process.
Summary ofProblem:

o     The problem with the starved air incinerator is that the
      facility is not meeting the air quality standards for
      airborne particulates,  specifically silica.

o     The scrubbers that are  being used are not meant to remove
      particles, like silica, that are less than one micron in
      size.

o     Silica was not tested before the scrubbers were in place;
      therefore, it was previously not a problem.
Summary of Solution:

o     The city recommended the replacement of the scrubbers with
      new ones that will alleviate the silica problem.
Current Status:

o     The technology as used at Greensboro has been declared
      failed.

o     A 100 percent M/R grant has been requested which is in the
      review process.
                                   115
-------
                         APPENDIX n.2

                  GREENVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA
Subject:   Failure of the Innovative Counter Current Aeration
Process.
Summary of Problem:

o     The Schreiber Counter Current Aeration process was
      declared as an innovative technology for its claimed
      energy savings arid oxygen transfer efficiency.

o     The facility is not meeting its effluent limits for
      nitrogen and suspended solids due primarily to inadequate
      oxygen transfer.

o     The problem is that the system was tested using clean
      water and a correction factor that did not compensate for
      dirty effluent was applied.
Summary of Solution:

o     The technology as used at Greenville has been declared
      failed.

o     The grantee is performing a study to determine a
      cost-effective solution.
Current Status;

o     A 100 percent M/R grant has been requested and is in the
      review process.
                                  116
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                   HENDERSON, NORTH CAROLINA
Subject:  Dual Digestion

Summary of Problem:

o     Low level explosion hazard detection equipment at dual
      digestion facility is not operating within design
      specifications.  in addition, inadequate control of oxygen
      and sludge feed rates have resulted in extreme variation
      in system temperatures.

Current Status;

o     The State has declared this a failed project.  The grantee
      has applied for 100 percent M/R grant to improve or
      replace failing equipment; the State/Region are currently
      reviewing the 100 percent M/R request.
                                  117
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                PILOT MOUNTAIN, NORTH CAROLINA
Subject;   Failure of the Innovative Jet Aeration Oxidation
Ditch and the Vacuum Assisted Sludge Drying Beds.
Summary of Problems:

o     The Jet Aeration Oxidation Ditch and the Vacuum Assisted
      Sludge Drying Beds were funded as innovative technologies
      for their more effective oxygen transfer and more
      efficient drying process then standard technologies,
      respectively.

o     The Jet Aeration process does not provide the oxygen
      transfer that is needed.
o
      The vacuum sludge drying beds are not producing the dried
      sludge cakes in the amount of time predicted, causing more
      time for dewatering the sludge.


Summary of Solution;

o     The city is conducting an oxygen transfer study to
      determine the efficiency of the jet aeration oxidation
      ditch.  The city is also evaluating the vacuum assisted
      sludge drying bed process.
Current Status:

o     The technologies as used in Pilot Mountain have been
      declared failed.

o     A 100 percent M/R grant has been requested and is in the
      review process.
                                  118
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                     ANTLER, NORTH DAKOTA
SubjecLti.  Community Mound System

Summary of Problem:

o     Effluent has been flowing out of the sides and top of the
      mound.   This problem is attributed to inadequate
      separation of the mounds and insufficient evaluation of
      soil and ground water conditions for mounds of this size.
      This problem originated from a lack of knowledge of
      necessary system design and construction specifications
      during the system planning stages.

Current Status:

o     The mound system was declared a failure by the State.  The
      grantee has requested a 100 percent M/R grant; the grant
      request is currently under review.  The proposed solution
      is to replace the mound system with a land treatment
      system.
                                   119
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                  CHURCHS FKRRY, NORTH DAKOTA



Subject:   Failure of an Alternative Community Mound System.


Summary of Problem:

o     Effluent has been flowing out the sides and the top of the
      mound.

o     Sufficient soils investigations to determine soil
      percolation characteristics were not performed prior to
      construction.

o     The mound system was improperly designed and built
      according to the EPA guidelines for individual septic
      systems.  An additional 50 percent capacity was added to
      the design specifications for a more conservative project,
      yet it still failed.


Summary of Solution;

o     The mound system was declared a failure by the State.

o     Proposed solutions are to eliminate the mound and either
      construct a two-celled total containment pond system or a
      two-celled storage system prior to land application by
      irrigation.


Current Status:

o     A 100 percent M/R grant has been requested and is in the
      review process.
                                  120
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                          AKRON, OHIO
Subject:   In-Vessel Composting

Summary of Problem;

o     Inadequate ventilation of the composting vessel results in
      excessive humidity within the vessel.   The excessive
      moisture reduces the efficiency of the composting process.
      In addition, inadequate odor control has resulted in
      complaints from nearby residents.   Operation and
      maintenance costs at the facility have also increased due
      to failure of the sludge conveyance system.

Current Status:

o     A 100 percent M/R grant has been requested for the
      installation of additional air handling and odor control
      devices and the replacement of sludge conveyors.  The
      grant request is currently under review.
                                  121
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                     BEDFORD HEIGHTS, OHIO
Subject:   Failure of the Innovative Powdered Activated Carbon
System.


Summary of Problem:

o     The Powdered Activated Carbon System is causing increased
      mixed liquor suspended solids and increased ash generation
      leading to ash build-up.

o     The ash is predominantly iron oxide, which has caused
      corrosion of the carbon regenerating heat exchangers.

o     The facility cannot adequately meet effluent standards
      for metals.

o     The overall problem is due to unforeseen factors, such as
      the characteristics of the sludge and the ash build-up.


Summary of Solution:

o     The manufacturer was working on their own solution for the
      failure.  This solution was determined to be too costly.

o     The grantee conducted a pilot study to determine the
      effectiveness of a proposed modification.  The modified
      process included minor piping changes and utilized a
      process media filter unit to condition the sludge so that
      ash regeneration will be minimal.

o     The facility is replacing the worn out heat exchangers.
Current Status:

o     The wet air regeneration system of the powdered activated
      carbon process has been declared a failed technology.

o     The grantee has requested a 100 percent M/R grant which is
      in review, and the State feels that the award is imminent.
                                  122
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

              LAKE COUNTY  (GREATER MENTOR), OHIO
SubjecLj.  Compost, i nq

Summary of Problem:

o     Optimum composting efficiency at this facility requires a
      larger amount of bulking agent than called for by design
      specifications.  Greater volumes of bulking agent increase
      the effective volume of the material to be composted.  A
      larger area for composting than that currently available
      is required.

Current Status;

o     The grantee has requested a 100 percent M/R grant for
      expansion of the composting area.  The grant request is
      under review by the State.
                                   123
-------
    APPENDIX B.2

NORTH OLMSTFAU, OHIO
                         (PACT)  System-
Sub iect:  Powdered Activated Carbon Treatment
Carbon Regeneration System.

Summary of Problem:

o     Increased mixed liquor suspended solids are resulting from
      the build up of ash in the system from the carbon
      regeneration unit.  Effluent degradation results from
      accumulation of ash in the secondary aeration tank to a
      level that overloads the final clarifiers and tertiary
      microscreens.

Current Status;

o     The grantee has requested a 100 percent M/R grant; the
      grant request is under review by the State.  A pilot study
      to evaluate modification options has been conducted
      independently of the manufacturer's studies.
             124
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                    MINA LAKE, SOUTH DAKOTA



Subject;   Evapotranspiration/Soi1 Absorption Mound System.


Summary of Problem:

o     Two of three existing evapotranspiration/soil absorption
      mounds have failed resulting in accumulation of untreated
      wastewater at and around the site of the treatment system.
      This has created both public health and water pollution
      problems.

Current Status:

o     The grantee has requested a 100 percent M/R grant; the
      grant request is curently under review by both the Region
      and the State.  The proposed solution involves the
      construction of total containment lagoons to replace the
      failed facilities.
                                  125
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                   WHITE RIVER, SOUTH DAKOTA



Subject:   Total Containment Lagoon System

Summary of Problem:

o     Evaporation and seepage rates of the wastewater discharged
      to the lagoon are considerably less than predicted.   The
      design capacity of the lagoon is therefore not sufficient
      to allow wastewater treatment without effluent discharge.

Current Status:

o     The State has declared the project a failure.  The grantee
      has requested a 100 percent M/R grant; the grant request
      is currently under review by both the State and Region.
      The proposed solution involves the construction of an
      artificial wetland to provide treatment for lagoon
      discharges.
                                  126
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                  CLA1BORNE COUNTY,  TENNESSEE
Subject:   Counter Current Aeration

Summary of Problem:

o     Oxygen transfer is much lower than the design
      specification resulting in much grater than anticipated
      volume of sludge production.

Current Status:

o     The State lias declared this a failed project. The grantee
      has applied for a 100 percent M/R grant to fund additional
      sludge handling facilities and/or additional aeration.
      This grant request is under State/Region review.
                                   127
-------
                         APPENDIX B.?.

                      MEMPHJ S, TENNESSEE



Subject:   Activated Biofliter Towers

Summary of Problem;

o     The biofliters do not provide adequate treatment for the
      design-specified wastewater volume.   Towers are therefore
      overloaded and are not providing adequate secondary
      wastewater treatment.

Current Status:

o     The State has declared this a failed project.  The grantee
      has applied for a 100 percent M/R grant to construct
      additional towers; the grant request is under State/Region
      review.
                                   128
-------
                         APPENDIX B.2

                     WITTENBERG, WISCONSIN



Subject:  Failure of the Seepage Cells.


Summary of Problem;

o     The seepage cells were designed to allow for vertical
      passage of effluent;  soils in the area, however, are
      relatively impermeable and do not allow for adequate
      passage of effluent.


Summary of Solution:

o     The State declared the seepage cells at this facility a
      failure.


Current Status;

o     The grantee has requested a 100 percent M/R grant for the
      replacement of the seepage cells.

o     The grantee is currently evaluating alternative solutions
      to the project.
                                  129
-------
           APPENDIX  B.3

    I/A  TECHNOLOGIES  THAT FAILED
    FOR WHICH NO REQUEST FOR A
100 PERCENT M/R GRANT HAS BEEN MADE
                    130
-------
                         APPENDIX B.3

                        ATMORE,  AIABAMA




          Failure of Innovative  Draft Tube Aerators.
Summary of Problem:

o     The draft tube aerators were funded as an innovative
      technology because of claimed energy-efficient design.

o     The problem was insufficient oxygen transfer by the draft
      tube aerators, causing a need for more power and increased
      energy costs.

o     The facility design was to use one of two parallel basins,
      but actually both basins were needed, causing the increase
      in energy costs.

o     The oxygen transfer deficiency and subsequent operational
      problems were identified and reported to the State well
      within the 2-year limit.
Summary of Solution;

o     The manufacturer of the equipment has worked with the
      grantee in attempts to correct the problem.

Current Status:

o     A modification is imminent; no official request has been
      made for a 100 percent M/R grant.
                                   131
-------
                          APPENDIX  B.3

                        OPEL1KA,  ALABAMA



Subject:  Failure of Innovative Draft Tube Aerators.


Summary of Problem:

o     The draft tube aerators were funded as an innovative
      technology because of their more energy-efficient design.

o     The draft tube aerators are not providing sufficient
      oxygen transfer, causing increased power and energy costs

o     The problem of insufficient oxygen transfer was noticed
      and reported to the State well within the two-year limit.


Summary of Solution;

o     The facility was designed conservatively; the city is
      therefore able to provide adequate wastewater treatment
      using the current system.

o     The manufacturer attempted to fix the oxygen transfer
      problem but was not successful.


Current Status:

o     A 100 percent M/R grant has not yet been requested.
                                  132
-------
                         APPENDIX B.3

                       FLAGSTAFF, ARIZONA



Subject:   Combined Chlorination/Clarification

Summary of Problem:

o     The system has been unable to provide adequate mixing for
      optimum wastewater treatment.   The addition of chlorine to
      the clarifier has also reduced biomass efficiency.

Current Status;

o     The State has declared the technology at this location a
      failure.  The grantee has not, however, requested a 100
      percent M/R grant.
                                  133
-------
                         APPENDIX  B. 3

                  CITY OF RF.EDLEY, CALIFORNIA



Subject:   Failure of Innovative Pond Unclerclrains.


Summary of Problem:

o     The City of Reedley constructed an oxidation ditch
      treatment system followed by rapid infiltration
      (percolation) basins.

o     The basins include underdrains to enhance hydraulic
      disposal during periods of high flow.

o     During the wet season when the water table is high, the
      infiltration basins do not drain and the effluent cannot
      be adequately treated.


Summary of Solution:
o
The grantee has requested a 100 percent M/R grant  for  the
-F^ilnrp of +-hp> civci-t-om
      failure of the system
Current Status:

o     The state is reviewing the request to determine  if  the
      system is an actual failed technology.
                                   134
-------
                         APPENDIX B.3

                       STKRLING, COLORADO
Subject:  Design, performance and structural problems with
microscreens.
Summary of Problem;

o     The microscreens do not adequately remove the suspended
      solids, causing the effluent to exceed standards.

o     Structural failure of the filter mechanism resulted in an
      increase in operation and maintenance costs,

o     The one micron filter fabric life expectancy is shorter
      than the warranted design, causing an increase in the
      operation and maintenance costs.

o     The facility has not been certified complete; therefore,
      the possible failure is well within the 2-year limit.
Summary of Solution:

o     The manufacturer has been working witli the facility to
      correct the problems by repairs and substitutes.

o     The one micron filter fabric has been replaced with a six
      micron filter mesh that is designed to have a longer life
      expectancy.
Current Status:

o     Microscreens for filtering lagoon effluent have been
      declared a failure.

o     A 100 percent M/R grant is not necessary because the state
      relaxed effluent suspended solids limits, thereby
      eliminating the need for microscreens.
                                  135
-------
                         APPENDIX B.3

                       HANOVER, ILLINOIS
Subject:   Alternative One-Cell Lagoon with an Intermittent Sand
Filter.
Summary of Problem:

o     The one-cell lagoon with an intermittent sand filter was
      declared an innovative technology due to its
      cost-effectiveness.

o     Effluent failed to meet suspended solids standards.   Core
      samples from sand filters contained large amounts of
      algae; reasons for algae accumulation are not known.

o     There are a few systems elsewhere; similar failures have
      been reported.
Summary of Solution:

o     The process does not work consistently; the grantee has
      experimented with different loading rates and sand grain
      sizes with no success.

Current Status:

o     The grantee gave up trying to prove the technology failed
      so a request for a 100 percent M/R grant is unlikely.

o     If replacement is decided, the funds will come entirely
      from the State.
                                  136
-------
                         APPENDIX B.3

                       HOYLETON,  1LLINOJ S
Subject:   Sand Filters

Summary of Problem:

o     The Hoyleton facility uses a sand filter for suspended
      solids control for effluent from a one-cell lagoon.

o     Effluent from the sand filter does not consistently meet
      suspended solids standards.  An accumulation of algae in
      the sand filter is believed to have reduced sand
      filtration efficiency.

Current Status:

o     The State has declared the project a failure.   The grantee
      has not requested a 100 percent M/R grant.
                                  137
-------
                         APPENDIX B.3

                       SAUGET, JLLINOJS
Subject:   Powdered Activated Carbon Treatment (PACT)-Carbon
Regeneration System

Summary of Problem:

Several problems have been reported for the Sauget PACT process
including the following:

o     Increased mixed liquor suspended solids is resulting from
      the build up of ash from the carbon regeneration unit.

o     Excessive ash and respective metals in the ash result in
      effluent discharge limit violations.

o     Failure of the carbon regeneration heat exchanger forced
      the shut-down of one carbon regeneration train.

o     Excessive scaling and increased acid washing of carbon
      regeneration units have increased operation and
      maintenance costs.

o     Carbon use is in excess of design specifications.
Current Status;

o     The grantee is studying options for
      modification/replacement of the PACT carbon regeneration
      system.  The grantee has not requested a 100 percent M/R
      grant.
                                   138
-------
                         APPKND1X B.3

                     WAYNKSV1LLE, ILLINOIS
Subject:  Apparent failure of Community Mound System to provide
adequate wastewater treatment.
Summary of Problem:

o     The mound system leaks effluent out the sides, resulting
      in a possible failure.

o     The system was not designed to provide adequate treatment
      to the wastewater.

o     The contractor constructing the mound system did not
      follow the design and specifications.

o     The leakage problem was discovered soon after start-up.


Summary of Solution;

o     The State provided funds to have the mound system fixed.
Current Status;

o     The grantee has not applied for a M/R grant.
                                   139
-------
                         APPENDIX B.3

                        AUBURN, INDIANA
Subject:   Failure of the pumps prior to the Innovative Swirl
Concentrators.
Summary of Problem:

o     Pumping station pumps (prior to the swirl concentrators)
      were not protected with a grit screen to prevent larger
      solids from entering the pumps.  Pump failure resulted.

o     Numerous breakdowns in the pumps caused an increase in
      operational and maintenance costs.

o     The grantee requested the state to declare the technology
      failed, but the State does not recognize the pumps as an
      innovative technology or as a part of the swirl
      concentrators which are recognized as innovative.

Summary of Solution:

o     The grantee is planning on modifying the plant by placing
      a floating baffle in the basins to trap the floating
      matter and a channel at the bottom to alleviate the solids
      problem.

o     The State feels that the technology would have worked at
      the design capacity if the grid screens were installed in
      front of the pumps.
Current Status:

o     The grantee requested that the State declare the
      technology failed but the State has not recognized the
      system as a failure.
                                  140
-------
                         APPENDIX B.3

                        FA1RFIELD,  IOWA
Subject:  A potential failure of the Innovative Draft Tube
Aerators.
Summary of Problem:

o     The draft tube aerators were not meeting the design
      performance specifications due to inadequate mixing and
      low oxygen transfer efficiencies.

o     The inadequate mixing was discovered well within the
      2-year limit.
Summary of Solution:

o     Since the draft tube aerators were not meeting
      specifications, the engineer negotiated with the
      manufacturer to install two additional blowers, at the
      manufacturer's expense, to provide the designed oxygen
      transfer rate.

o     The facility has the capacity to provide adequate
      wastewater treatment for the present time, even though the
      draft tubes are not performing up to specifications.
Current Status:

o     After negotiating a settlement described above no 100
      percent M/R grant was requested.
                                  141
-------
                         APPENDIX B.3

                      NORWOOD, LOU F S1ANA



Subject:   Small Diameter Pressure Sewer System

Summary of Problem:

o     Numerous pumps in the small diameter pressure sewer system
      have failed.  The grantee is experiencing economic
      hardship in replacing pumps to keep the system in
      operation.

Current Status:

o     This system has been declared a failure by the State and
      Region.  A 100 percent M/R grant request is anticipated
      after a Comprehensive Performance Evaluation of the
      facility is completed.
                                   142
-------
                         APPENDIX  B.3

                      PRESQUE LSLE, MAJNE
Subject:  UV Disinfection

Summary, of Problem:

o     UV disinfection process has not performed to design
      specifications.

o     Electrical problems and Jamp failures have resulted in
      inadequate fecal coliform control.

Current status:

o     Grantee has not applied for a 100 percent M/R grant.
                                   143
-------
                         APPENDIX B.3

                        SABATTUS, MAINE
Subject;   Failure of the Innovative Ultraviolet (UV)
Disinfection system.
Summary of Problem:

o     A sand filter followed by a UV Disinfection unit was
      funded as an innovative technology because of its designed
      higher loading capacity.

o     The sand filter is working at its design capacity, but the
      UV Disinfection units do not provide adequate
      disinfection, resulting in coliform standards being
      exceeded.

o     The failure was not recent; the system has never worked
      since the start-update.
Summary of Solution:

o     The UV units were replaced with other units but with no
      success.
Current Status;

o     The facility's Operation and Maintenance Department is in
      the process of evaluating the whole system to decide
      whether to repair the current system or replace the system
      with a Chlorination-Dechlorination process.
                                  144
-------
                         APPENDIX  B.3

                     WAYLAND,  MASSACHUSETTS



Subject;   Independent Septage Treatment Facility

Summary of Problem:

o     Preliminary treatment units for septage have not performed
      to expectations causing operational problems in downstream
      processes.

Current Status:

o     Grantee nas not applied for a 100 percent MR grant.
                                  145
-------
                          APPENDIX  B.3

                  WlLLJ AMSTOWN, MASSACHUSETTS



Subject:  Grinder Pump/Pressure Sewer System

Summary__g,f _ Problem:

o     Sewer system capacity lias been prematurely exceeded due  to
      more rapid growth than anticipated in the area.

o     There have been numerous pump and electrical  failures, and
      odor problems.

Current Status:

o     Grantee has not applied for  a 100 percent M/R grant.
                                   146
-------
                          APPENDIX  B.3

                     GREENFIEI.D, MINNESOTA



Subject:  Community Mound System

Summary of Problem:

o     The mound system is unable to provide wastewater treatment
      for designed volume.  Wastewater is leaking out of the
      mound.

Current Status:

o     Grantee has not applied for  100 percent M/R grant.
                                   147
-------
                         APPENDIX B.3

                     MOOREHEAD, MINNESOTA
Subject:   Possible Failure of the Innovative Ozone Disinfection
Unit.
Summary of Problem:

o     The ozone generating units were not producing sufficient
      ozone to kill  the bacteria, resulting in an inability to
      meet coliform  standards.

o     The life expectancy of the ozone generating units was far
      shorter than the designed value.

o     The generating units burned out, increasing operation and
      maintenance costs.

o     The failure was discovered within six months after the
      start-up date.

Summary of Solution;

o     Repairs made on the ozone generating units have been
      unsuccessful.

o     The State declared the units a failed technology.

Current Status;

o     One possible solution under investigation is replacing the
      ozone units with a chlorination and dechlorination
      process.

o     The grantee has not submitted an application for the 100
      percent M/R grant, but submission is imminent.
                                  148
-------
                          APPENDIX  B.3

                      ROCHESTER,  MINNESOTA
Subject:  A Potential failure of the innovative Biological
Phosphorus Removal Process.
Summary of Problem:

o     The Phostrip process is designed to remove phosphorus from
      the secondary wastewater.

o     The process is not performing up to its design
      specifications, resulting in the release of phosphorus
      over the effluent limit of lmg/l.

o     The reason for the system failure lias not yet been
      determined.
Summary of Solution:

o     The grantee is studying the problem to find out why the
      Phostrip process is failing.
Current Status:

o     The grantee must provide the State with a reason why the
      process is failing before a failure determination is made,
                                  149
-------
                          APPENDIX  H.3

                  LITTLE BLUE VALLEY, MISSOURI
Subject:  Intrachannel Clarifiers

Summary _jojL -Problem:

o     Mixers at the Little Blue Valley facility have not  been
      able to maintain sufficient fluid velocity  in channels.

o     Sludge lias accumulated in the clarifiers.

o     Plant has not been able to maintain consistent compliance
      with its discharge permit.

Current Status:

o     The grantee has not yet applied for an M/R  grant.
                                   150
-------
                         APPENDIX B.3

                       HENDERSON, NEVADA
Subject:  Rapid Infiltration

Summary of Problem;

o     Rapid infiltration basins provide only about 25 percent of
      the design disposal capacity due to slow percolation of
      the wastewater resulting from the presence of restrictive
      soil layers in the area.

Current Status:

o     Grantee has not formally requested a 100 percent M/R
      grant.
                                   151
-------
                         APPENDIX B.3

                       LEVELIAND, TEXAS



Subject:   Aeration/Oxidation Ditches

Summary of Problem:

o     The wastewater contains a high concentration of sulfur
      which reduces aeration efficiency.   This results in back
      pressure in the pumps creating excessive operation and
      maintenance costs.

Current Status:

o     Both the State and Region have declared the project a
      failure.  An M/R grant request will not be processed until
      completion of a comprehensive performance evaluation of
      the facility.
                                  152
-------
                         APPENDIX B.3

                   BLACK DIAMOND, WASHINGTON



Subject:   Possible Failure of Alternative Wetlands


Summary of Problem:

o     The facility uses a natural wetland to remove nitrogen and
      phosphorus from the effluent of a two-cell lagoon system.

o     The wetland adequately removed the nitrogen from the
      wastewater discharge, but did not adequately remove
      phosphorus to meet effluent standards.

 o    Insufficent nutrient removal by the wetlands reportedly
      resulted in discharges which caused numerous algal blooms
      in a downstream lake.


Summary of Solution;

o     The facility was declared failed due to phosphorus levels
      not meeting the effluent standards.


Current Status:

o     A 100 percent M/R grant will be requested after a
      cost-effective solution has been found.
                                  153
-------
                         APPFINDIX B.3

                      HAYWARU, WISCONSIN
Subject:   Possible Failure of Alternative Rapid Infiltration
System,
Summary of Problem:

o     The seepage rate of the water is not as rapid as
      predicted, resulting in slower treatment process.

o     The facility has three cells, but one of the cells is not
      working to design specifications due to restrictive soils
Summary of Solution:

o     The State is studying the problem to determine if the
      system should be considered a failure.

Current Status:

o     The facility has not been officially declared failed;
      therefore, an M/R grant can not be requested until further
      data is collected.
                                   154
-------
            APPENDIX B.4

    I/A TECHNOLOGIES THAT FAILED
 FOR WHICH THE GRANTEE IS SUING THE
DESIGN ENGINEER AND/OR MANUFACTURER
                     155
-------
                         APPENDIX B.4

                    BONNER  SPRINGS, KANSAS
Subject:   Intrachannel Clarifiers

Summary of Problem;

o     The clarifier aeration system did not meet design
      specifications for oxygen transfer.

Current Status:

o     The grantee is seeking a settlement from the contractor or
      manufacturer to perform modifications or repairs to
      provide adequate oxygen transfer.
                                   156
-------
                         APPENDIX U.4

                     SOUTH PORTLAND,  MAINE



Subject:   Failure of  an Innovative compostinq technology.


Summary of Problem:

o     The enqineering firm desiqnecl a four-walled compostinq
      building with inadequate ventilation.   This resulted in
      moisture build-up, causing a lower efficiency of the
      composting process.

o     The process is too mechanical and not flexible enouqh to
      be modified to alleviate the problem.


Summary of Solution:

o     The grantee has slightly unfastened the roof to create
      more ventilation.

o     The amount of sludge being composted has been reduced to
      below design levels.  Excess sludge is being landfilled or
      land spread.


Current Status:

o     The grantee requested a 100 percent M/R grant but the
      request was turned down due to engineering design errors.

o     The grantee is now suing  the engineering firm and the
      building contractor to recover costs associated with
      increased  operational costs resulting  from inadequate
      composting.
                                   157
-------
                         APPENDIX B.4


                     STAFFORD, NEW JERSEY
Subject:   Failure of the controllers in an Alternative Vacuum
Collection System.

Summary of Problem:

o     The control valves which were leaking air caused the
      vacuum pumps to run constantly.   This led to breakdowns in
      the pumps.

o     The failure of the valves was discovered almost
      immediately after start-up.
Summary of Solution:

o     The manufacturer redesigned the valve, but the valves
      still leaked.
Current Status;

o     The grantee is replacing the Envirovac valves with Airvac
      valves and is also replacing the troublesome vacuum pumps

o     The grantee is suing the valve manufacturer to recover
      costs associated with valve replacement.

o     Depending on the outcome of the litigation, a 100 percent
      M/R grant may be requested.
                                   158
-------
                         APPKNIMX ».4

             CRAB ORCHARD MACARTHUR,  WEST VIRGINIA



Subj°ct:   Failure ot  the Innovative Draft Tube Aerators.


Summajry _0i Prob1em:

o     The dratt tube aerators tailed to provide adequate oxygen
      transfer, resultinq in excessive enerqy costs.

o     The tacility was not meeting effluent standards for
      suspended solids and ammonia.

o     Mechanical failure with the impellers and the speed
      control box caused increased operation and maintenance
      costs.


Summary of Solution;

o     The manufacturer replaced parts of the speed control box
      and the impellers.


Current Status:

o     The technology has been declared a failure.

o     A 100 percent M/R grant has been requested by the grantee,
      but the review process is on hold.  The grantee is now
      suing the engineering firm for design errors.

o     A decision on the M/R grant request will be made  following
      the litigation.
                                   159
-------