POTATO  PROCESSING WASTES:
PROGRESS REPORT on PILOT PLANT
STUDIES OF SECONDARY TREATMENT
January 1968
           FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMINISTRATION
           NORTHWEST REGION
           Pacific Northwest Water Laboratory
           Corvallis, Oregon

-------

-------

-------
               PROGRESS REPORT

 PILOT PLANT STUDIES ON SECONDARY TREATMENT
                     OF
           POTATO PROCESSING WASTES
                 Prepared by

              Robert W. Vivian
              Kenneth A. Dostal
          Technical Projects Branch

              Report No. PR-4
        U. S. Department of the Interior
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
               Northwest Region
      Pacific Northwest Water Laboratory
               Corvallis, Oregon

-------
                           LIST OF FIGURES
Figure                                                       Page
  No.                                                        No.

   1      Flow Diagram of Primary Treatment Plant 	   A-37

   2      Flow Diagram of Pilot Plant	A-38

   3      Hydraulic Loading Pattern - 1967  	   A-39

   4      Variation in pH	A-40

   5      Temperature Changes of Waste Stream 	   A-41

   6      Alkalinity and Volatile Acids Relationships .  .  .   A-42

   7      Total Volatile Solids Reduction 	   A-43

   8      Pond II CODC Loadings and Reductions	A-44
                     E>

   9      Pond III CODS Loadings and Reductions	A-45

  10      Data Comparison on CODg Reduction Across
           Pond II + Pond III	A-46

  11      Influence of Pond Loadings on CODg Reduction  .  .   A-47

  12      BOD Loadings on and Reductions by Anaerobic
           Pond II	A-48

  13      BOD Loadings on and Reductions by Aerobic
           Pond III	A-49

  14      Total BOD Reduction Across Pond II + Pond III  .  .   A-50

  15      Influence of Pond Loading on BOD Reduction  .  .  .   A-51

  16      Preliminary Estimate of Annual Charges  	   A-52

-------
                        ABBREVIATIONS
         5-day biochemical oxygen demand
         National Canner's Association modified chemical oxygen
         demand
CODS     Standard Method chemical oxygen demand


SS       Suspended solids


VSS      Volatile suspended solids


TDOC     Total dissolved organic carbon


TS       Total solids


TVS      Total volatile solids


mgd      Million gallons per day

-------
                         TABLE OF CONTENTS




                                                          Page




   I.  INTRODUCTION 	       1




       A.  Problem	       1




       B.  Authority	       1




       C.  Objective and Scope	       2




       D.  Acknowledgment	       3




  II.  SUMMARY	       4




 III.  DESCRIPTION OF PROCESSING PLANTS 	       5




  IV.  WASTE TREATMENT PLANT	       7




       A.  Description	       7




       B.  Efficiency	       7




   V.  PILOT PLANTS	      10




       A.  Description	      10




       B.  Operation	      10




       C.  Results	      12




  VI.  PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE	      21




 VII.  DISCUSSION	      23




VIII.  REFERENCES	      26




  IX.  APPENDIX




       Appendix A - Memorandum of Understanding




       Appendix B - Data




       Appendix C - Analytical Procedures




       Appendix D - Figures

-------
                         LIST OF TABLES
Table No.                                               Page No.
             Waste Production per Ton of Raw
             Potatoes 	
    2        Operational Characteristics of Primary
             Clarifier	      9

    3        Pilot Plant Feed Rates 	     12

    4        BOD5 Loadings and Plant Efficiencies  .  .     18

-------
                         PROGRESS REPORT
           PILOT PLANT STUDIES ON SECONDARY TREATMENT
                   OF POTATO PROCESSING WASTES

                        I.  INTRODUCTION

      A.  Problem

          Potato processing in Idaho has had a rapid expansion during

the past 15 years.  The $23,235,457 payroll and $52,085,335 plant

investment by the eleven Potato Processors of Idaho members in

1965-66 represent growth of more than 10 times that of comparable

1950 figures'*'.  Waste production has, unfortunately, kept pace

with their growth.

      Potato wastes are one of the major pollutional sources in the

State of Idaho.  Even with primary treatment afforded by all processing

plants, these wastes, in combination with other wastes, have resulted

in fish kills and other pollution problems during periods of low flow

in receiving streams.  The potato processors are now faced with pro-

viding secondary treatment for their wastes and recognize that the

cost of waste treatment must be considered to be part of the cost of

doing business.  Processors know that they must minimize the cost of

waste treatment to be both competitive and profitable.

      B.  Authority

          Federal authorization for this type of study comes from the

Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended.  Sec. 5(b) of the Act

provides that the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration (FWPCA)

-------
may, "upon request of any State water pollution control agency, conduct




investigations... concerning any specific problem of water pollution




confronting any... industrial plant, with a view to recommending a




solution of such problem."




      The regional office of the FWPCA received a verbal request for




technical assistance from the Idaho State Health Department in July




1966 in the development of secondary treatment methods for potato




process waste water.  The Technical Projects Branch of the FWPCA located




in the Pacific Northwest Water Laboratory (PNWL) in Corvallis, Oregon,




was selected to participate in the study since this was a logical extension




of a previously authorized Technical Projects study on aerated lagoon




treatment of food processing wastes.  A memorandum of understanding




authorizing the study was drawn up and signed by the three participating




groups:  Potato Processors of Idaho, Idaho State Health Department, and




Technical Projects, FWPCA, PNWL, in January  1967.  A copy of the memo-




randum is in Appendix A.




      C.  Objective and Scope




          The objective of this study is to  conclude pilot plant studies




on  feasible methods of secondary treatment of potato processing wastes.




Two specific methods are  being investigated:  an anaerobic lagoon followed




by  a surface-aerated, aerobic  lagoon and an  aerobic lagoon system.




          Due to  late arrival  of a  surface-aerator this progress report




covers only the  first system - an anaerobic  lagoon followed by a surface-




aerated, aerobic  lagoon.
                                  -2-

-------
      0.  Acknowledgments




          The assistance of the Idaho State Health Department,




J. R. Simplot Co. and the consulting firm of Cornell, Rowland,




Hayes, and Merryfield in instituting, formulating, and completing




the present studies is gratefully acknowledged.




           In addition, appreciation is due the Wayne Wiscomb




Co. for supplying the surface aerator used in the aerated pond.
                               -3-

-------
                            II.  SUMMARY




      This report outlines the operation of and results from a




pilot plant used to treat potato wastes from January 1 to June 1,




1967.




      Primary clarifier effluent was fed to the first of two small




lagoons in series.  The first lagoon was operated as a complete




mixed anaerobic unit and the second lagoon was aerated with a small




surface aerator.  Hydraulic loadings were varied to give detention




times of 8.8, 5.0, and 2.4 days in each lagoon.




      Preliminary conclusions drawn from the information gathered




during this period include:




      1.  The 8005 in potato wastes can be reduced by greater than




90 percent by primary clarification plus anaerobic-aerobic lagoons




in series.




      2.  Mixing of the contents of the anaerobic lagoon is Meeisary




for proper operation of the anaerobic-aerobic system.




      3.  Covering the anaerobic lagoon will reduce the temperature




drop and help control odors.




      4.  Secondary clarification for removal of suspended solids




will be required following the aerobic lagoon.




      5.  Foaming may cause operational difficulties in full-scale




aerobic lagoons, but can be controlled by proper design.




      6.  Preliminary cost estimates show that a combination of




anaerobic-aerobic lagoons may result in a lower cost than either




anaerobic or aerobic treatment separately.






                                -4-

-------
              III.  DESCRIPTION OF PROCESSING PLANTS




      The Simplot Bur ley  Processing Company plant processes about




75,000 tons of potatoes per year.  It is a highly automated processing




plant and produces instant mashed potatoes and related specialties.




The potatoes are washed,  lye peeled, cut, automat icily sorted for




flakes or granules, dehydrated, and packed for shipment.  Water use




is about 1.2 mgd.




      The J. R. Simplot Heyburn plant is one of the largest potato




processing plants in the world.  It processes approximately 180,000




tons per year and employs 860 people.  Products include french fries,




potato specialties, and potato starch.  Here, too, the potatoes are




washed and lye peeled; then trimmed, blanched, processed, and packed.




Water use totals about 5.0 mgd.




      Table 1 presents average figures for waste production per ton




of potato processed as measured during the 1966-67 processing season.




These figures do not include fat recovered or solids screened out




for cattle feed.  Unit waste production for this season, however,




was higher than generally reported.
                               -5-

-------
                      TABLE 1

    WASTE PRODUCTION PER TON OF RAW POTATOES
-------
                     IV.  WASTE TREATMENT PLANT




      A.  Description




          Waste streams from both potato processing plants are




piped to a primary waste treatment plant.  They first enter a




receiving tank and are passed through two 5-foot diameter,




10-foot long rotary drum screens as shown in Figure 1.  (All




figures appear in Appendix D.)  All solids retained on the +20




mesh screens are strained and stored in bins.




      '  The remaining waste water then enters a 100-foot diameter




Eimco clarifier with an overflow rate of about 800 gallons per day




per square foot.  Additional solids settle out in the clarifier




and the bverflow passes through a Parshall flume and is discharged




to the Snake River.




          The solids collected as clarifier underflow are pumped




through a Sharpies Super-D-Canter Dewatering Centrifuge.  The sludge




is stored in bins and the centrate is either returned to the clarifier




or discharged to the river.




          The screenings and the sludge from the centrifuge are




trucked together to a cattle feet-lot operation for use as part of




the animal's diet.




      B.  Efficiency




          Primary treatment plant efficiency affects both the design




and cost of secondary treatment.  A high degree of efficiency requires




a well-designed and operated primary clarification system.  When this
                               -7-

-------
is provided, the cost of secondary treatment is minimized.




          The efficiency of the primary clarifier at the J. R.




Simplot Co.'s Waste Treatment Plant is indicated by seasonal




averages of the waste parameters measured on the clarifier




influent and effluent during the January through May, 1967, process-




ing period as shown in Table 2.  All data is presented in Appendix B.




      The influent temperature ranged from 68 to 82 degrees Fahren-




height and averaged 78.  The temperature of the waste dropped an




average of 4 degrees across the primary clarifier.   8005 reduction




across the clarifier averaged 40 percent with an average effluent




concentration of 1680 mg/1.  CODS was reduced by 45 percent and the




suspended solids were reduced an average 73 percent.  The suspended




solids concentration in the clarifier effluent with a maximum




3190 mg/1, averaged 740 mg/1.




      The influent to the primary clarifier contained an average




total Kjeldahl nitrogen concentration of 113 mg/1 as N and the effluent




contained 78 mg/1.  Thirty-one percent was removed by the primary




clarifier.  Only 10 percent of the phosphates were removed by the




clarifier with the effluent containing 51 mg/1 as
                                  -8-

-------
                               TABLE 2




           OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PRIMARY
pH
Temp
oF
BOD.
rag/1
CODg
mg/1
TS
mg/1
TVS
mg/1
SS
mg/1
VSS
mg/1
Range
Median
Range
Mean
Std. Deviation
Range
Mean
Std. Deviation
Range
Mean
Std. Deviation
Range
Mean
Std. Deviation
Range
Mean
Std. Deviation
Range
Mean
Std. Deviation
Range
Mean
Std. Deviation
Clarifier
Influent
12.1 - 10.6
11.3
82 - 68
78
± 3
5150 - 1900
2780
+ 750
10,800 - 3120
6140
+ 1720
9080 - 3950
6440
+ 1160
7410 - 2500
4850
+ 1270
5900 - 280
2730
+ 1340
5900 - 280
2680
+ 1330
Clarifier
Effluent
11.6 - 7.1
10.4
79 - 63
74
+ 3
2080 - 1180
1680
+ 200
6000 - 2520
3400
+ 610
5970 - 2070
4040
+ 600
4300 - 1880
2540
+ 510
3190 - 90
740
+ 640
3040 - 50
640
+ 570
Ave.
Removal %
	
	
40
45
37
48
73
76
(a)  J. R.  Simplot  Co.  from January  through May,  1967.
                                 -9-

-------
                         V.  PILOT PLANTS




      A.  Description




          The pilot plant facility of the Potato Processors of Idaho




is located at the primary waste treatment plant in Burley, Idaho.




Two earthen ponds sealed with concrete applied as gunite were utilized




together with ancillary pumps and piping.  Each pond was 40 feet square




at the water surface and 10 feet deep with side slopes of 3 on 1;




providing about 51,000 gallons capacity.  Feed and overflow were at




the water surface on opposite sides of the pond.  Flows were measured




by timing the filling of a bucket at the feet lines.




          The anaerobic cell, pond II, was covered with 3-inch thick




styrofoam blocks to retard heat loss and control odors.  It was provided




with a  100 gpm pump to continuously circulate the contents from the




bottom to the inlet.  Feed to the cell was pumped from the clarifier




overflow at a predetermined flow rate.




          The aerated cell, pond III, was pump fed from the surface of




the anaerobic cell.  Pond III contained a floating 5 hp Wells aerator




and was open to the atmosphere.  Figure 2 is a schematic diagram of




the pilot plants as operated from January 2, 1967, to the end of the




processing season.




      B.  Operation




          Both ponds were placed in operation September 19,  1966 as




covered anaerobic  lagoons while awaiting the arrival of a previously




ordered surface aerator.  Inasmuch as the aerator was not delivered




until the latter part of December, both ponds were operated  as parallel
                                  -10-

-------
anaerobic units until the processing and waste treatment plants



were shut down for the holidays, December 23, 1966.  This period of


                                                         (2)
pond operation was covered in a previous progress report.



      On January 2, 1967, both ponds were started as covered anaerobic



units with the feed rates set at 1.15 gpm to pond II and 8.8 gpm to



pond III.  The feed to both ponds was clarifier effluent.  Pond II was



seeded with 20 gallons of primary sludge from a municipal sewage



treatment plant on January 4.  The styrofoam cover was removed from



pond III on January 11 and on the following day the feed to pond



III was changed from clarifier effluent to pond II effluent.  The



feed rate to pond III was 3.7 gpm, the minimum for that pump.  This



pump was operated intermittently since pond II was only being fed at



a rate of 1.15 gpm.  The feed rate to pond II was increased slowly



until both ponds were being fed at the same rate on February 23.



      The 5 hp Wells surface aerator was installed in pond III and



started on January 14.  At that time, with the ponds in series and



the aerator running, the complete sampling program was started.



      Eight-hour composite samples were collected from the clarifier



influent and overflow.  Grab samples were collected from the effluent



of each pond.  Split samples in iced containers were shipped by bus



on a weekly schedule to the Idaho State Health Department laboratory



and to the FWPCA Pacific Northwest Water Laboratory.
                                -11-

-------
      All analyses were performed according to the 12th edition of




Standard Methods with the exception of volatile acids and the National




Canner's Association modified chemical oxygen demand test (CODm).'




These are described in Appendix C.  Tests included:  pH, temperature,




alkalinity, total dissolved organic carbon, volatile acids,  solids,




CODS, CODiQ, BOD5, and inorganic nutrients.  All data collected is




presented in Appendix B.




      Table 3 presents the feed rates and detention times for the




three primary periods of operation of the two lagoons.  Figure 3




presents the hydraulic loading rates for the entire period of




January 2 to May 27, 1967.








                             TABLE 3




                     PILOT PLANT FEED RATES








                   Pond II - Anaerobic      Pond III - Aerobic
Q Detention Time Detention Time
Date gpm Days gpm Days
2/23-3/20/67 4.0 8.8
3/29-4/23/67 7.0 5.0
4/30-5/27/67 15.0 2.4
4.0 8.8
7.0 5.0
15.0 2.4
      C.  Results




          1.  pH and Temperature




              Fluctuations in pH in the primary clarifier effluent,




anaerobic pond II effluent, and aerobic pond III effluent are presented







                                 -12-

-------
in Figure 4.  The pH of the clarifier effluent ranged from 7.1 to



11.7 with a median of 10.7.  During the three periods of study



(Table 3), the median pH was 6.5, 6.4, and 6.5 in pond II effluent,



respectively, and 8.3, 8.6, and 8.3 in pond III effluent.



          The temperature drops across the primary clarifier, the



clarifier plus pond II, and the clarifier plus ponds II and III are



shown on Figure 5.  Across the clarifier plus both ponds the tempera-



ture drop ranged from 45° F in late January to less than 25° F in May.



During the three periods of operation the temperature averaged 62,



68, and 71° F in the anaerobic pond effluent, respectively, and 42,



43, and 53° F in aerobic pond III effluent.



           2.  Alkalinity and Volatile Acids



               Although analyses for alkalinity and volatile acids



were made on samples from all sampling points they are of primary



concern only in the anaerobic cell, pond II.  Volatile acids : alkalinity


                       (4)
ratios in excess of 0.8V ' are inhibitory to methane production in



anaerobic digestion.  Figure 6 shows the change in volatile acids



concentration and the volatile acids : alkalinity ratio during the



study.  The volatile acids ranged from 600 in January to 3500 mg/1



in the middle of May.  The volatile acids : alkalinity ratio ranged



from 0.5 to 1.0 for the first two months, then it started increasing



and reached a maximum of 3.5 on May 9.  Since the primary aim was



only hydrolysis of the wastes in the anaerobic pond to more easily



oxidized forms, the high ratios and high volatile acids concentra-



tions were probably not harmful.
                                -13-

-------
           3.  Solids




               Averaged reductions in suspended solids and total




volatile solids for the three periods of operation are shown in




Table 4.  All reductions, both positive and negative,  shown for




the primary clarifier, anaerobic pond and aerobic pond are based




on the percentage change from the influent to the effluent of




that unit.  Overall reductions show the percentage change from




the influent of the primary clarifier to the effluent  of the




aerobic pond.  BOD loadings were calculated from the feed rates




and influent BODS to each of the two ponds.




               During the February 23 to March 20 period the primary




clarifier removed 57 percent of the suspended solids.   The anaerobic




pond reduced the suspended solids by 82 percent and there was a 230




percent increase in suspended solids upon passage through the




aerobic pond.  Overall reduction in suspended solids across the




clarifier and both ponds was 74 percent.




               Suspended solids removal by anaerobic pond II was




related to the efficiency of the primary clarifier. As the percentage




removal increased across the clarifier, the removal decreased across




the anaerobic pond.  Volatile suspended solids averaged 97 percent  of




the suspended solids for the clarifier influent,  90 percent for the




clarifier effluent.




               Total volatile solids reductions by ponds II and III




are shown on Figure 7.  Average reductions for the three periods
                                -14-

-------
   col

   H!
              CO
                        00
                           co
                           CN
      co
      en
CM
vO
                                                                                 co
                                                                                 ro
vO
co
co
                        CM
                        oo
                           o
                           co
                           CM
                            I
in
CO
                                                            10
                                                                  vO
                                                                              vO
            vO
            CM
            CM
             I
Hi
                                                CN
                                                      CM
                                                            00
                                                            CO
                                                                  in
                                                                              CO
                                                                                            CO
 *
•o
•o
c
CO
in
60
C
•H
•O
CO
o
n4
m
Q
O
«
-*
 f< in eo  ^"r-tOOON ^
•o
"^N^
•
00 4J
C ^M
•^ *
TJ 3
SO 1 r-l 00 1 1 CM O 1 1
1 i— < 1 1 CM CM 1 1
J 0
o
mo
Q t-H
0 -^
CQ M
                                                                                    CO
                                                                                    vO
                                                                                          oo
                                                                                          CM
                                                                                            00
                                                                                            vO
                                                                                          vO
                                                                                                OO
O
CM
CO
1

•o
O
1-1
to
0)
(X
r-~
vO
*-^
CO
CM
^^^
CM
y clarif
to
§
•H
to
a,





•o
c
o -a
a c
o
u a
1-1
x> u
O -H
to X)
0) O
(0 M
3 3





.— <
i— I
efl CO
to CM
<1J --
> 
O
a
u
•rl
XI
O
l-l
V
at
$





"8 -
o ^-<
D. td r>-
Jj CM
O 0) —
•H > m
XI 0
O 1
to
. CO
M
U 0>
^ >
XI 0
o
to
*





                                      -15-

-------
ranged from 29 to 48 percent across pond II and from 12 to 33




percent across pond III.  The negative reductions shown for pond III




in January are a result of the change of operation from a covered




anaerobic pond to an aerobic pond.  While operating as an anaerobic




unit a considerable buildup of suspended solids occurred in pond III.




After conversion to an aerobic unit these solids were washed out,




markedly influencing reductions for most of January.




               The total volatile solids :  total solids ratio




remained fairly constant throughout the study for each of the




sampling points as shown by the following table:
        Clarifier        Clarifier          Pond II          Pond III

         Influent         Effluent          Effluent         Effluent
Range   0.59 to 0.82   0.56 to 0.89       0.36 to 0.89     0.36 to 0.59




Mean        0.72           0.63               0.52             0.45




Std.Dev.  + 0.05         + 0.06             + 0.09           + 0.06






      4.  CODrc




          This test was a modification of National Canners Association's



      (3)
method    for running a quick COD test.  For certain wastes it has been




shown that a good correlation exists between COD  and either COD  or BOD,
                                                Tu.               s



In this study both the CODm : COD  ratio and the CODm :  BOD ratio varied




depending upon type of treatment as well as organic loadings.  All CODm




data may be found in Appendix B, Table A-12.




      5.  CODS




          Figure 8 shows the COD_ loading and reductions by anaerobic
                                5



pond II.  In general the removals decreased from about 50 percent to






                                -16-

-------
about 13 percent as the CODS loading was increased from 10 to 100




lbs/day/1000 cu.ft.  As the average BODj loading was increased from




11 lbs/1000 cu.ft./day to 22 to 46 during the three separate periods




of operation, the average CODg reductions were 33, 15, and 15 percent,




respectively.




          CODs reduction by pond III ranged from -50 percent, due to




the changeover from anaerobic to aerobic, to 60 percent as shown in




Figure 9.  With a BODs loading of 20 lbs/1000 cu.ft./day during the




March 29 to April 23 period, the CODS reduction averaged 58 percent.




During the third period when the 8005 loading averaged 40 Ibs, the




average CODS reduction dropped to 28 percent.  After the CODS loading




increased above 60 lbs/day/1000 cu.ft., the percent reduction started




to decrease rapidly.  The total CODS reduction across ponds II and III




is shown in Figure 10 along with the reductions calculated from Idaho




State Health Department's data.  Agreement is good except for four




samples during the month of April which showed consistently higher




removals based on the Department's data.




          Figure 11 shows all of the COD  data run onsite for both




ponds.  The influence of loading is readily seen as removals decreased




for both ponds with increasing load.  Reduction by pond II appeared to




reach a  minimum of 10-15 percent as the loading was increased to the




50 to 110 lbs/day/1000 cu.ft. area.  The drop in CODS reductions




across pond III was rather uniform as the loading was increased from
                               -17-

-------
15 to 90 lbs/day/1000 cu.ft.  The five low reductions near the 16 Ib/day




loading were a result of the change in operation of pond III from anaerobic




to aerobic.  Much of the scatter may be attributed to using grab samples




from the pond effluent for analysis.



      6.  BOD5




          The BOD5 loadings on and reductions by anaerobic pond II are




shown in Figure 12.  As the loading was increased from 4 to 50 Ibs BOD^/




1000 cu.ft./day, the percent reduction decreased from 50 to about 10.




For the three periods of operation shown in Table 3, the reduction




averaged 25, 12, and 13 percent, respectively.




          Figure 13 presents the BOD5 reductions by aerobic pond III




and the loadings on that pond.  After the solids which had accumulated




during operation as an anaerobic lagoon were washed out, the BOD5




reduction maintained itself in the 80 to 90 percent range until the




loading increased to about 20 Ibs/1000 cu.ft./day.  For the three




periods of operation the reductions averaged 88, 87, and 64 percent




as the loading was increased from 8 to 20 to 40 Ibs BODj/lOOO cu.ft./day.




          Five-day BOD reductions across both ponds are shown in Figure 4




based on the data collected onsite and that collected by Idaho State




Health Department.  For the first two months of the study, the reductions




based on the Health Department's data were 30 to 40 percent lower than




those based on analyses run onsite.  Some of this disagreement may be




explained by the fact that the State Health Department seeded their




incubation bottles and the BOD's run onsite were not seeded.  In
                                -18-

-------
addition, different techniques were used for getting the small sample

sizes needed for the high BOD's encountered.  As the study progressed

the differences between the two labs decreased.  BOD- reductions across

the two ponds were maintained near  85 percent for about three months.

          A plot of percent reduction vs BOD loading in lb/day/1000 cu.ft,

for both ponds is shown in Figure 15.  Estimated lines of best fit were

drawn through the data and these curves were used for a rough cost

comparison between anaerobic and aerobic ponds.  This is discussed later.

      7.  Total Dissolved Organic Carbon

          Nine sets of samples were analyzed for total dissolved organic

carbon  (TDOC) during the April and May period of operation.  The primary

clarifier reduced the TDOC from an average of 1590 to 1220 mg/1 (23

percent).  The results from the ponds are shown in the following table:
                   Pond II      Pond II      Pond III
      Date         Influent     Effluent     Effluent

   3/29-4/23        1250         1220          755
   4/30-5/27        1230         1090          915
Removal across both ponds averaged 40 percent during the 3/29 to 4/23

period and 26 percent during the May period.

      8.  Inorganic Nutrients

          Inorganic nutrient levels were measured in the form of total

phosphate, ammonia nitrogen, nitrite and nitrate nitrogen, and total

Kjeldahl nitrogen.  Neither phosphates nor nitrogen were removed by the

ponds as expected, inasmuch as both ponds were completely mixed.  The

nitrogen form changed upon passage through both ponds.  Ninety-one

percent of the 78 mg/1 total Kjeldahl nitrogen was in the organic form


                                 -19-

-------
in the clarifier effluent.  In the effluent from the anaerobic pond




only 42 percent of the nitrogen was in the organic form and the




percentage increased to 78 upon passage through pond III.




          The feed to pond III contained about 75 mg/1 total Kjeldahl




nitrogen, 50 mg/1 phosphate, and 1500 mg/1 of BODj.  These values




result in a BOD : N ratio of 20:1 and a BOD : P ratio of 90:1.  The




most commonly quoted ratios for N and P requirements of aerobic




biological systems are 20:1 and 100:1.  Based on the measured levels




of inorganic nutrients and the degree of treatment obtained by the




ponds, nutrient deficiencies did not seem to occur.
                                -20-

-------
                  VI.  PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE




      The Loading curves drawn on Figure 15 were used to make some




very rough cost estimates to see if a combination anaerobic-aerobic




system might result in lower total annual charges.  The following




assumptions and prices were used to develop the cost estimates.




           1.  BOD of clarifier influent = 2700 mg/1.




           2.  BOD of clarifier effluent = 1700 mg/1.  (Thirty-seven




percent reduction by clarifier.)




           3.  Overall BOD5 reduction = 90% (effluent BOD = 270 mg/1).




           4.  Aerators installed at $500/HP (amortized across 10 years




at 6 percent).




           5.  Cost of aerator maintenance at 2%/year of installed cost.




           6.  Aerators add 2 Ibs 02/HP-hr.




           7.  Oxygen requirements of waste = 1.2 Ibs/lb BOD applied.




           8.  Power costs $0.01/KW-Hr.




           9.  Total land costs based on $1000/acre of lagoon surface




(yearly cost of 6%).




          10.  Aerobic ponds installed (lined) at $10,000/acre (10




years - 6%).




          11.  Anaerobic ponds installed (lined, covered, and mixed)




at $16,000/acre (10 years - 6%).




          12.  Waste plant operates 300 days/year, 24 hours/day.




      A series of annual charges were calculated using these assumptions




for various combinations of anaerobic-aerobic loadings to achieve the
                                 -21-

-------
effluent 8005 concentration of 270 rag/1.  Other costs were assumed




to remain relatively constant for a given size plant regardless of




type of treatment used.  On Figure 16 is shown the annual charges in




$l,000/yr/mgd treated.  Any combination of anaerobic reduction and




aerobic reduction, shown directly opposite will reduce the BOD from




1700 to 270 mg/1.  Arriving at the desired endpoint by aerobic ponds




only (84% reduction) results in a cost of about $48,000/year per tugd




treated, whereas, anaerobic ponds removing 35% of its influent BOD




followed by aerobic ponds reducing it to 270 mg/1 results in a cost




of about $39,000.  The important point from this preliminary analysis




is that a combination anaerobic-aerobic system appears at this time to




result in an overall cost lower than either of them separately.  This




is true despite the relatively poor BOD removals obtained by the




anaerobic pond and the higher installed cost of anaerobic ponds.
                               -22-

-------
                          VII.  DISCUSSION




     The pilot plant study on secondary treatment of potato processing




wastes will be continued during the 1967-68 processing season.  Due to




the late arrival of the 5 hp aerator the anaerobic-aerobic lagoons in




series were only operated about one-half of the 1966-67 season.  The




10-hp aerator for a third aerobic lagoon which was to be operated in




parallel with the other two ponds did not arrive until the end of the




processing season.  Preliminary conclusions, however, may be drawn




from the data already collected and presented in this report.




     An overall BOD  reduction of at least 90 percent is feasible




with primary clarification followed by anaerobic and aerobic ponds




in series.  Preliminary findings indicate that loading rates in the




range of 10 to 20 pounds of BOD. per 1000 cu.ft./day can be applied




to the lagoons to achieve the desired removals.  The BOD  removal




varied from 12 to 25 percent across the anaerobic pond and from 87 to




88 percent across the aerated pond at these loading rates.  Overall




pilot plant efficiencies during this period ranged from 88 to 91




percent BOD removal.  Coupled with an average of 40 percent removal




by the primary plant, this results in a total BOD removal in excess




of 90 percent.




     The combination of high BOD removals with substantial increases




in suspended solids across the aerobic lagoon indicate that inorganic
                                -23-

-------
nutrient levels were not limiting to growth of required organisms




to accomplish treatment.  As a result of this solids increase, the




overall suspended solids reduction was relatively poor -- ranging




from 50 to 75 percent.  In order to increase the suspended solids




reduction to 90 percent or higher, secondary clarification will be




needed.  This would also increase the overall BOD removals.




      The advance of the volatile acids : alkalinity ratio above 0.8




did not seem to affect the removal rates in the anaerobic pond.  Short




detention time coupled with pH values of about 6.5 and fluctuating




loading conditions contributed to the inhibition of methane production.




The purpose of the anaerobic cell was to carry out the first stage of




anaerobic fermentation and hydrolize some of the more complex organics




to simpler forms more amenable to aeration.  The effectiveness of




this cell cannot be evaluated until results from a parallel aerobic




lagoon study are obtained.  Mixing the contents and covering the




anaerobic pond with styrofoam did, however, increase its effectiveness




by holding the temperature drop to a minimum and preventing sludge




deposits from accumulating in the pond.




      Foaming in the aerated cell was an intermittent problem.  At




the small scale of our pilot lagoon it was not a major nuisance, but




a fullscale  lagoon will probably require some means of preventing




foaming.
                                -24-

-------
      The cost analysis presented is based on rough assumptions and




the annual charges derived from it are subject to gross adjustment.




The figures do, however, provide an idea of the relative weight to




be applied to removals in the anaerobic or aerated cells.




      The 1967-68 processing season should provide all the necessary




additional pilot plant data for formulation of design parameters for




lagooning potato wastes.  Changes planned for the pilot facility will




greatly expedite its operation.  In addition, the replacement of the




primary sludge centrifuge with a vacuum filter will substantially




reduce the solids loading to the ponds and should result in even




better removal rates.
                             -25-

-------
                          VIII.   REFERENCES
1.   "Idaho Image,"  Idaho State Department  of  Commerce  and Development,
          Boise, Idaho.  July 1967.

2.   "Progress Report - Pilot Plant  Studies on Secondary  Treatment of
          Potato Process Water",  Federal  Water Pollution  Control
          Administration, Northwest  Region, Corvallis,  Oregon,
          January 1967.

3.   Rose, W. W. and W. A. Mercer.   "Chemical  Oxygen Demand  as  a
          Test of Strength of Cannery Waste Water."   National
          Canners Association Research Laboratories, Berkeley,
          California, May 16, 1956.

4.   "Anaerobic Sludge Digestion,"   Journal Water Pollution  Control
          Federation, p. 1684, October 1966.

5.   DiLallo, R. and 0. E. Albertson.  "Volatile Acids  by Direct
          Titration,"  Journal Water Pollution Control  Federation,
          p. 356, April 1961.

6.   "An Engineering Report on Pilot Plant  Studies,  Secondary Treatment
          of Potato  Process Water."   Cornell,  Rowland,  Hayes, and
          Merryfield, Boise, Idaho.   September 1966.

-------
IX.  APPENDIX

-------
        APPENDIX A
Memorandum of Understanding

-------
                                                                        A-2

                      MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
          This agreement sets forth the provisions of a cooperative
study of methods for secondary treatment of potato processing wastes
to be conducted by the Pacific Northwest Water Laboratory, (a division
of the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration), the Potato
Processors of Idaho Association, and the Idaho Department of Health.

Objective;  This project will conclude pilot plant studies on feasible
          methods of secondary treatment of potato processing wastes.

Facilities;  These studies will be conducted on pilot plant facilities
          furnished by the J. R. Simplot Co. at its Burley, Idaho, site.
          This company has constructed three lined cells, each 40 feet
          square, and about 10 feet deep with a liquid volume of 51,000
          gallons, which receives the clarified effluent from two inte-
          grated potato processing plants.  Some pilot plant studies were
          made on these facilities last year and operating data are
          available.  Major laboratory equipment and supplies will be
          furnished by FWPCA.

FWPCA Responsibility;  Technical assistance will be provided consisting
          of one resident sanitary engineer on site during the 1966-67
          processing season to supervise and operate pilot plant facili-
          ties, determine plant loadings and flow patterns, and perform
          laboratory tests.  General supervision and laboratory back up
          will be provided by FWPCA through the Pacific Northwest Water
          Laboratory at Corvallis, Oregon.

State Responsibi1 ity;  The State of Idaho will provide some laboratory
          staff and facilities for special analyses requiring more than
          routine type equipment.

Industry Responsibility;  The industry will provide some laboratory space
          and pilot plant facilities as well as some assistance in routine
          plant operation.  Some existing laboratory equipment will be
          provided.  Plant production figures will be made available for
          calculation of unit loads on the pilot plant facilities.

Procedure;  Sufficient chemical and bacteriological analyses at various
          flows and organic loadings will be run to determine the feasi-
          bility of secondary treatment methods.  Treatment processes to
          be studied include;   (1) anaerobic treatment in one cell equipped
          with a Styrofoam float cover followed by aerobic treatment in a
          mechanically-aerated pond, and (2) independent aerobic treatment
          in an additional mechanically-aerated pond.
                                  -35-

-------
                                                                  A-3

Coordination;  Day-to-day direction of pilot plant operation and tests
          will be provided by FWPCA.  Regular review meetings will be
          held at intervals of approximately one month to apprise State
          and industry representatives of study findings and to review
          proposed operation and tests.

Reports;  Semimonthly activity reports will be prepared by FWPCA and
          submitted to the State and industry representatives.  At the
          completion of the processing season, in the spring of 1967,
          all pilot plant study results shall be incorporated into a
          final report prepared by FWPCA for public distribution, which
          shall include unit waste loadings and a description of the
          process wastes being treated.

Revision and Termination;  Changes in the provisions of this agreement
          may be made by mutual consent of the parties thereto.  This
          agreement shall terminate on. December 31, 1967.
For the FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMINISTRATION:


                                                       Date:   _jan 9
   	
D^reVtor, Technical Sefvices
Pacific Northwest Water Laboratory
For the IDAHO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH:
   ef, Watejf-Bollutioh Section
For the E0fATO PROCESSORS OF 2DAHO ASSOCIATION
                                                       Date:
  	^___	     Date:
Vice Pres^Ldenft, J. R. Simplot Co.
                                  -36-

-------
APPENDIX B
   Data

-------
                                          A-5
Table A-I   FLOW DATA, gpm
Date
1-1-67
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
2-1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Aerobic
Clarifier Pond I


3510
3880
4220
3750
3690
3380






3320
4220
4220
4390
4190
4220
4210
4280
4390
4220
4220
4390
4390
4220

4390
4390
4390
4190
4390
3500

4390
4390
4390
4290
4290
4040

4380
4390
Anaerobic
Pond 11
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.7
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.3
2.8
2.8
3.0
3.0

3.0
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2

3.2
3.2
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5

3.5
3.5
Anaerobic
Pond III
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
8.8
3.7 *
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
3.7
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0

4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0

4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0

4.0
4.0
                                    Comments
                                  Ponds down since
                                     12-23-66
                                  Changed pond III to
                                  aerobic in series
                                  following pond II.
                                  Pump minimum =
                                  3.7 gpm.
         -38-

-------
                                                A-6





Table A-l   FLOW DATA (Cont'd.)
Date
2-15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3-1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31

Aerobic
Clarifier Pond I
4390
4390
4290
3760

4290
4390
4390
4390
4220
4170

4190
4190
4290
4290
4390
4190

4290
4390
4290
4390
4390
3860

4390
4390
4390
4390
4390
4290

4390
4390
4390
4390
4390
3590

4390
4390
4390
4390
4390

Anaerobic
Pond II
3.5
3.5
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
4.0
4.0

4.0
4
4
4
4
4

4
4
4
4
4
4

4
4
4
4
4
4

4
5
5
6
6
6

6
6
6
7
7
39-
Anaeroblc
Pond III Comments
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0

4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0

4.0
4
4
4
4
4

4
4
4
4
4
4

4
4
4
4
4
4

4
5
5
6
6
6

6
6
6
7
7


-------
Table A-l   FLOW DATA (Cont'd.)
Date
4-1
2
33
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
5-1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Aerobic
Clarifier Pond I
4060

4390
4390
4390
4390
4390
4390

4220
4390
4390
4390
4390
4040

4390
4390
4390
4290
4220
4140

4390
4390
4390
4390
4220
4190

4390
4390
4390
4390
4390
4390

4390
4390
4390
4390
4290
4210

4390
4390
4390 7
Anaerobic
Pond II
7

7
7
7
7
7
7

7
7
7
7
7
7

7
7
7
7
7
7

9
9
11
11
13
13

15
15
15
15
15
15

15
15
15
15
15
15

15
15
15
Anaerobic
Pond III Comments
7

7
7
7
7
7
7

7
7
7
7
7
7

7
7
7
7
7
7

9
9
11
11
13
13

13
15
15
15
15
15

15
15
15
15
15
15

15
15
15 Started aerol
             -40-

-------
                                                                       A-8

                      Table A-l   FLOW DATA (Cont'd.)

                       Aerobic     Anaerobic     Anaerobic
  Date    Clarif ier     Pond I	Pond II	Pond III	Comment a

5-18        4390        7           15           15
  19        4390        7           15           15
  20        4390        7           15           15
  21        4390        7           15           15
  22        4390        7           15           15
  23        4390        7           15           15
  24        4390        7           15           15
  25        4390        7           15           15
  26        4390        7           15           15
  27        4390        7           15           15
                                    -41-

-------
                                             A-9




Table A-2   TEMPERATURE DATA,  °F

Date
1-3-67
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
17
18
19
20
21
23
24
25
26
27
30
31
2-1
2
6
7
8
9
10
11
14
15
16
17
20
21
22
23
24
25
28
3-1
2
3
Clarifier
Influent
73
73
72
74
73
73
80
78
76
80

77
77
76
78
78
77
78
80
77
79
78
71
78
77
82
72
79
77
78
80
78
79
78
78
78
77
77
80
79
78
78
77
78
78
77
Clarifier Pond I
Effluent Effluent
63
69
70
70
69
69
74
71
73
76

70
73
72
74
76
73
74
76
75
75
76
68
76
75
79
69
76
76
76
75
75
75
75
74
74
75
74
76
75
74
73
74
75
74
75
Pond II
Effluent
52
52
52
54
51
55
54
55
54
54
53
56
54
55
55
54
54
56
56
56
57
57
58
60
59

53
59
58
61
60

60
59

61
62
60
60
63
62
60
61
62
59
61
Pond III
Effluent
54
58
58
59
51
50
47
44
44
44
44
34
32
32
33
36
36
34
32
33
33
36
40
41
41

35
35
33
38
38

42
34

34
34
33
34
37
43
41
39
42
43
46
           -42-

-------
                                                  A-10




Table A-2   TEMPERATURE DATA (Cont'd.)
Date
3-4-67
6
7
8
9
10
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
21
22
23
24
27
28
29
30
31
4-3
4
7
11
13
18
19
20
21
24
25
27
5-2
3
9
11
15
16
17
18
19
20
22
Clarifier
Influent
78
70
78
78
78
80
79
78
79
77
78
78
79
78
81
82
82
81
72
79
78
78
78
70
79
80
78
79
80
79
80
76
68
79
77
76
76
82
79
68
79
81
79
79
80
76
Clarifier Pond I
Effluent Effluent
74
69
74
74
74
76
76
76
76
75
75
76
77
76
76
79
77
76
70
77
76
75
74
68
77
77
73
77
78
75
77
74
64
77
75
72
72
80
77
66
77
78
77 61
76
76
74 62
Pond II
Effluent
62
53
61
63

62

60
61
65

65
66
63
64
66



66
67

65

67
66
68
70
70

68

63
67
68
68
70
73
71

71
70
71


72
Pond III
Effluent
45
36
32
35

48

42
39
41

51
49
48
44
46



47
40

47

40
41
42
47
42

45

44
44
44
40
46
57
51

54
53
55


62
                 -43-

-------
                                                                       A-ll


                   Table .*-2   TEMPERATURE DATA (Cont'd.)


              Clarifier     Clarifier     Pond I        Pond II     Pond III
__ Date	.	_	.	._ .-

5-23-67          78             76
  24             79             76
  25             80             75           59            73          59
  26             79             75
  27             78             76
                                    -44-

-------
                                         A-12
Table A-3   ptt DATA
Date
1-3-67
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
17
18
19
20
21
23
24
25
26
27
30
31
2-1
2
6
7
8
9
10
14
15
17
20
21
22
23
24
25
28
3-1
2
3
4
6
Clarifier
Influent
11.1

11.6





11.8



11.4

11.6



11.8

11.4




11.9







10.7
10.8
11.1


11.5

11.2


11.1


Clarifier Pond I
Effluent Effluent
10.3

11.0





10.8



10.8

10.7



9.6

10.7




11.1







8.9
10.7
10.3


11.4

10.9


10.3


Pond II
Effluent
6.. 7
7.5
7.1
7.0
6.9
7.0
7.1
6.9
7.1
7.1
7.5
6.9
6.8
7.2
6.4
6.8
6.8
6.9
6.6
6,7
6.2
6.3
6.6
6.6
6.7
6.9
6.7
6.7
6.4
6.5
6.4
6.4
6.6
6.3
6.3
6.6
6.2
6.6
6.6
6.5
6.3
6.4
6.5
6.3
6.4
6.5
Pond III
Effluent
6.8
7.2
6.8
7.1
7.0
7.1
7.1
7.2
7.0
7.2
7.2
8.5
8.4
7.6
8.2
7.8
8.0
8.6
8.5
8.7
8.4
8,1
8.3
8.5
8.3

8.7
8.3
8.5
8.3
8.4
7.6
7.8
8.5
8.4
8.6
7.5
8.1
8.2
8.0
8.3
8.3
8.3
7.9
8.2
8.9
       -45-

-------
                                                  A* 13




Table A-3   pH DATA (Cont'd.)
Date
3-7-67
8
10
13
14
15
17
18
20
21
22
28
31
4-4
7
11
13
18
20
25
27
5-2
3
9
11 .
16
17
18
22
25
Clarifier
Influent
U.3

ii.4
12.1


11.4

11,4
10.8

11.6
10.6
11.6
10.8
10.5
11.4
11.1
11.2
11.6
11.7

11.3
11.4
11.4
11.2

11.5

11.5
Clarifier Pond I
Effluent Effluent
10.6

10.2
11.6


9.4

9.9
11.1

10.1
8.9
10.1
10.1
10.0
10.8
11.2
7.1
10.5
11.1

10.8
11.7
10.8
9.8

10.4 8.0
8.6
11.2 8.2
Pond II
Effluent
6.6
6.6
6.6
6.6
6.5
6.6
6.6
6.6
6.3
6.4
6.4
6.8
6.5
6.4
6.3
6.3
6.3
6.7
6.4
6.4
7.0
6.6
6.6
6.5
6.5
6.2
6.4
6.3
6.6
6.6
Pond III
Effluent
8.9
8.5
8.4
8.5
8.4
8.3
8.2
8.3
8.2
8.3
8.2
8.3
8.6
8.5
8.6
8.5
8.4
8.5
9.0
8.0
8.1
8.4
8.1
8.2
8.2
8.3
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.4
                 -46-

-------
                                                  A-14



TABLE A-4   TOTAL ALKALINITY DATA, mg/1

Date
1-3-67
5
12
17
19
24
26
31
2-2-67
10
17
21
24
28
3-3-67
10
17
21
28
31
4-11-67
13
18
20
25
27
5-3-67
9
16
25
Clarifier
Influent
870
1230
1380
1070
1240
1500
1300
1240
1810
970
840
910
1180
930
840
1030
1220
900
1110
820
920
970
970
770
1050
1200
930
970
1040
1170
Clarifier Pond I
Effluent Effluent
470
930
760
860
880
810
1060
980
1560
760
520
750
1410
960
760
780
640
980
610
450
800
880
830
370
700
1020
790
1130
720
1020 1190
Pond II
Effluent
1100
1040
1090
1080
1010
1080
1060
1080
1160
1070
1080
1000
1040
1080
1020
1090
1020
1080
1090
990
920
980
1010
1040
940
1010
1050
1010
830
1020
Pond III
Effluent
1060
1100
1100
1120
1080
1160
1140
1210

1240
1320
1250
1220
1240
1200
1210
1240
1340
1320
1240
1210
1230
1200
1250
1200
1220
1220
1240
1210
1140
               -47-

-------
                                                                    A-15
                    TABLE A-5  VOLATILE ACIDS DATA, mg/1
          Clarifier     Clarifier      Pond I      Pond II       Pond III
Date      Influent      Effluent      Effluent    Effluent      Effluent
1-17-67      550           120                       570           750
  19         390           380                       630           630
  24         380           560                       600            50
  26         440           480                       800            60
  31   '      440           380                       860            60

2-2-67       540           550                       840
 10          360           450                       880           110
 17          480           700                      1040           540
 21          340           300                      1080           130
 24          510           580                      1040           140
 28          380           420                      1050            60

3-3-67       300           400                       940            50
 10          400           640                      1200            90
 17          450           720                      1080            80
 21          390           390                      1230            60
 28          420           640                      1170            60
 31          380           600                      1590            60

4-11-67      380           420                      1320            80
  13         520           500                      1620           540
  18         940           800                      2060           100
  20         690          1300                      2360           120
  25         870          1040                      2280           110
  27         820           990                      2320           120

5-3-67       760           860                      2100            90
  9         1950          2120                      3520           100
 16         1260          1170                      2380           150
 25          870           940            120        2180           300
                                  48-

-------
                                                A-16
TABLE A-6  TOTAL SOLIDS DATA,  mg/1

Date
1-3-67
4
5
10
12
17
19
24
26
31
2-7-67
14
15
21
22
28
3-2-67
7
8
14
15
21
22
28
29
4-4-67
7
11
13
18
20
25
27
5-3-67
9
11
16
18
22
25
Clarifier
Influent
5450
7650
7540
8810
8040
5760
6460
7670
6940
6540
6050
6250
5270
4890
4890
5350
7080
6010
3950
6720
8310
6680
6610
6310
9080
6110
6650
6600
6100
6460
5170
6510
6730
6270
8910
4620
5900
4680
5960
6580
Clarifier Pond I
Effluent Effluent
2070
4660
4160
4000
3480
3360
3880
5090
4710
3900
4100
4010
3630
3430
4330
4050
5970
4410
3500
4300
3480
4080
3940
3750
4070
3870
4080
3700
4370
3880
3750
3880
4270
3800
4750
4680
3770
4830 3290
3310 2760
4240 2500
Pond II
Effluent
2560
2720
2550
2450
2530
2340
2570
2620
3040
2840
2840
2670
2940
2950
2760
3150
2880
2980
2950
2990
3060
3160
3190
3230
3260
3110
3320
3220
3310
3350
3380
3000
3320
3260
3300
3500
3010
3240
3090
3110
Pond III
Effluent
2720
2690
2580
2910
2930
3350
3050
2140
2810
2750
2630
2540
2390
2860
2700
2860
2630
2690
2710
2780
2780
2640
2690
2830
2800
2870
2950
2770
2770
2730
2820
2750
2810
2880
3190
•* «
2930
3360
3350
3270
              -49-

-------
                                                                    A-17
               TABLE A-7  CENTRIFUGED TOTAL SOLIDS  DATA, mg/1
                          Clarifier                   Clarifier
Date                      Influent                    Effluent

1-4-67                      4570                        4020
 17                         3310                        2940
 31                         4380                        3630

2-21-67                     33,60                        2850
  28                        3290                        3810

3-7-67                      3850                        3300
 14                         4720                        2090
 21                         3730                        3230
 28                         4090                        3600

4-4-67                      3940                        3840
 11                         3490                        3390
 18                         4190                        3670
 25                         3930                        3490

5-3-67                      3340                        3390
  9                         4880                        4670
 16                         3480                        3660
                                  -50-

-------
                                                                    A-18
                  TABLE A-8  SLUDGE-TOTAL SOLIDS DATA,  mg/1
Date

1-4-67
 17
 24
 31

2-14-67
  21
  28

3-7-67
 14
 21
 28

4-4-67
 11
 18
 25

5-3-67
  9
 16
Clarifier
Influent
7500
5590
6230
5930
6300
4380
4650
5190
5910
4920
5820
4050
5550
6230
4050
3950
6440
4860
Sludge
from
Clarifier
40,800
81,800
77,000
50,500
57,500
61,000
43,700
44,500
45,800
36,100
43,300
40,400
43,200
45,800
41,600
63,500
51,400
48,800
Centrifuge
Supernatant
21,600
40,300
49,300
32,500
34,700
29,800
25,500
25,200
24,500
32,800
22,900
24,300
21,500
26,500
25,900
28,200
26,400
23,900
S ludge
from
Centrifuge
165,000
184,000
191,000
203,000
198,000
210,000
183,000
208,000
212,000
218,000
196,000
227,000
229,000
191,000
182,000
241,000
232,000
182,000
                                 -51-

-------
                                                                     A-'19
                 TABLE A-9  TOTAL VOLATILE SOLIDS  DATA, mg/1
Date
Clarif ier
Influent
1-10-67
12
17
19
24
26
2-14-67
15
22
3-2-67
8
15
22
29
4-4-67
7
11
18
20
25
27
5-3-67
9
11
16
18
22
25
6880
6030
3980
4450
5210
5330
4510
3850
3510
4630
2500
6580
4900
7410
4150
4970
4900
4460
3790
4670
4790
4670
7200
3000
4090
2750
4520
4810
Clarifier
Effluent

  3480
  2110
  1880
  2260

  3080

  2530
  2340
  2480

  4300
  2050
  2240
  2370
  2730
                          2480
                          2150
                          2320
                          2420
                          2340
                          2630

                          2280
                          2990
                          2750
                          2190
                          3140
                          2010
                          2640
Pond I
Effluent
                              1490
                              1090
                               990
Pond II
Effluent

  1160
  1200
   880
   930
  1240
  1820

  2380
  1740
  1380

  1370
  1460
  1580
  1650
  1530

  1410
  1890
  1830
  1750
  1840
  1540
  1840

  1530
  1900
  1750
  1590
  1710
  1730
  1850
Pond III
Effluent

  1460
  1500
  1430
  1480
  1270
  1660

  1090
  1130
  1070

  1050
  1240
  1090
  1030
  1200

  1110
  1280
  1170
  1060
  1020  104o(a)
  1010
  1380

  1080
  1640

  1260
  1580
  1730
  1700
            (a) After 2 hours settling
                                  -52-

-------
                                                                   A-20

                   TABLE A-10  SUSPENDED SOLIDS  DATA, mg/1
          Clarifier     Clarlfier     Pond I        Pond  II     Pond III
Date      Influent      Effluent      Effluent      Effluent    Effluent

1-3-67      1660           420                         640         160
  5         4040          2260                        1140         100
 12         5100           360                         240         400
 17                        200                         520        2060
 19         3280           520                         640         210
 24         4140          1780                         320         890
 26         5900           680                        1270         910
 31         4500           600                         870         650

2-15-67     2880           780                         70         160
  22        3280           510                         390         950

3-2-67      2330          3190                         370         830
  8         2560           500                         180        1100
 15         5000           560                         220         610
 22         3170           860                         370        1220
 29         2600          1100                         150         420

4-4-67      2380           990                         380         460
  7         2280           280                         170         460
 11         2580           420                         250         740
 13          280           820                         400        1840
 18          580           370                         580         500
 20         2700            90                         720         200
 25         2620           180                         440         160
 27         1660           400                        1080         800

5-3-67      2020           500                         500         280
  9         2960          1160                         910        1680
 11         1280           500                         80         120
 16         2720           340                         90        1160
 18         3240           380           380           210         420
 22          860           570           900           130        1080
 25          720           840           480           130        1960
                                  -53-

-------
                                                     A-21





TABLE A-ll  VOLATILE SUSPENDED SOLIDS DATA, mg/1

Date
1-12-67
17
19
24
26
31
2-15-67
22
3-2-67
8
15
22
29
4-4-67
7
11
13
18
20
25
27
5-3-67
9
11
16
18
22
25
Clarifier
Influent
5060
3380
3280
4140
5900
4440
2800
3280
2220
2460
4780
2640
2680
2320
2240
2480
280
580
2580
2460
1580
2020
2920
1120
2600
3240
860
660
Clarifier Pond I
Effluent Effluent
400
240
520
1780
680
600
710
510
3040
480
500
250
1080
990
220
420
770
320
50
170
360
460
960
460
340
380 280
570 700
620 240
Pond II
Effluent
140
260
370
230
500
470
70
390
340
180
200
300
110
380
140
230
230
550
—
360
730
380
730
80
90
210
130
60
Pond III
Effluent
400
580
210
830
880
590
160
890
700
820
560
850
320
460
380
740
1840
500
80
160
640
280
1440
120
1020
420
1080
1540
                    -54-

-------
                                                                     'A* 22

                         TABLE A-12  CODm DATA, mg/1


          Clarifier     Clarifler     Pond I        Pond  II     Pond III
Date      Influent      Effluent      Effluent       Effluent    Effluent

1-4-67      6320          2780                         540         690
 10         3500          2020                         500         660
 13         2960          1300                         620        1020
 17         3180          1240                         560         840
 20         5680          2440                         500         830
 24         4740          2160                         600         920
 27         3720          3000                         860         920
 31         3820          1900                         860         740

2-3-67      3900          2200                         700         600
  7         5680          1340                         120         480
 10         3040          1920                         760         440
 14         4400          2260                         850         460
 15         3940          1760                         670         410
 21         2600          1900                         590         730
 22         3380          2260                         700         610
 28         3220          2120                         780         760

3-2-67      5280          4880                         740         610
  7         3080          2080                         620         620
 14         4500          2320                         640         730
 15         6580          4280                         740         760
 21         2820          2180                         720         590
 22         5440          2000                         740         710
 28         4240          2220                         880         860
 29         4440          1620                         490         550

4-4-67      5220          2460                         840         920
 11         6120          2120                         720         610
 18         4300          2340                         620         580
 25         3640          2280                         660         580

5-3-67      6920          1980                        1170         960
  9         6700          2460                         860         950
 16         2920          2440                         700         680
 22         2460          1720           810           870        1080
                                  -55-

-------
                                                      A-23
             TABLE A-13  CODg DATA, mg/1

Date
1-4-67
6
11
13
16
18
20
23
25
27
30
2-1-67
3
10
15
22
3-2-67
8
15
22
29
4-4-67
7
11
13
18
20
25
27
5-3-67
9
11
16
18
22
25
Clarifier
Influent
7050
6390
5250
6540
4950
4860
6080
8100
4920
5920
4110
5900
5140
3700
3140
9860
5660
3120
--
6050
7270
6940
6880
6940
7440
7260
4980
7200
7240
6750
10800
4140
5920
9570
3420
4650
Clarifier Pond I
Effluent Effluent
3740
3330
3360
3040
2660
2520
3600
3700
3720
4090
2680
3150
4030
2680
3140
3440
6000
2930
2930
3330
3790
3550
3320
3000
3530
3170
3360
3280
3230
3180
3870
3790
3030
4100 1400
2730 1320
3080 1290
Pond II
Effluent
1780
1580
1610
1640
1800
1460
1640
1890
2000
2340
2330
2240
2210
2330
2190
2190
2520
2500
2500
2680
2840
2760
2930
3080
3140
2620
2890
2810
2810
2750
3310
3270
2660
2750
2990
2470
Pond III
Effluent
2150
2220
2300
2270
2740
2640
2480
1930
1990
1680
1590
1450
1660
790
960
2020
1340
1250
1410
1230
1170
1180
1170
1220 7
1360
1270
1150
1530
1190
1530
2520
1920
1940
1980
2050
2570





















690(a)
680(b)
710(a)

io(a)


870
-------
                                            A-24



TABLE A-14  BOD DATA, rag/1

Date
1-4-67
11
18
25
2-15-67
22
3-2-67
8
15
22
29
4-7-67
11
13
18
20
27
5-3-67
9
11
16
18
22
25
Clarifier
Influent
2580
2550
2210
2630
2180
2050
2260
1900
3720
2340
3800
3060
3080
3100
3100
2350
3170
2280
5150
1930
3160
3650
2200
2200
Clarifier Pond I
Effluent Effluent
1680
1800
1180
1830
1710
1800
1870
1220
1550
1630
1510
1750
1550
1720
1770
1960
1690
1590
2000
2080
1680
1480 540
1660 360
1720 420
Pond II
Effluent
670
950
730
1020
1200
1070
1100
1110
1260
1180
1060
1420
1730
1700
1560
1580
1440
1590
1590
1710
1350
1390
1630
1390
Pond III
Effluent
950
1290
1170
280
250
230
120
120
180
220
100
95
200
240
320
240
340
320
570
540
640
640
640
790
          -57-

-------
                                                                        A-25
                     Table A-15   AfftONIfl  NITROGLf? PAT/f,  mg/1 as N
Date
3-16-67
23
29
4-4
11
19
25
5-3
10
16
23
Clarifler
Influent
7.5
5.3
9.1
7.1
6.1
9.8
6.4
8.2
10.0
9.6
10.8
Clnrifler Pond I
Effluent Effluent
5.5
4.0
6.1
7.7
5.4
7.8
5.9
7.0
9.3
9.5
8.9 27
Pond II
Effluent
48
25
36
45
39
35
47
29
88
28
43
Pond III
	 effluent
14
18
30
26
21
23
24
11
10
19
__
  mean
                 8.2
               7.0
                           43
            20
3-16-67
  23
  29
 4-4
  11

 mean
1.0
1.1
0.6
1.4
1.7
1.2
                            MITIGATE-NITROGEN DATA,  mg/1 as N
0.7
1.0
1.2
1.5
1.4

1.2
0.2
0.2
0.5
0.3
0.1
0.5
0.3
0.2
0.6
0.1
0.3
0.3
                            NITRITE-NITftOGEtf DATA,  mg/1 as N
3-16-67
  23
  29
 4-4
  11

 mean
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.3

0.2
0.2
0.
0.
0.
0.2
0.1
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.13
0.03

0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.05
0.004

0.03
                                     -58-

-------
                  Table A-16   TOTAL KJELDAHL NITROGEN DATA
                                         mg/1 as N
  D_atc_

3-16-67
  23
  29
 4-4
  11
  19
  25
 5-3
  10
  16
  23
Ciarifier
Influent
225
96
131
112
91
110
102
76
120
03
84
Ciarifier Pond I
Effluent Effluent
38
83
72
108
60
99
84
48
93
70
98 79
Pond II
Effluent
41
R7
79
7°
70
70
7°
69
R7
67
85
Pond III
Affluent
20
01
92
70
C6
89
91
90
110
104
130
  mean
                 113
78

 7

71
74

43

31
R9

20

69  Org.
                                     -59-

-------
                                                                         'A-27
                       Table  i-17   TOTriL PHOSPHATE  PAT/I
                                          mg/l as PO
Date
3-L6-67
23
29
4-4
11
19
?3
5-3
10
16
23
CUrifier
Influent
46
63
89
33
52
60
57
46
67
71
45
CZarifier Fond I
Affluent Cffluent
71
46
50
41
41
45
48
36
54
64
48
Pond II
Bffluent
51
52
55
?4
39
50
53
53
56
61
52
Pond III
Affluent
53
52
57
26
56
54
55
54
62
73
65











 mean            57              51                          50          55
5-23              11.7            3.8                         19.0        9.7
                                      -60-

-------
                                                                       A-28


                    Table A-18   TOT^L ORGANIC C.dlBON DATA, mg/1


              Clarifier      Clarifier     Pond I        Pond II     Pond  III
  Date	Influent	Effluent	Effluent	Effluent	Effluent

3-29-67          1720           1350                        1240        860
 4-4             1550           1350                        1200        730
  11             2020           1220                        1370        870
  19             1420           1070                        1060        560
  25             1610           1110                        1040        810
 5-3             1190           1090                        1170        890
  10             1760           1340                        1150        950
  16             2080           1200                        1000        890
  23              980           1290           730          1040        930
  mean           1590           1220                        1140         830
                                    -61-

-------
                             Table A-19   IDAHO STATE HEALTH

                                     DEPARTMENT DATA (a)
	p.H	

1-11-67

    Clarifier Influent
    Clarlfier Effluent
    Pond II Affluent
    ?onJ III Effluent
1-1:
              Total
            Alkalinity
Total    Suspended
Solids     Solids
COD
BOD
1295
725
1130
1090
5468
3930
3831
3801
506
393
327
382
3998
3644
2118
2451
2150
1862
1088
1270
    Influent
    Effluen'-
    Fond II
    Fond III
10.6
10.5
 6.6
 8.0
°20
930
1110
1040
5834
3791
2756
3599
2100
620
200
740
3493
308?
1680
2378
2314
1318
1202
2285
    Influent
    Effluent
    Fond II
    Pond III
11.9
 8.0
 7.6
 9.2
1080
490
1060
1390
5780
3901
3214
3396
500
464
316
576
3738
3224
1950
1416
3900
2010
1140
1260
2-1
    Influent
    Effluent
    Pond II
    Ton..I III
2-8
11.4
11.2
 6.7
 6.2
1570
1120
1090
1450
8946
5005
3170
2322
610
180
120
200
7558
3184
2336
1638
3137
1758
1223
1544
    Influent
    Effluent
    Pond II
    Pond III
10. C
10.2
 7.1
 e.4
1130
960
1410
153C
7335
4164
2772
2554
288
204
252
360
10691
3933
1932
1249
5450
2812
1560
900
2-15
    Influent
    Affluent
    Pond II
    Pond III
10.5
10.0
 7.2
 8.5
1200
720
1160
1300
6742
4017
3162
2685
602
370
242
452
4277
2780
1805
960
2883
1825
1245
1195
               (a)  all  mg/1,  except pH
                                           -62-

-------
                             Table A-19   IDAHO STATE HEALTH

                                DEPARTMENT DATA (CONTiD.)
                                                                             A-30
                                Total
                              Alkalinity
                            Total    Suspended
                            Solids     Solids
COD
BOD
2-22-67
    Influent
    Effluent
    Pond II
    Pond III
3-1
    Influent
    Effluent
    Pond II
    Pond III
3-8
    Influent
    Effluent
    Pond II
    Pond III
3-15
    Influent
    Effluent
    Pond II
    Pond III
3-22
    Influent
    Effluent
    Pond II
    Pond III
3-30
    Influent
    Effluent
    Pond II
    Pond III
 9.6
 8.3
 7.6
 9.1
10.8
 9.1
 7.5
 8.6
11.0
 9.6
 7.0
 8.1
10.8
 9.4
 7.4
 8.2
11.2
 9.6
 7.5
 8.0
11.1
 9.8
 7.6
 7.8
1530
1040
1260
1440
5620
3852
2868
2768
720
330
258
462
4113
3562
2097
1292
3223
2382
1485
1244
1400
1120
1060
1380
6224
3446
2686
2492
680
420
300
580
4726
2932
2253
1616
2400
1970
1323
815
1460
1220
980
1300
5524
3528
3040
2988
800
620
480
760
5864
3231
2910
1606
3894
2262
1907
1125
1520
1100
940
1340
7227
4218
3162
2626
920
880
520
640
8103
3843
2327
1504
5584
2606
1202
680
1600
920
1020
1280
6887
5184
3086
2768
840
800
680
540
7531
4186
1760
1369
4500
3000
1550
570
1580
1060
980
1220
7224
5586
3018
2664
1040
880
660
580
8472
6384
2818
1142
6000
4400
1800
650
                                          -63-

-------
                                                                               A-31
                             Table A-19    IDAHO STATE H&VLTH

                                 DEP.JVTMENT DAT^ (CONT'D.)
Total
4-4-67
    Influent
    Effluent
    Pond II
    Pond III
4-19
    Influent
    Effluent
    Pond II
    Tond III
4-26
    Influent
    Effluent
    Pond II
    Pond III
5-3
    Influent
    EfflllGUt
    Pon^ II
    Pond III
5-9
    Influent
    Effluent
    Pond II
    Pond III
5-16
    Influent
    Effluent
    Pond II
    Pond III
                 .-B.H
                            Total
                            soiids
                                                       Suspended
                                   COD
BOD
10.8
 9.7
 7.4
 8.0
12.2
10.4
 7.2
 8.0
11.8
10.2
 7.4
 8.0
11.4
10.0
 7.2
 8.2
11.2
10.2
 7.4
 8.0
11.5
10.6
 7.2
 8.4
1540
1110
860
1320
8122
5484
2928
2410
860
820
680
620
6848
4740
2404
780
3450
2850
1325
480
1610
1200
 920
1220
1720
1460
 880
1180
7050
5226
2779
2208
920
780
620
600
6744
3270
2245
756
4500
1960
1800
450
7226
4867
2818
2016
1080
600
SCO
460
6286
3178
2184
724
4200
1950
1300
390/270
1880
1520
960
1240
7868
5812
3024
2287
1240
940
380
540
5204
3393
2089
1496
3286
2018
1354
COO
1780
1600
1120
1440
1050
 870
 925
1370
3277
6103
2928
2614
1620
1240
1080
960
9856
3763
2284
1990
5439
3450
1486
912
6116
3428
2068
2820
1728
1408
1204
1048
8725
4054
2394
2051
4800
2227
1438
1126
                                           -64-

-------
                                                                            A.-32

                             Table A-19   IDAHO ST.iTE HEALTH

                                DEPARTMENT DATA (CONT'D.)
                                Total        Total    Suspended
                  pH	Alkalinity     Solids     Solids     COD     BOD
5-23-67
    Influent      11.8          1840         6052                  4691    3000
    Effluent      11.1           960         4526                  2352    2360
    Pond I         7.6          1360         3420                  1175     732
    Pond II        7.2          1020         2842                  2055    1245
    Pond III       8.0          1400         2382                  1796     553
                                           -65-

-------
     APPENDIX C
Analytical Procedures

-------
                                                              A-34

                    ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
     All of  the analyses performed on the collected samples were
 in accordance with  the  12th edition of Standard Methods with the
 exception of the volatile acids determination and the short-term
 modified Canner's Association chemical oxygen demand, CODm, tests.
 The methods  used for  these parameters are outlined below.

     The volatile acids determinations were made following the
 procedure outlined  in 'Volatile Acids by Direct Titration," by
 DiLallo and  Albertson.(S)  The sample is first titrated with
 H2S04  to a pH of 3.5  to 3.3.  Then, it is boiled lightly for at
 least  3 minutes, and  cooled to its original temperature.  It is
 then adjusted to pH 4.0 with 0.05 N sodium hydroxide.  The sample
 is then titrated with the 0.05 N sodium hydroxide from pH 4.0 to
 7.0,   The volatile  acid alkalinity is then calculated from;
 Volatile acid alkalinity = mlO.OSNNaOH x 2.500
                              ml. sample
 The volatile acids  are  then calculated as 1.5 x volatile acids
 alkalinity for volatile acid alkalinities greater than 180 rag/1
 and 1.0 x volatile  acid alkalinity for volatile acid alkalinities
 less than 180 mg/1.

     This test was  concise and convenient and appeared to give
 accurate results.

     The National Canner's Association modified chemical oxygen
 demand determination  was performed in accordance with procedures
 outlined in  "Chemical Oxygen Demand as a Test of Strength of
 Cannery Waste Water," by Rose and Mercer, National Canner's
Association  Research  Laboratories, Berkeley, California, May 16,
 1956.  However, a. 20  minute digestion period was substituted for
 the recommended 10 minutes.  The method consists of boiling the
 sample in a mixture of  sulfuric and phosphoric acids for 20 minutes,
 cooling to room temperature, diluting with distilled water and
 titration with 0.1N Sodium Thiosulfate solution with the addition
 of KI crystals and 2  ml of starch solution.  The endpoint occurs
 when the sample first turns light blue-green.
     The CODj,! test gave fairly consistent correlation with the
standard method CODS test for the clarifier effluent, but diverged
from it for the pond effluents.  The test is extremely sensitive
to digest ion time and temperature variations and to laboratory
techniques due to the incomplete oxidation which occurs during its
digestion period.  Replicate samples did not reproduce accurately.
The ratios of BOD to both CODS and CODm are shown in Table A-20.
The BOD/CODg ratios show a consistently higher correlation than
the BOD/CODjn ratios.
     The CODjj! results were not an adequate indications of the
efficiency of secondary waste effluent.
                             -67-

-------
                                                        A*. 55
TABLE A -20 COMPARISONS BETWEEN BOD:CODS RATIO
              and BOD:CODm RATIO
Clarifier Influent
                        BOD/CODs(a)
                        0.46 + 0.10(c)        0.63 + 0.22
Clarifier Effluent
                                    0.50+0.07
                                              0.74 t 0.20
Pond II Effluent
                                    0.51 t 0.06
                                              1.80   0.38
Pond III Effluent
                                    0.23   0.12
                                              0.47   0-31
            24 sets of values
            13 sets of values
            Mean 1 1 standard deviation
                      -68-

-------
APPENDIX D




  Figures

-------
                                                                   A-37
                                           Screened
                                            Solids
                                             Bin
Raw
	9
Waste
Tank
                      Screen
                      Screen
                        Screened
                         Waste
                         Stream
                                                      Sludge
                                                       Bin
                                         Screenings
                                                                    Sludge
                                                                Underflow
     River
              Parshall
               Flume
                                                                        Centrifuge
          Figure 1.  FLOW DIAGRAM OF PRIMARY TREATMENT PLANT

-------
                                                        A-38
'•
                       Feed
                       Pump
                  Feed
             Pond  II
            (covered)
                            Mix
                            Pump
                             o
                             rj
                               Feed
                               Pump
                                        Feed
                              Effluent
              Sump
Pond III
 (open)
n
        5HP
       Wells
X^^x Aerator
  To River
         Figure 2.   FLOW DIAGRAM OF PILOT PLANTS

-------
H

35

o
2
M
Q
o
 1-1

 60

-------
§
2

-------
H
en

W
H
en
CO
w
O
o


I
H
W
m

 
-------
                                                                                S
                                                                                H
                                                                                X
                                                                                in

                                                                                §
                                                                                H
                                                                                a
                                                                                u
                                                                                H




                                                                                >
         H
         a
                                                                                 s
                                                                                 a
                                                                          u
                                                                          M
o
«
                                                                           1
s.0001 -

-------
H
O

g

s
in



9
M
H
I
H
r-~



 4>
 t>0

-------
                                          CO
                                          I
                                          6
                                          S
                                          8
                                          S
                                           §
                                           a
QOO II puoj

-------
M
H
O

g

a
en
CJ
§

O
1
 
-------
M
o
CM
CO
3
PM
O
P4

CO
en

§
CO

§
§
a
§
CJ
§
§
u
I
 M
•H

-------
                                                                A-47
60

H!
o 40
•r^
4J
U
3
•O
3
Q 20
O
o
t-<
M
•o
1 °
(Vi

-20
©
Ph®
0 %
_© ©
©
e «
G
0 ° ©
©003 ^ G © ©Q ©e
©
0

   100
    80
3  60
•o
 01
 a
 o
 •8
 o
 cm
    20
               ©
               ©
               0
                      0  GE>
                                  „.
                                           G
                                                  G
                                              0
                 20        40         60 o      80       100


                   Loading -  Ibs COD8/day/1000 cu. ft.
                                                                120
Figure 11.  INFLUENCE  OF POND LOADINGS ON CODs REDUCTION

-------
                                                                           o
                                                                           pj
                                                                           o
                                                                           g
                                                                           8
                                                                           H
                                                                           O


                                                                           1
                                                                           §

                                                                           8
                                                                           S

                                                                           §
                                                                          §
                                                                          PQ
                                                                           4)
                                                                           M

                                                                           60
                                                                           •i-l
O
vO
     3
uof 3onp3}}
    o

II  puoj
o
04
 I

-------
                                                             o
                                                             f^

                                                             o
                                                             H
                                                             M
                                                             O
                                                             §
                                                             M
                                                             H
                                                             O

                                                             g
                                                              e
                                                              <
                                                              §
                                                             o
                                                             o
                                                              W)
                                                              •H
% - uo^^onpa^ aoa III  puo
-------
t-4

s
pp
 3,

-------
                                                                      A-51
 c
 o
 u
 3
TJ
 •I
Q
O
(Q
 O
e
o
o
3
TJ
Q
O
PQ
§
      80
      60
      40
      20
     -20


     100
      80
      60
      40
      20
       0
0
                   O
10
                                  O o
                                                            0
                                                    O
                           20         30       40       50

                         Loading  -  Ibs  BOD/day/1000 cu. ft.

       Figure 15.  INFLUENCE OF POND  LOADING ON BOD REDUCTION
                                                          60
                                                           70

-------
                                                                     A-52
o
o
o


 I

T)
00
_6

en
V
00
M
(0
J2
U
I
     30
                82.5
  Reduction in  aerobic pond - %


80       77.5      72.5       68
60.5
                 10
 20        30       40        50


 Reduction in anaerobic pond  - "L
                                                                  60
            70
        Figure  16.   PRELIMINARY ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL  CHARGES

-------